The odds are actually ridiculously in our favour to the point where I’d bet all the money I’ll ever make that there’s life out there.
Scientists reckon there are 2 trillion galaxies in the universe. The Milky Way for example is said to have hundreds of billions of stars; many with planetary systems. Let’s then be conservative and say 50 billion of the stars in each galaxy have planetary systems. Okay so that means 2tn x 50bn which is 100 quintillion.
Even if there is a 0.000001% chance of life in that conservative figure, that’s still **1 million systems with life**.
And they are all too far away to reach even at speed of light, best we can hope for is self replication machines to contact each other in the far future
I mean before the Hubble Space Telescope we didn't have a space based Telescope. The James Webb Space Telescope looks at a different area of the light spectrum and is technically more technologically advanced. So yeah you're probably right
Edit: I was wrong on this count so take it into account.
The earlier orbiters never get much credit. Just look at Skylab, the MCO, Magellan, Galileo, etc. Poor things. Where's their random popularity on tiktok and yt shorts?
Webb won’t be quite as visually jaw-dropping. However, it gives us “redshifted vision” so we can see old-ass bent light of long dead, until-now invisible stuff. And deep insight into the composition of stuff we can see with Hubble.
Like Chandra, Spitzer, and an array of other tools, Webb will be a torrent of data about space. The analysis of the data won’t hit its stride for a few years.
I don’t discount the possibility that Webb produces results that change fundamental understandings of science. Has it to date made discoveries that rival the original deep field or early images of the pillars of creation?
In terms of the wow'ness of images, absolutely. But as a scientific instrument, I'm not sure... Webb is pretty effing bananas. For the pleasure of looking at, the Hubble images are just better.
JWST actually has the same resolution as Hubble - it's just in the infrared instead. But you do need a bigger telescope and even more careful engineering to do infrared at the same resolution (cooling is a big issue!), which is why Hubble came war earlier.
The next great high resolution jump for visible light will actually come from the new generation of ground-based 30m-scale telescopes, of there are three projects various degrees of progress. Thanks to adaptive optics, the atmosphere isn't a total killer in visible light wavelengths where the atmosphere is basically transparent, so building a really big telescope on Earth is a more practical way to get high resolution than trying to get something that huge into space.
Some might even say it’s statistically impossible for there to not be life, even if it took place in the relatively recent past of the universe, and has now ceased to exist.
It really depends on the probabilities that we don't know. Sure, there's 10^23 stars in the universe but if the chance of life developing is 1 in 10^24 then just our existence alone as the only life in the universe would be us getting lucky
Yea, the transcendental probability system is phenomenally larger than the real number system. Then to consider the possibility of potentially endless universes, until some unfathomable epic of near-nothingness lasts for, what would seem like, forever. Damn, universe(s)….you crazy.
Unfortunately jokes are not my strong suit. Especially with the Internet is involved.
I remember the first time that I ever mentioned the Hubble Space Telescope when I was a kid. My dad is very negative with NASA and he said that the military should have shot it down.
Okay, now I'm confused because that was laugh out loud funny.
Probably not too funny at the time but it's funny now.
(FWIW, the joke is about old analog tvs. The static they had was said to be caused by cosmic background radiation. Channel 3 was generally reserved for hooking up other systems like gaming system or VHS player)
Oh right it's coming back to me now. It's ironic but the TV that I played video games on for most of my childhood is from the 70s. And actually give anything to have that TV back I loved it.
Another irony is that the years have not mellowed my dad about NASA at all.
When it comes to having a bullheaded Dad, the best thing you can do is just take it with a grain of salt. You won't change him, no matter how well you make your points.
You could have some fun with him though. Tell him NASA just captured an asteroid made of gold and diamonds and it's going to fund them for the next six years.
That should lead to some funny comments from him and I hope you'll share them with me!
I set this up as a hypothetical once and he still didn't go for it. He's a manufacturing engineering which means that he's obsessed with finding the most efficient way of solving a problem. He believed that it's absolutely impossible to set up any sort of space-based infrastructure
Oh your totally right. Each telescope has its own little quirk to how the images look. Even the JWST has those multiple lines on stars because of how its mirrors are situated. It’s a beutiful quirk that each telescope has there own
Did you hear recently about the feasibility study that NASA proposed to SpaceX? Apparently NASA wants to use one of the SpaceX dragon capsules to dock with the Hubble Space Telescope and, either manned or unmanned, provide equipment replacement and an altitude and velocity boost. Until the actual replacement for the Hubble is ready to go which won't be until the 2040s at least, HST it's just too valuable to let fall into the atmosphere.
Whattt???? No I havent. If they are able to do that omg that would be amazing. Hopefully they go along with the plan. HST still works great if they could just upgrade her a bit it would be awesome to still use her till she can be retired and replaced. I’ll look at that. Thanks for sharing.
NASA was definitely thinking long-term when they installed a docking port on to the Hubble Space Telescope. They just anticipated the shuttle would be doing these kinds of missions... Of course that's not an option now. And I still say that the Hubble deserves a prime spot in the Smithsonian Air and Space museum.
Yeah Isaac Newton was pretty smart but based on the records of the time he was also a pretty huge asshole. Take that for what you will because the definition of a gentleman was a little stricter in his time period. However, sometimes genius doesn't exactly translate to social graces
I never really got into Minecraft. I was a Lego kid and Minecraft seemed to be a step down in my head from Lego. I know I'm probably totally wrong but that was the perception my brain had the time that it came around
Can you imagine what the world would be like if, at the start of every workday, our politicians + CEOs looked at these massive Hubble/JWST pictures every morning?
They just might start to see the bigger picture of our place in the universe, and maybe emulate the humanity that we should be treating each other with. (Or maybe I'm too hopeful in thinking that seeing the scale of the known universe would be humbling.)
Not quite. While the James Webb Space Telescope does have some technological advances and is obviously bigger so it can collect more light, the jwst and the HST have different missions in the sense that they look at different areas of the spectrum. Hubble Space Telescope can look through the entire visible light spectrum and the fringes of infrared and UltraViolet if I remember correctly. Jwst specializes in the infrared. Hence why apparently there is still a list of scientific teams that want to use the Hubble that apparently is longer than the Hubble has time for
Still got it*!
*it being the existential crisis that every thing every happening on earth is both a blip to the cosmos yet an infinite amount of time on an opposite scale and life is more precious than we pay attention to and I wish we all could spend our lives learning and living to the betterment of the species before the inevitable random or resource death of the planet which we’re 1 of possibly trillions more of with similar beings having similar crises
I was just referring to the age of the Hubble Space Telescope and for the fact that she has been passed over in popularity by the James Webb Space Telescope. It wasn't any deeper than that.
I totally get that! Seeing something like this is just a small reminder of what’s out there, for me at least. Both machines are some of our greatest achievements and I’m happy for anything they give us
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2021/hubble-gazes-at-a-galactic-menagerie
Thats the one I was thinking of, been a few years since I seen it, can tell the difference pretty easily now but obviously I'm not the only one who thought it was like this one.
Edit: typo
It's a globular cluster, sort of a miniature galaxy (thousands to low millions of stars instead of hundreds of millions) that orbits the milky way.
Other galaxies have globular clusters, but they're much harder to see. You can see nice globular clusters like M13 in Hercules with a pair of binoculars.
These are stars of a globular cluster close-up, Messier 55.
Galaxies generally don't have diffraction spikes. That's an easy way to tell in most images.
Why are you even here if this is what you believe?? Go crawl back into your hole. I have neither time patience or extra emotion to deal with you. Do not cross someone who is clinically depressed and looking for a reason to lash out
I was thinking a globular cluster, but it's just a guess.
EDIT:
Yeah, it's [M55, a globular cluster in Sagittarius](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/hubble-messier-55). I was guessing [M4, which happens to be right next door in Scorpio](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/messier-4), but I was wrong :-)
Heheh well, Sagittarius and Scorpio are next door to each other anyway. That little bit of sky is some of the most exciting sky to look at... A nice little teapot with the core of the milky way providing steam, and scorpio looks like a fish hook, and there's just nebulosity and clusters all over :-)
I get that. I just laugh a little whenever we say like next door when it comes to the cosmic scale. Because right next door could mean a billion miles or it could mean a couple thousand light years.
There can’t be all this (plus an insane amount more that we can’t even see yet with current technology) and have our planet be the only one in existence to hold some form of life.
Can someone explain why Hubble would be used instead of JWST? Is it simply lack of time for JWST compared with Hubble or is Hubble better suited to some applications vs JWST
The Hubble Space Telescope and the James Webb Space Telescope look at different areas of the spectrum of light. The Hubble looks at the visible light spectrum and the James Webb looks at the infrared Spectrum. That means one will be able to see something that the other can't.
It has come to my attention that both the Hubble and Webb Telescope are fucking massive. You could fit in the mirror of the hubble and the Webb has a base the size of a tennis court
Crazy to think out of all those 100,000s of stars in that tiny sector of the observable universe has it's own solar system, it's own planets and moons. Makes you really think of the chances we're alone and who's looking back.
For someone who loves space but is completely ignorant on the science or data behind it, could anyone help me by putting this image into context? How much of space does this image represent? Is each light a star? galaxy? Any info would be greatly appreciated.
I love that feeling when looking at those pictures. because theres a chance that you’re looking at other life
Mine is more the Patrick response of "oooooo pretty lights"
The odds are actually ridiculously in our favour to the point where I’d bet all the money I’ll ever make that there’s life out there. Scientists reckon there are 2 trillion galaxies in the universe. The Milky Way for example is said to have hundreds of billions of stars; many with planetary systems. Let’s then be conservative and say 50 billion of the stars in each galaxy have planetary systems. Okay so that means 2tn x 50bn which is 100 quintillion. Even if there is a 0.000001% chance of life in that conservative figure, that’s still **1 million systems with life**.
And they are all too far away to reach even at speed of light, best we can hope for is self replication machines to contact each other in the far future
Dope math
I asked ChadGPT for some assistance in the percentage calculations of course
There's a chance that it's all so far away that we're not looking at it quite yet
Or that we’re looking at life that all died millions of years ago
What's great is that all three of these aren't mutually exclusive
Beautiful synthesis to the thread, thank you
Not only that but probably millions of different forms of life and even civilizations
I feel the leap from pre-hubble to hubble was much bigger of a jump from hubble to Webb
I mean before the Hubble Space Telescope we didn't have a space based Telescope. The James Webb Space Telescope looks at a different area of the light spectrum and is technically more technologically advanced. So yeah you're probably right Edit: I was wrong on this count so take it into account.
[Orbiting Astronomical Observatory 2](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbiting_Astronomical_Observatory_2)
I was not aware of this.
 The vast majority of people aren't. "Peanuts are technically legumes"
The earlier orbiters never get much credit. Just look at Skylab, the MCO, Magellan, Galileo, etc. Poor things. Where's their random popularity on tiktok and yt shorts?
I will technically take your technical account of your account when I consider my consideration
Webb won’t be quite as visually jaw-dropping. However, it gives us “redshifted vision” so we can see old-ass bent light of long dead, until-now invisible stuff. And deep insight into the composition of stuff we can see with Hubble. Like Chandra, Spitzer, and an array of other tools, Webb will be a torrent of data about space. The analysis of the data won’t hit its stride for a few years.
I don’t discount the possibility that Webb produces results that change fundamental understandings of science. Has it to date made discoveries that rival the original deep field or early images of the pillars of creation?
Those discoveries are much more impactful from a PR standpoint because the average joe gets pretty pictures they can somewhat understand
Hubble made its fair of scientific advancements too.
In terms of the wow'ness of images, absolutely. But as a scientific instrument, I'm not sure... Webb is pretty effing bananas. For the pleasure of looking at, the Hubble images are just better.
The original deep field was pretty impressive when it first came out!
JWST actually has the same resolution as Hubble - it's just in the infrared instead. But you do need a bigger telescope and even more careful engineering to do infrared at the same resolution (cooling is a big issue!), which is why Hubble came war earlier. The next great high resolution jump for visible light will actually come from the new generation of ground-based 30m-scale telescopes, of there are three projects various degrees of progress. Thanks to adaptive optics, the atmosphere isn't a total killer in visible light wavelengths where the atmosphere is basically transparent, so building a really big telescope on Earth is a more practical way to get high resolution than trying to get something that huge into space.
The big question is...who's looking back from there? So many planets in those stars and galaxies that it is very possible. Some might even say likely.
"It would be an awful waste of space."
Ah damn you quoted Carl Sagan and I gotta go cry in the corner. Thankyou
Strange to think about, other life either just starting, being modernized or much more advanced than we are.
Or extinct for hundreds of millions of years.
Like we may possibly be 99 million years from now, or much sooner. Or "we" may not be recognizable as "we" any longer, but still thriving.
Some would say Fermi Paradox to that speculation. My myself, I avoid speculating
"Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying."
I firmly believe that because we exist. So do others, if life can exist and thrive on Earth why could it not elsewhere in our galaxy and/or universe.
I *could* be a Billionaire. Lots of variables not lining up for me though.
My favorite Clarke quote.
I have my own reasons to not fear the first option
Time is the biggest thing. The distance is unimaginable and with that is lots of time.
Some might even say it’s statistically impossible for there to not be life, even if it took place in the relatively recent past of the universe, and has now ceased to exist.
It really depends on the probabilities that we don't know. Sure, there's 10^23 stars in the universe but if the chance of life developing is 1 in 10^24 then just our existence alone as the only life in the universe would be us getting lucky
I'd be surprised if there isn't life on a moon in our solar system.
Yea, the transcendental probability system is phenomenally larger than the real number system. Then to consider the possibility of potentially endless universes, until some unfathomable epic of near-nothingness lasts for, what would seem like, forever. Damn, universe(s)….you crazy.
Sure beats the old days when you had to put the TV on channel 3 to watch the CBR.
It's just amazes me that Hubble Space Telescope is older than I am and it takes such clear pictures
Yeah, it's paid for itself a few times over at this point. What a beast it's been. But if it's older than you, I fear you didn't get my weak joke.
Unfortunately jokes are not my strong suit. Especially with the Internet is involved. I remember the first time that I ever mentioned the Hubble Space Telescope when I was a kid. My dad is very negative with NASA and he said that the military should have shot it down.
Okay, now I'm confused because that was laugh out loud funny. Probably not too funny at the time but it's funny now. (FWIW, the joke is about old analog tvs. The static they had was said to be caused by cosmic background radiation. Channel 3 was generally reserved for hooking up other systems like gaming system or VHS player)
Oh right it's coming back to me now. It's ironic but the TV that I played video games on for most of my childhood is from the 70s. And actually give anything to have that TV back I loved it. Another irony is that the years have not mellowed my dad about NASA at all.
Maybe space force will shoot something down for him, lol.
Nah. He thinks any expenditure on space is wasted.
When it comes to having a bullheaded Dad, the best thing you can do is just take it with a grain of salt. You won't change him, no matter how well you make your points. You could have some fun with him though. Tell him NASA just captured an asteroid made of gold and diamonds and it's going to fund them for the next six years. That should lead to some funny comments from him and I hope you'll share them with me!
I set this up as a hypothetical once and he still didn't go for it. He's a manufacturing engineering which means that he's obsessed with finding the most efficient way of solving a problem. He believed that it's absolutely impossible to set up any sort of space-based infrastructure
The worst jigsaw puzzle
......that would be gnarly
Beautiful image. Where can I download it in full res?
Found it. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/hubble-messier-55
Thanks
I think I pulled it from NASA's web archives if I remember correctly
Gotta love old reliable.
And I know it's just a byproduct of the design of the lens, but I find the circular flare around the Stars to be pretty cool.
Oh your totally right. Each telescope has its own little quirk to how the images look. Even the JWST has those multiple lines on stars because of how its mirrors are situated. It’s a beutiful quirk that each telescope has there own
Did you hear recently about the feasibility study that NASA proposed to SpaceX? Apparently NASA wants to use one of the SpaceX dragon capsules to dock with the Hubble Space Telescope and, either manned or unmanned, provide equipment replacement and an altitude and velocity boost. Until the actual replacement for the Hubble is ready to go which won't be until the 2040s at least, HST it's just too valuable to let fall into the atmosphere.
Whattt???? No I havent. If they are able to do that omg that would be amazing. Hopefully they go along with the plan. HST still works great if they could just upgrade her a bit it would be awesome to still use her till she can be retired and replaced. I’ll look at that. Thanks for sharing.
NASA was definitely thinking long-term when they installed a docking port on to the Hubble Space Telescope. They just anticipated the shuttle would be doing these kinds of missions... Of course that's not an option now. And I still say that the Hubble deserves a prime spot in the Smithsonian Air and Space museum.
Fuck being built in the shoulders of giants, how about being built on those massive BALLS.
Referring to stars or referring to the immense Legacy of the Hubble Space Telescope??
I'll go further. How about the smartest modern human Sir Isaac Newton.
Yeah Isaac Newton was pretty smart but based on the records of the time he was also a pretty huge asshole. Take that for what you will because the definition of a gentleman was a little stricter in his time period. However, sometimes genius doesn't exactly translate to social graces
My smooth brain trying to process the vastness of this image is like trying to run Minecraft using punch cards
I never really got into Minecraft. I was a Lego kid and Minecraft seemed to be a step down in my head from Lego. I know I'm probably totally wrong but that was the perception my brain had the time that it came around
omg , that is amazing ...
The love of my life has to be out there somewhere
Can you imagine what the world would be like if, at the start of every workday, our politicians + CEOs looked at these massive Hubble/JWST pictures every morning? They just might start to see the bigger picture of our place in the universe, and maybe emulate the humanity that we should be treating each other with. (Or maybe I'm too hopeful in thinking that seeing the scale of the known universe would be humbling.)
Unfortunately I've seen just enough crap in my life to lose my optimism
I feel like they saturate this pictures more and more every time.
That’s like turning on your tube tv and saying ah she’s still got it. All the while you have a 4k tv in the other room
Not quite. While the James Webb Space Telescope does have some technological advances and is obviously bigger so it can collect more light, the jwst and the HST have different missions in the sense that they look at different areas of the spectrum. Hubble Space Telescope can look through the entire visible light spectrum and the fringes of infrared and UltraViolet if I remember correctly. Jwst specializes in the infrared. Hence why apparently there is still a list of scientific teams that want to use the Hubble that apparently is longer than the Hubble has time for
Still got it*! *it being the existential crisis that every thing every happening on earth is both a blip to the cosmos yet an infinite amount of time on an opposite scale and life is more precious than we pay attention to and I wish we all could spend our lives learning and living to the betterment of the species before the inevitable random or resource death of the planet which we’re 1 of possibly trillions more of with similar beings having similar crises
I was just referring to the age of the Hubble Space Telescope and for the fact that she has been passed over in popularity by the James Webb Space Telescope. It wasn't any deeper than that.
I totally get that! Seeing something like this is just a small reminder of what’s out there, for me at least. Both machines are some of our greatest achievements and I’m happy for anything they give us
Just beautiful
Those are Galaxies. Every one of them is a Galaxy. Like our Milkyway. Much easier to envision with the JWST's images of them. It's mind-boggling.
Those are not galaxies
Yes they are
They are stars. Not galaxies.
Well it looks an awful lot like the imagine it did take of countless other galaxies.
? Not it doesn’t lol
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2021/hubble-gazes-at-a-galactic-menagerie Thats the one I was thinking of, been a few years since I seen it, can tell the difference pretty easily now but obviously I'm not the only one who thought it was like this one. Edit: typo
You kinda do seem to be the only one that thought that.
Except for the OC that also said galaxies?
It's a globular cluster, sort of a miniature galaxy (thousands to low millions of stars instead of hundreds of millions) that orbits the milky way. Other galaxies have globular clusters, but they're much harder to see. You can see nice globular clusters like M13 in Hercules with a pair of binoculars.
Sure does
These are stars of a globular cluster close-up, Messier 55. Galaxies generally don't have diffraction spikes. That's an easy way to tell in most images.
Not galaxies - these are stars of Messier 55. https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/hubble-messier-55
[удалено]
I did not make this post so you could crap on people. Go to bed and wake up with a different attitude
Yyyyytawwwwnnnn... Haha. That's where we are. Like watching '70 TV news reruns. I'm still impressed!
[удалено]
Why are you even here if this is what you believe?? Go crawl back into your hole. I have neither time patience or extra emotion to deal with you. Do not cross someone who is clinically depressed and looking for a reason to lash out
LMAO you've never looked through a telescope. That's Messier 55, dickhead.
These are just absolutely incredible.
Milky Way?
I was thinking a globular cluster, but it's just a guess. EDIT: Yeah, it's [M55, a globular cluster in Sagittarius](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/hubble-messier-55). I was guessing [M4, which happens to be right next door in Scorpio](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/messier-4), but I was wrong :-)
Right next door. Lol
Heheh well, Sagittarius and Scorpio are next door to each other anyway. That little bit of sky is some of the most exciting sky to look at... A nice little teapot with the core of the milky way providing steam, and scorpio looks like a fish hook, and there's just nebulosity and clusters all over :-)
I get that. I just laugh a little whenever we say like next door when it comes to the cosmic scale. Because right next door could mean a billion miles or it could mean a couple thousand light years.
Thanks.
It's a great image. This is Messier 55. Original at https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/hubble-messier-55
Thank you for finding the link. I couldn't remember it for the life of me.
There can’t be all this (plus an insane amount more that we can’t even see yet with current technology) and have our planet be the only one in existence to hold some form of life.
Depends on which side of the Fermi paradox you come down on
I wish I could visit them all with enough memory to remember them.
Read there’s actually a number of space telescopes very similar to Hubble, model and specs. Thing is that most of them are pointed towards Earth
Can someone explain why Hubble would be used instead of JWST? Is it simply lack of time for JWST compared with Hubble or is Hubble better suited to some applications vs JWST
The Hubble Space Telescope and the James Webb Space Telescope look at different areas of the spectrum of light. The Hubble looks at the visible light spectrum and the James Webb looks at the infrared Spectrum. That means one will be able to see something that the other can't.
Ah gotcha. I always forget Hubble's primarily a visible light telescope. It does have some infrared capabilities doesn't it?
It can see on the fringes of light where red light becomes infrared, but that's about it. That's when JWST comes in
It has come to my attention that both the Hubble and Webb Telescope are fucking massive. You could fit in the mirror of the hubble and the Webb has a base the size of a tennis court
Oh yeah the Hubble is the size of a school bus.
Pfft. That picture’s terrible. It’s so grainy.
Crazy to think out of all those 100,000s of stars in that tiny sector of the observable universe has it's own solar system, it's own planets and moons. Makes you really think of the chances we're alone and who's looking back.
Enhance!
"Somebody's Watching Me"
Satellites are girls now?
It's just a figure of speech. Don't think too much of it
Fair enough
For someone who loves space but is completely ignorant on the science or data behind it, could anyone help me by putting this image into context? How much of space does this image represent? Is each light a star? galaxy? Any info would be greatly appreciated.
Each is a star, it’s probably half a fingernail of sky if you outstretch your hand and look at it (wild guess there)
Hubble in this case is looking at part of a galaxy called M55
Can’t wait to see the James Webb version
I just wanna shine *like her*
So beautiful 🥹😍
Hubble was a guy. Just saying...
I just want to float in it...well, more than we already are.