https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60931100
They've nicknamed it "Earendel" and it's the most distant, single star yet imaged by a telescope.
The light from this object has taken 12.9 billion years to reach us.
It's at the sort of distance that telescopes normally would only be able to resolve galaxies containing millions of stars.
But the Hubble space observatory has picked out Earendel individually by exploiting a natural phenomenon that's akin to using a zoom lens.
It's called gravitational lensing and it works like this:
I wonder, how JWT will resolve this distant star, when ready?
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60931100
They've nicknamed it "Earendel" and it's the most distant, single star yet imaged by a telescope.
The light from this object has taken 12.9 billion years to reach us.
It's at the sort of distance that telescopes normally would only be able to resolve galaxies containing millions of stars.
But the Hubble space observatory has picked out Earendel individually by exploiting a natural phenomenon that's akin to using a zoom lens.
It's called gravitational lensing and it works like this:
I wonder, how JWT will resolve this distant star, when ready?
On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 01:57:11 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <csoka01@gmail.com>
wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60931100
They've nicknamed it "Earendel" and it's the most distant, single star yet imaged by a telescope.
The light from this object has taken 12.9 billion years to reach us.
It's at the sort of distance that telescopes normally would only be able to resolve galaxies containing millions of stars.
But the Hubble space observatory has picked out Earendel individually by exploiting a natural phenomenon that's akin to using a zoom lens.
It's called gravitational lensing and it works like this:
I wonder, how JWT will resolve this distant star, when ready?
To be clear, the star isn't resolved, just detected. Presumably
because it is so massive that it's very hot, and therefore has most of
its output in the UV, meaning that even with its massive redshift
there's enough energy left in the visible spectrum for HST to detect
it.
There are two big differences between HST and JWST. The latter is much
more sensitive, and the latter works in the IR spectrum. Therefore, it
will be capable of directly detecting stars like this one without
requiring the lucky chance of a gravitational lens to boost the
signal. It should also be able to detect cooler stars.
On 31/03/2022 14:42, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 01:57:11 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <csoka01@gmail.com>
wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60931100
They've nicknamed it "Earendel" and it's the most distant, single star yet imaged by a telescope.
The light from this object has taken 12.9 billion years to reach us.
It's at the sort of distance that telescopes normally would only be able to resolve galaxies containing millions of stars.
But the Hubble space observatory has picked out Earendel individually by exploiting a natural phenomenon that's akin to using a zoom lens.
It's called gravitational lensing and it works like this:
I wonder, how JWT will resolve this distant star, when ready?
To be clear, the star isn't resolved, just detected. Presumably
because it is so massive that it's very hot, and therefore has most of
its output in the UV, meaning that even with its massive redshift
there's enough energy left in the visible spectrum for HST to detect
it.
There are two big differences between HST and JWST. The latter is much
more sensitive, and the latter works in the IR spectrum. Therefore, it
will be capable of directly detecting stars like this one without
requiring the lucky chance of a gravitational lens to boost the
signal. It should also be able to detect cooler stars.
I doubt if it will be able to see anything by way of individual stars
that far away without the aid of a galaxy cluster lensing them.
It will see galaxies out to some considerably greater distance though.
There is a golden opportunity of JWST to do a high resolution spectrum
of this star which could be very interesting indeed to show how much by
way of metals it has and if it is indeed a true first generation star.
I presume the claimed distance is inferred from its redshift measurement
so they must have some sort of spectrum already.
On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 15:46:08 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 31/03/2022 14:42, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 01:57:11 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <csoka01@gmail.com>
wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60931100
They've nicknamed it "Earendel" and it's the most distant, single star yet imaged by a telescope.
The light from this object has taken 12.9 billion years to reach us.
It's at the sort of distance that telescopes normally would only be able to resolve galaxies containing millions of stars.
But the Hubble space observatory has picked out Earendel individually by exploiting a natural phenomenon that's akin to using a zoom lens.
It's called gravitational lensing and it works like this:
I wonder, how JWT will resolve this distant star, when ready?
To be clear, the star isn't resolved, just detected. Presumably
because it is so massive that it's very hot, and therefore has most of
its output in the UV, meaning that even with its massive redshift
there's enough energy left in the visible spectrum for HST to detect
it.
There are two big differences between HST and JWST. The latter is much
more sensitive, and the latter works in the IR spectrum. Therefore, it
will be capable of directly detecting stars like this one without
requiring the lucky chance of a gravitational lens to boost the
signal. It should also be able to detect cooler stars.
I doubt if it will be able to see anything by way of individual stars
that far away without the aid of a galaxy cluster lensing them.
It will see galaxies out to some considerably greater distance though.
There is a golden opportunity of JWST to do a high resolution spectrum
of this star which could be very interesting indeed to show how much by
way of metals it has and if it is indeed a true first generation star.
I presume the claimed distance is inferred from its redshift measurement
so they must have some sort of spectrum already.
I believe it could detect this particular star without any
gravitational lensing.
On 31/03/2022 17:02, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 15:46:08 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 31/03/2022 14:42, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 01:57:11 -0700 (PDT), StarDust <csoka01@gmail.com> >>>> wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-60931100
They've nicknamed it "Earendel" and it's the most distant, single star yet imaged by a telescope.
The light from this object has taken 12.9 billion years to reach us. >>>>>
It's at the sort of distance that telescopes normally would only be able to resolve galaxies containing millions of stars.
But the Hubble space observatory has picked out Earendel individually by exploiting a natural phenomenon that's akin to using a zoom lens.
It's called gravitational lensing and it works like this:
I wonder, how JWT will resolve this distant star, when ready?
To be clear, the star isn't resolved, just detected. Presumably
because it is so massive that it's very hot, and therefore has most of >>>> its output in the UV, meaning that even with its massive redshift
there's enough energy left in the visible spectrum for HST to detect
it.
There are two big differences between HST and JWST. The latter is much >>>> more sensitive, and the latter works in the IR spectrum. Therefore, it >>>> will be capable of directly detecting stars like this one without
requiring the lucky chance of a gravitational lens to boost the
signal. It should also be able to detect cooler stars.
I doubt if it will be able to see anything by way of individual stars
that far away without the aid of a galaxy cluster lensing them.
It will see galaxies out to some considerably greater distance though.
There is a golden opportunity of JWST to do a high resolution spectrum
of this star which could be very interesting indeed to show how much by
way of metals it has and if it is indeed a true first generation star.
I presume the claimed distance is inferred from its redshift measurement >>> so they must have some sort of spectrum already.
I believe it could detect this particular star without any
gravitational lensing.
That doesn't seem likely to me. I would believe JWST could easily see a
Type I supernova at that distance or possibly even a little more but a >solitary fast burning supermassive star will be beyond its light grasp. >(until it goes supernova)
The fields imaged so far look well populated with galaxies and not so
many lone stars (but they are avoiding any local galaxy bright stars).
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 298 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 06:29:44 |
| Calls: | 6,671 |
| Calls today: | 3 |
| Files: | 12,219 |
| Messages: | 5,339,003 |