Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Strict-Kaleidoscope2 t1_ixnse2d wrote

For a telescope that can see the farthest into the universe, you'd except it to take intense close up shots of relatively close objects. Especially in our solar system.

−2

phenomduck t1_ixny5ra wrote

It's moving relatively fast compared to what it's designed to view. As far as I understand the main way these super powered telescopes work is by focusing on a singular point over time to get as much data as possible. The closer something is, the less space it has to travel to move a degree across your vision.

18

daddywookie t1_ixo19ls wrote

I guess like trying to look into fast cars with a pair of binoculars. You’d could see it really well if it would only stay still.

4

phenomduck t1_ixo99eg wrote

It's also important to remember that the solar system is very large compared to the planets and moons. Titan is only 5150km across, but 1.2 billion km away. To scale, it's not actually much larger than the farthest known galaxies. Luminosity is whole other thing, which I have no knowledge about.

1

the6thReplicant t1_ixqk8qp wrote

But this has nothing to do with the question.

Moons and planets have a far smaller size to distant ratio than galaxies.

A galaxy may be a billion light years away but it’s 100,00 light years across. As something in our solar system my be a billion kms away but only thousands of kilometers across.

So just because it’s closer doesn’t mean it’s more resolvable.

2

phenomduck t1_ixqt1yj wrote

I made a second comment where I addressed that. The JWST is designed to look for galaxies over 13 billion years old. GN-z11 is only estimated to be 4000 light years. It's actually a pretty similar size to distance scale as Titan is from the Earth. The amount of infrared light from the subject is also relevant.

−1

Hyphen_Potamus_7 t1_ixt05o2 wrote

Its motion has absolutely nothing to do with the sharpness. JWST has actually incredibly fast and efficient cameras relatively speaking. Titan isn’t moving particularly much within the exposure time you need to get an image at all.

1