Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MalcolmY OP t1_iu757p1 wrote

These objects are so far away its impossible to view them from a different "angle". So why does Spitzer's image look like that?

60

TheFeshy t1_iu78bw2 wrote

You're confusing parallax for rotation. Set something on your counter, and take a picture of it with your phone. If you walk four feet to the left, and take another picture, it will be at a different angle of parallax. That sort of transition would be impossible (or at least, incredibly small) given the nebula's great distance to us.

On the other hand, stand in one spot, and turn your phone on its side and snap another shot instead. Now you haven't moved relative to the object all, but your image is rotated.

100

[deleted] t1_iu75r9z wrote

[deleted]

63

the_fungible_man t1_iu7egky wrote

It's actually rotated left.

45

MiguelMenendez t1_iu7pamy wrote

60° left. 300° right. Can’t we all just get along?

50

x925 t1_iu85jb0 wrote

No, we're people, we must fight.

14

diox8tony t1_iu7u2b7 wrote

I refuse to believe OP is talking about the rotated image. However I couldn't pause enough to see any parallax differences so idk what difference they are asking about.

6

MalcolmY OP t1_iu88sr7 wrote

Yes I wasn't asking about simple rotation of the image. The image looks like it was taken from somewhere else in space. Like imagine if Hubble was imaging to the right X light years, while Spitzer was to the left X light years. That was my initial perception when I saw the image, but obviously it wasn't something like that. So I was wondering what was going on.

It seems the consensus is it was simply "rotated".

1

DuncanEastwood t1_iu8bl9d wrote

It 𝘸𝘢𝘴 taken from somewhere else in space. The object that we're "viewing" and the telescopes have all been moving since the first images were captured.

6

Lord_Space_Lizard t1_iu8oiga wrote

> It 𝘸𝘢𝘴 taken from somewhere else in space.

They're 7,000 light-years away from us. A light year is 6,000,000,000,000 miles so these things are 42,000,000,000,000,000 miles away. A couple hundred thousand miles between camera locations aren't going to do shit to perspective.

> The object that we're "viewing" and the telescopes have all been moving since the first images were captured.

Again, they're 7,000 light-years away, in the 30 years between photos there wasn't enough time for things to move enough to have any impact

11

manicdee33 t1_iu76xb4 wrote

Wider field of view, different "up", older/worse sensors and looking at different wavelengths, and images processed differently meaning the various infrared wavelengths are mapped to different visible wavelengths.

18

probablywhy t1_iu7kq83 wrote

The clouds look different because this is a processed image of "near infrared" light from the area. It allows them to look past the clouds to an extent

5

trollsmurf t1_iu7xdlv wrote

What do you mean by any of that? What's impossible?

5

OnlyGoodVibesYo t1_iu85mtj wrote

They’re saying it’s impossible to view objects at astronomical distances from different angles. If I were to move five feet to the left of a normally sized picture that is five feet away from me, I would have a vastly different view of the picture. If that same picture was the size of a skyscraper and, say, a mile away, my five foot shift to the left would functionally offer no different view of the picture.

Now multiply the distance and size of the skyscraper sized picture by billions and you’ll see that even looking at a nebula many thousands of light years away from vantage points thousands of miles apart would offer no difference in the angle at which we view the nebula.

But OP is mistaking angle for rotation. I can tilt my head in any of those instances and get the same effect for any object at any distance.

9

MalcolmY OP t1_iu88yk7 wrote

Yes exactly but I wasn't asking about rotation, I just couldn't find a better word than angle for the thing you explained in your first paragraph. However, it appears the image was merely rotated.

2

trollsmurf t1_iu8o0ra wrote

Yes, the images are all from the same viewpoint, yet rotated.

1

L0nely_L0ner t1_iu837w1 wrote

What? I seriously don't understand what's your problem. There are 3 things going on here.

  1. the pictures are just rotated, not taken from a different "angle"

  2. some of them are more zoomed in than the others

  3. they use different type of coloration process and were taken with different type of infrared cameras.

Seriously, you know you can rotate pictures, right...?

4

SneakyMOFO t1_iu7jbyb wrote

Same angle, camera just rotated differently. Like if you stand in the same spot and tilt your phone while filming a tree.

2