Comments
Clementinesm t1_ix98t8s wrote
This headline had me scared it had been struck again, but I’m glad it was only just about the event that happened when it first opened
BecomingCass t1_ix9bw26 wrote
The hit sucks, but they're also still able to make observations at double their requirements for the mission
5yleop1m t1_ix9d6vy wrote
I figure its the universe trying to tell us to stop looking at its nethers.
Prehistory_Buff t1_ix9gsfd wrote
It really makes you wonder how many undetectable space rocks are milling about the universe, to scattered even for gaseous appearing formations like planetary rings. On a small scale, they're inconsequential and their effects imperceptible, but on a larger scale, they could be a force of nature. Kind of like large geological phenomena on earth formed by moisture and dust.
nickeypants t1_ix9hv8q wrote
It's revenge for sniffing the universe's fart.
"A unique atmosphere with oaky notes"
-James Webb, celestial flatulence connoisseur
PrimarySwan t1_ix9jht3 wrote
Oh good. I hate these articles. They could have also wrote JWST performing above expectstions despite early bad luck with micrometeroids but who clicks on that... well I do but I'm a nerd.
xabrol t1_ix9k5a3 wrote
An unimaginable number of them, but space is so huge the probability of being hit hy one is near 0, but not 0.
Clementinesm t1_ix9kph5 wrote
Honestly that would’ve been a much better headline. I wish “science journalists” would be more educated and involved in sciences. It annoys me how much they write for clicks.
Latyon t1_ix9ooy6 wrote
Precisely.
Yeah, we lost $10,000, but we still have almost a million dollars.
navand t1_ix9vuxf wrote
Sounds like gambler's fallacy TBH.
[deleted] t1_ixa415x wrote
[removed]
RollinThundaga t1_ixa5mqz wrote
The Chelyabinsk meteor was 20m wide and we didn't detect that before it struck.
BenP785 t1_ixa6eij wrote
Well if the first meteor made the telescope smaller then technically speaking it is less susceptible to future ones. The next one could theoretically go straight through the hole the first one left.
TheDotCaptin t1_ixa6hux wrote
If the rock that hit it was destroyed to the point it can't reencounter Webb, then that is one less bullet in the revolver.
PrimarySwan t1_ixa6hya wrote
It's all for clicks. Phys.org is a great news site. Obviously geared towards physics news but they have a big astronomy and space exploration section with some great writers that usually have STEM education. And they also cover all the sciences, you have a chemistry section, bio etc... but focus on physics. So a great place to get your JWST and CERNor LIGO news without clickbait. And they do magical stuff like publish corrections for articles if something was wrong.
colexian t1_ixa71ty wrote
By jove, you're right! We just need to overload the meteor's kill limit and they all shut down. We can defeat them by sending wave after wave of telescopes at them.
Goregue t1_ixa9iht wrote
The JWST team will now avoid pointing the telescope towards meteor-heavy fields
colexian t1_ixa9v34 wrote
Headline: "Entomologist stung by bee moves research to area with less bugs"
[deleted] t1_ixadst9 wrote
[removed]
BubbhaJebus t1_ixaewbm wrote
Considering phenomena like shooting stars and gegenschein, there are a lot. Especially inside the Solar System (probably a lower concentration in interstellar space).
SlipCritical9595 t1_ixafziz wrote
For a comedic anecdote, watch “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead” — an absurdist tragicomedy featuring the two minor characters from Hamlet (one played by Tim Roth) made in 1990…. and then watch what happens as Roth keeps flipping a coin…. talk about odds!
Brendo-Dodo9382 t1_ixasgw6 wrote
No matter how big space is a pebble is eventually gonna find something to bump into
Riegel_Haribo t1_ixb0n6i wrote
So said the report and the post in this same subreddit -- six days ago. This telephone game from gizmodo a week later is unnecessary.
Wavefront error seen in a bizarre artifact I discovered in imagery: https://i.imgur.com/eXAYzjf.png
night_dude t1_ixbdt31 wrote
To be fair, I read that the whole launch and deployment went so well that it actually exceeded expectations. So in the scheme of things, pretty good luck on average.
night_dude t1_ixbdw3b wrote
No universe, YOU'RE not wearing pants
Universe: ARGH! MY UNIVERSAL PARTS ARE SHOWING
NumpyNimpy t1_ixbib7c wrote
Don’t know how I feel about the decision to put this thing on a Lagrange point now..
mfb- t1_ixbx51t wrote
Less susceptible than feared after the first strike. After more data analysis, they are now confident this large strike was a big outlier instead of something we should expect every few months.
dr4d1s t1_ixclcdh wrote
Oh it's been struck 14 times now. 13 really small ones and that one bigger one. At the time "the big one" struck JWST, it had only been hit 5 times. And that was as of 2 weeks or so ago. It could be more now.
South-Ad3793 t1_ixdf9w3 wrote
Before the JWT was lauched i was worried about this happening
Dyolf_Knip t1_ixdgbbi wrote
So if mass were less of an issue, what could we do to armor up a telescope like this against these sorts of strikes?
Just_Michael1138 t1_ixdt94d wrote
Uh huh. "Space rock." Sure.
Funny how these telescopes always go down right as something is going on in the background of the live feed that NASA doesn't want you to see...
coffeesippingbastard t1_ix9863u wrote
I know statistically it was bad luck but man- for it to happen so soon after launch. Just a statistical middle finger.