Why not us interferometry to take a picture of Pluto? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InReason for disqualifying Pluto as a Planet?Planets and Pluto? Neptune?How long will it take Pluto to grow to planet size?VLT interferometry vs E-ELT?Can the expansion of spacetime be directly measured with laser interferometry (like GW can)Is Pluto a “proto-planet”?Why was the (small) Hubble better able to find KBO targets for New Horizons than large adaptive optics ground telescopes?Why does Jupiter atmosphere does not get thinner on edgesIs Optical VLBI theoretically feasible? If not why not?Why did the Event Horizon Telescope take so long to take a photo of a black hole?
Can a rogue use sneak attack with weapons that have the thrown property even if they are not thrown?
What could be the right powersource for 15 seconds lifespan disposable giant chainsaw?
How technical should a Scrum Master be to effectively remove impediments?
How can I autofill dates in Excel excluding Sunday?
Is "plugging out" electronic devices an American expression?
Worn-tile Scrabble
What to do when moving next to a bird sanctuary with a loosely-domesticated cat?
How to manage monthly salary
Do these rules for Critical Successes and Critical Failures seem Fair?
"as much details as you can remember"
Is flight data recorder erased after every flight?
Output the Arecibo Message
Multiply Two Integer Polynomials
Apparent duplicates between Haynes service instructions and MOT
How to support a colleague who finds meetings extremely tiring?
STM32 programming and BOOT0 pin
Why isn't the circumferential light around the M87 black hole's event horizon symmetric?
Can one be advised by a professor who is very far away?
Delete all lines which don't have n characters before delimiter
One word riddle: Vowel in the middle
What is the most effective way of iterating a std::vector and why?
Is an up-to-date browser secure on an out-of-date OS?
How to answer pointed "are you quitting" questioning when I don't want them to suspect
Which Sci-Fi work first showed weapon of galactic-scale mass destruction?
Why not us interferometry to take a picture of Pluto?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InReason for disqualifying Pluto as a Planet?Planets and Pluto? Neptune?How long will it take Pluto to grow to planet size?VLT interferometry vs E-ELT?Can the expansion of spacetime be directly measured with laser interferometry (like GW can)Is Pluto a “proto-planet”?Why was the (small) Hubble better able to find KBO targets for New Horizons than large adaptive optics ground telescopes?Why does Jupiter atmosphere does not get thinner on edgesIs Optical VLBI theoretically feasible? If not why not?Why did the Event Horizon Telescope take so long to take a photo of a black hole?
$begingroup$
Interferometry is among the best ways (if not, the best way!) to have an image of a very distant object.
Recently a picture of the black hole at the center of M87 was released. It is the result of several data collected by the Event Horizon Telescope, a series of arrays all across our world, working as one like a giant Earth sized telescope. The picture is not really cutting edge and high definition however it is still very surprising and in a way detailed enough, considering the fact that M87 is 53.49 million light years away... and this is where I arrive to Pluto which is just around 6 to 7 billion kilometers from us.
If we used an interferometer, perhaps the same size as the EHT (or just a smaller one, the size of an entire continent), and point all the arrays at Pluto, then we should have a picture with a resolution that is at least higher as the Hubble Space Telescope, but likely not as high as the pictures from the New Horizons spacecraft which directly made a fly by of Pluto... right?
If so then why don't we use interferometry to take pictures of Pluto from Earth?
planet telescope interferometry
asked 5 hours ago
Victorbrine CassiniVictorbrine Cassini
1212
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interferometry is among the best ways (if not, the best way!) to have an image of a very distant object.
Recently a picture of the black hole at the center of M87 was released. It is the result of several data collected by the Event Horizon Telescope, a series of arrays all across our world, working as one like a giant Earth sized telescope. The picture is not really cutting edge and high definition however it is still very surprising and in a way detailed enough, considering the fact that M87 is 53.49 million light years away... and this is where I arrive to Pluto which is just around 6 to 7 billion kilometers from us.
If we used an interferometer, perhaps the same size as the EHT (or just a smaller one, the size of an entire continent), and point all the arrays at Pluto, then we should have a picture with a resolution that is at least higher as the Hubble Space Telescope, but likely not as high as the pictures from the New Horizons spacecraft which directly made a fly by of Pluto... right?
If so then why don't we use interferometry to take pictures of Pluto from Earth?
planet telescope interferometry
asked 5 hours ago
Victorbrine CassiniVictorbrine Cassini
1212
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Interferometry is among the best ways (if not, the best way!) to have an image of a very distant object.
Recently a picture of the black hole at the center of M87 was released. It is the result of several data collected by the Event Horizon Telescope, a series of arrays all across our world, working as one like a giant Earth sized telescope. The picture is not really cutting edge and high definition however it is still very surprising and in a way detailed enough, considering the fact that M87 is 53.49 million light years away... and this is where I arrive to Pluto which is just around 6 to 7 billion kilometers from us.
If we used an interferometer, perhaps the same size as the EHT (or just a smaller one, the size of an entire continent), and point all the arrays at Pluto, then we should have a picture with a resolution that is at least higher as the Hubble Space Telescope, but likely not as high as the pictures from the New Horizons spacecraft which directly made a fly by of Pluto... right?
If so then why don't we use interferometry to take pictures of Pluto from Earth?
planet telescope interferometry
asked 5 hours ago
Victorbrine CassiniVictorbrine Cassini
1212
$endgroup$
Interferometry is among the best ways (if not, the best way!) to have an image of a very distant object.
Recently a picture of the black hole at the center of M87 was released. It is the result of several data collected by the Event Horizon Telescope, a series of arrays all across our world, working as one like a giant Earth sized telescope. The picture is not really cutting edge and high definition however it is still very surprising and in a way detailed enough, considering the fact that M87 is 53.49 million light years away... and this is where I arrive to Pluto which is just around 6 to 7 billion kilometers from us.
If we used an interferometer, perhaps the same size as the EHT (or just a smaller one, the size of an entire continent), and point all the arrays at Pluto, then we should have a picture with a resolution that is at least higher as the Hubble Space Telescope, but likely not as high as the pictures from the New Horizons spacecraft which directly made a fly by of Pluto... right?
If so then why don't we use interferometry to take pictures of Pluto from Earth?
planet telescope interferometry
planet telescope interferometry
asked 5 hours ago
Victorbrine CassiniVictorbrine Cassini
1212
asked 5 hours ago
Victorbrine CassiniVictorbrine Cassini
1212
asked 5 hours ago
Victorbrine CassiniVictorbrine Cassini
1212
asked 5 hours ago
Victorbrine CassiniVictorbrine Cassini
1212
asked 5 hours ago
Victorbrine CassiniVictorbrine Cassini
1212
1212
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Radio interferometry can combine observations over very large baselines. But optical interferometry cannot. According to a list of interferometry instruments on wikipedia, the largest baseline for optical measurements is less than a kilometer. We can't take optical measurements with continent-sized instruments.
Then if you drop down to radio where the instruments do have that capability, I think you'll find Pluto is quite dim (it's not a radio source, and there's no strong radio emissions that it can reflect to us). There's no radio signal from Pluto that can be imaged.
From a page on optical interferometry:
Interferometers are seen by most astronomers as very specialized
instruments, as they are capable of a very limited range of
observations. It is often said that an interferometer achieves the
effect of a telescope the size of the distance between the apertures;
this is only true in the limited sense of angular resolution. The
combined effects of limited aperture area and atmospheric turbulence
generally limit interferometers to observations of comparatively
bright stars and active galactic nuclei.
answered 4 hours ago
BowlOfRedBowlOfRed
76637
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Might want to state Pluto is "dim" because it doesn't have many radio emissions (else one might infer you meant light).
$endgroup$
– Magic Octopus Urn
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "514"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f30334%2fwhy-not-us-interferometry-to-take-a-picture-of-pluto%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Radio interferometry can combine observations over very large baselines. But optical interferometry cannot. According to a list of interferometry instruments on wikipedia, the largest baseline for optical measurements is less than a kilometer. We can't take optical measurements with continent-sized instruments.
Then if you drop down to radio where the instruments do have that capability, I think you'll find Pluto is quite dim (it's not a radio source, and there's no strong radio emissions that it can reflect to us). There's no radio signal from Pluto that can be imaged.
From a page on optical interferometry:
Interferometers are seen by most astronomers as very specialized
instruments, as they are capable of a very limited range of
observations. It is often said that an interferometer achieves the
effect of a telescope the size of the distance between the apertures;
this is only true in the limited sense of angular resolution. The
combined effects of limited aperture area and atmospheric turbulence
generally limit interferometers to observations of comparatively
bright stars and active galactic nuclei.
answered 4 hours ago
BowlOfRedBowlOfRed
76637
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Might want to state Pluto is "dim" because it doesn't have many radio emissions (else one might infer you meant light).
$endgroup$
– Magic Octopus Urn
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Radio interferometry can combine observations over very large baselines. But optical interferometry cannot. According to a list of interferometry instruments on wikipedia, the largest baseline for optical measurements is less than a kilometer. We can't take optical measurements with continent-sized instruments.
Then if you drop down to radio where the instruments do have that capability, I think you'll find Pluto is quite dim (it's not a radio source, and there's no strong radio emissions that it can reflect to us). There's no radio signal from Pluto that can be imaged.
From a page on optical interferometry:
Interferometers are seen by most astronomers as very specialized
instruments, as they are capable of a very limited range of
observations. It is often said that an interferometer achieves the
effect of a telescope the size of the distance between the apertures;
this is only true in the limited sense of angular resolution. The
combined effects of limited aperture area and atmospheric turbulence
generally limit interferometers to observations of comparatively
bright stars and active galactic nuclei.
answered 4 hours ago
BowlOfRedBowlOfRed
76637
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Might want to state Pluto is "dim" because it doesn't have many radio emissions (else one might infer you meant light).
$endgroup$
– Magic Octopus Urn
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Radio interferometry can combine observations over very large baselines. But optical interferometry cannot. According to a list of interferometry instruments on wikipedia, the largest baseline for optical measurements is less than a kilometer. We can't take optical measurements with continent-sized instruments.
Then if you drop down to radio where the instruments do have that capability, I think you'll find Pluto is quite dim (it's not a radio source, and there's no strong radio emissions that it can reflect to us). There's no radio signal from Pluto that can be imaged.
From a page on optical interferometry:
Interferometers are seen by most astronomers as very specialized
instruments, as they are capable of a very limited range of
observations. It is often said that an interferometer achieves the
effect of a telescope the size of the distance between the apertures;
this is only true in the limited sense of angular resolution. The
combined effects of limited aperture area and atmospheric turbulence
generally limit interferometers to observations of comparatively
bright stars and active galactic nuclei.
answered 4 hours ago
BowlOfRedBowlOfRed
76637
$endgroup$
Radio interferometry can combine observations over very large baselines. But optical interferometry cannot. According to a list of interferometry instruments on wikipedia, the largest baseline for optical measurements is less than a kilometer. We can't take optical measurements with continent-sized instruments.
Then if you drop down to radio where the instruments do have that capability, I think you'll find Pluto is quite dim (it's not a radio source, and there's no strong radio emissions that it can reflect to us). There's no radio signal from Pluto that can be imaged.
From a page on optical interferometry:
Interferometers are seen by most astronomers as very specialized
instruments, as they are capable of a very limited range of
observations. It is often said that an interferometer achieves the
effect of a telescope the size of the distance between the apertures;
this is only true in the limited sense of angular resolution. The
combined effects of limited aperture area and atmospheric turbulence
generally limit interferometers to observations of comparatively
bright stars and active galactic nuclei.
answered 4 hours ago
BowlOfRedBowlOfRed
76637
edited 2 hours ago
answered 4 hours ago
BowlOfRedBowlOfRed
76637
answered 4 hours ago
BowlOfRedBowlOfRed
76637
answered 4 hours ago
BowlOfRedBowlOfRed
76637
76637
$begingroup$
Might want to state Pluto is "dim" because it doesn't have many radio emissions (else one might infer you meant light).
$endgroup$
– Magic Octopus Urn
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Might want to state Pluto is "dim" because it doesn't have many radio emissions (else one might infer you meant light).
$endgroup$
– Magic Octopus Urn
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Might want to state Pluto is "dim" because it doesn't have many radio emissions (else one might infer you meant light).
$endgroup$
– Magic Octopus Urn
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Might want to state Pluto is "dim" because it doesn't have many radio emissions (else one might infer you meant light).
$endgroup$
– Magic Octopus Urn
4 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Astronomy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fastronomy.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f30334%2fwhy-not-us-interferometry-to-take-a-picture-of-pluto%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
