Crazy Engineering: Starshade/Coronagraph
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 кві 2016
- Sometimes light just gets in the way. A look at two technologies that block starlight to give telescopes a better view of distant Earth-like planets. For more information on exoplanet research:
exoplanets.jpl.nasa.gov - Наука та технологія
"Mike, for fuck sake, i've already told you this 5 times!"
He sure does like saying Mike before every sentence...
Well done JPL. Keep up the good work.
Wow! This is so cool! This could be a real gamechanger in finding planets, exciting prospects!
Good practical demonstration at the beginning. That folding tech could help with orbital laser stations boosting light-sail craft too.
These are great!
That is so cool. Thank you for sharing!
Man this is an awesome channel. Hello from NZ my friend!
Very interessting, keep it coming!
I'm impressed with these, in fact blown.
Interesting but a bit short on the science behind the engineering - why the petals on the sunshade for example?
+Coastwalker My best guess, is that the petals acts as a smaller blocker. So when the star is smaller than what the big surface of the sunshade can block. It will use the petals tip to block it. Just a guess though.
+Coastwalker Because of diffraction. They tend to be the best shape to stop light spilling over and affecting around the image. Ie there would/could be many bright spots around the star making it hard to know if any of them is a planet or not. Add the pedals and you limit the light diffraction and, hopefully, itll allow you to see planets :)
+NicosMind There's an article about this in a recent sciencey magazine and it indeed has to do with diffraction. I only just skimmed the article though.
+NicosMind pretty much. The petals don't reduce the diffraction. They just spread the light somewhere other than behind the shade. If draw a line perpendicular to the edge that's how light will diffract at that point. For a circle you will see that all the way around some light is directed directly behind the shade. If you do the same thing along the edges of the petals the light is directed everywhere but a cone directly behind the shade.
(Drawing perpendicular lines along the edge is overly simplistic but should give you some idea about where diffracted light will end up)
That's awesome :-)
Awesome projects. I wish this segment didn't feel so robotically rehearsed, rather if they could just have a normal chat about what's going on...
So cool
awsome to see advangement is still beeing done every week. is there a way to detect exomoons yet?
+rubikfan1 Kind of. Some people are trying to sum light the light curves of plenty of planet transits from the kepler data, in hopes of seeing the trace of exomoons in the signal.
It can't tell you "that planet has an exomoon", but could tell you "that kind of planet tends to have exomoons".
When do they launch?
With all the music and hype you forget to mention when these two missions plan to actually launch .. so when is that then ?
Now imagine if they'd make a starshade that can be used by multiple telescopes at the same time.
starshade is basically a real life version of the Icarus II's shield in the movie sunshine
Why not a smaller starshade at a closer distance from the telescope?
I would love to know how to fold the origami structure used for the starshade. If anybody knows the name of the fold or where to find a tutorial, I sure would appreciate it.
You just make opposing folds along a spiral path.
Thanks, I will try that.
Cam N. I did see more info on it and a PDF to make your own years ago but I was unable to find it again, sorry.
+Cam N. soon there will be a video with a downloadable pdf and printable starshade. the last attempt failed and too many people where confused but during JPL's open house this year there will be handouts and possibly the release on interwebs of how to fold Starshade
Ive never been a fan of the starshade, thinking it looks bulky, slow and awkward, and would really limit the amount of stars we can look at. However if it gives a superior image then although it may be slow and very hard to line up, then maybe those images will be worth it. But I still think the alternative sounds superior
What are the alternatives?
CyberMew Where theres the star shade, but the other one is the satellite which blocks the stars lights with a device internally which looks much nicer to me. If its the same quality of photos then it would be much quicker and easier to operate.
+NicosMind The thing with the cronograph is that now the telescope has to do all the work with processing that image by taking in all the sun light and then having the cronograph slow distort the image so that you can eventually see the planet with low reslolution while the starshade will take that away and allow the telescope to only focus on taking hi-res pictures from natural light be refleted upon it from its star with out said stars glare to influence the image.
The units of measurement are all over the place in this one. They jump from metres, to miles, back to metres, then into inches.
For pity's sake! Just stick to metres with the appropriate prefix!
WOW I thought I can be NASA engineer just by wearing NASA hoodie
The crorna part is soo ironic yeas later
they still need to work that intro animation :(
Mike, ....
Saul Goodman of science
Wonder what your reactions would be, if one of you were to drop the Mike...
Sorry, that was irresistable and I'll show myself out..
How do I work for you!?
+John Hightower You don't.
Skeletor Jopko Are you willing to elaborate on your comment?
John Hightower Of course! If you worked for JPL, you wouldn't have asked that question, so the correct answer is you don't work for them.
Skeletor Jopko I assume they hunt for talent, but some equally talented people will not be noticed; therefor requiring application. Granted, this is not the actual format for a job application... unless I wanted to be a social media presents.
+Skeletor Jopko Dip Shit.
crOnagRapH diDn'T aGe wElL...
Is it possible to use this technology to block sunlight over a country or a region in planet Earth, so that this can be used as a boycott?
Short answer: No.
Long answer: You would need an absolutely gargantuan starshade to do that, and it would be nigh impossible to place it in an orbit that would cast a stationary shade on Earth. So still no.
Aside: It would certainly annoy a lot more people than the ones you wanted to punish.
didn't smithers try to do that in the simpsons or somthing?
Corona ghrath more like, coronavirus
Hi
more cartoons........
+pingpongpufflefuffle Do you mean animations?
+kevyn kollom cartoons.... animations. ... artists impressions..... composites.... never a real photo in space.... how would such an object even keep up with the earth as it hurtles round the sun at 66000 mph eh?
Both of these sound like really really poor ideas. Try this instead ...
What you really need is a telescope that can receive light ONLY from the potential planet. The only down side of this approach is that the amount of light received may be very weak.
The straight forward way to receive light only from the planet is to point a long small diameter tube at it, and capture the light at the end of the tube with a lens or a CCD. In essence I am describing a typical telescope accept that the ratio of its diameter to is length is much small than a conventional telescope. So a long small diameter tube, an enhancement would be to have the walls of the tube absorb light, thus, only light traveling directly in front of where the tube is pointed will reach the end and no scattered light at all will reach the end. This is a brute force polarizing filter which will ensure that the light received on the lens end is only from what it is pointed at and nothing else. If many of these tubes could be bundled together while still being pointed with focus on a single point far away, the planet in question, then a larger lens could be placed at the end of the bundle and the measurable light would be increased. I would call this a Perfect Polarizing Telescope, PPT.
So the larger setup would require a spotter telescope that scouts out potential planets and then the PPT would pointed at the location where the planet appears to be. The light from the sun from a second PPT, pointed at the sun, would be compared with light from the PPT pointed at the potential planet and the difference between the two would be analyzed by a computer and determine how to refocus the planetary PPT or move onto the next target.
Almost certainly the actual device if a PPT were built would consist of perhaps a 1/4" piece of very opaque plastic for the polarizing lens. This plastic would have very precise tiny holes in it, the plastic would be variably flexed very slightly from the center to the edges so that the wholes would all be perfectly aligned at one point very far off in the distance, the planet in question. This piece of would sit above a telescope flat lens were the light from the planet would be collected and tested or recorded.
Sorry Nostrudoomus but you idea is just really really really really poor. Do you know a little about fourier optics? or how to design an optical system? I know that you have the right intention, but you have to read about it before writing a comment like it.
The ideas I have seen here are NOT good ideas, these ideas proposed are cloddish, difficult to implement, and not worth the trouble to learn to do. The ideas I gave are certainly better but not necessarily the best, and they can certainly be criticized successfully by a better design.
Whoever proposed these ideas stated in the video are not computer people. The best way to do it would probably just involve collecting polarized light from the star at the highest resolution possible and then have the most computing power attainable on board the satellite to filter the data. Filtering and comparing the data, algorithms that identify interesting artifacts is key everything is just apparatus to acquire data.
Your argument lacks content, criticism that is purely accusation without providing new information is NOT CONSTRUCTIVE!
@@Nostrudoomusgenuine question, do you work on this field? I'm not trying to make a point or come off as rude, you just sound like you know a lot about it. Also it's the only reason I can think of why you would spend so much time to call trained NASA scientists' ideas "cloddish."