New Hubble Pictures

The Hubble Telescope's Wide Field Camera 3 has just been upgraded and the pictures coming out of it are superb. The clarity is absolutely astounding; look at this picture of some galaxies and nebulae - http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org... - it is breathtaking in my opinion.

I thought I would just share this with everyone since I know there are some astronomy fans on here - you can find more pictures http://hubblesite.org... .

Describing these as out of this world is a little on the nose but wow. Pictures like these motivated me to take astronomy courses in college. My love for outer space grew but who knew there was so much math =\

Man, awesome photos!

I read a question in New Scientist a while ago which hasn't been answered yet, and I'm dying for an answer... if they can look out and get such clear pictures thousands (millions?) of lightyears away, why can't they just take a photo of the moonlanding site and put an end to the conspiracy that man never walked on the moon? Surely that could be done cheaply and easily.

At 9/9/2009 3:02:38 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
Man, awesome photos!

I read a question in New Scientist a while ago which hasn't been answered yet, and I'm dying for an answer... if they can look out and get such clear pictures thousands (millions?) of lightyears away, why can't they just take a photo of the moonlanding site and put an end to the conspiracy that man never walked on the moon? Surely that could be done cheaply and easily.

Considering NASA is responsible for both these pictures and the moon landing, I doubt the conspiracy theorists would find any moon images NASA produces very convincing.

At 9/9/2009 3:05:52 PM, Maikuru wrote:

At 9/9/2009 3:02:38 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
Man, awesome photos!

I read a question in New Scientist a while ago which hasn't been answered yet, and I'm dying for an answer... if they can look out and get such clear pictures thousands (millions?) of lightyears away, why can't they just take a photo of the moonlanding site and put an end to the conspiracy that man never walked on the moon? Surely that could be done cheaply and easily.

Considering NASA is responsible for both these pictures and the moon landing, I doubt the conspiracy theorists would find any moon images NASA produces very convincing.

Very good point.

At 9/9/2009 3:02:38 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
Man, awesome photos!

I read a question in New Scientist a while ago which hasn't been answered yet, and I'm dying for an answer... if they can look out and get such clear pictures thousands (millions?) of lightyears away, why can't they just take a photo of the moonlanding site and put an end to the conspiracy that man never walked on the moon? Surely that could be done cheaply and easily.

http://news.yahoo.com...

http://cache.gawker.com...

They have more somewhere else; but they have taken pictures. As well, it isn't that cheap; why waste money only to disprove conspiracy theorists that will only find more excuses in the face of new evidence anyways?

At 9/9/2009 3:08:24 PM, Volkov wrote:

At 9/9/2009 3:02:38 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
Man, awesome photos!

I read a question in New Scientist a while ago which hasn't been answered yet, and I'm dying for an answer... if they can look out and get such clear pictures thousands (millions?) of lightyears away, why can't they just take a photo of the moonlanding site and put an end to the conspiracy that man never walked on the moon? Surely that could be done cheaply and easily.

http://news.yahoo.com...

http://cache.gawker.com...

They have more somewhere else; but they have taken pictures. As well, it isn't that cheap; why waste money only to disprove conspiracy theorists that will only find more excuses in the face of new evidence anyways?

If they didn't believe the Mythbusters special on the moon landing, they won't believe these.

At 9/9/2009 3:08:24 PM, Volkov wrote:

At 9/9/2009 3:02:38 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
Man, awesome photos!

I read a question in New Scientist a while ago which hasn't been answered yet, and I'm dying for an answer... if they can look out and get such clear pictures thousands (millions?) of lightyears away, why can't they just take a photo of the moonlanding site and put an end to the conspiracy that man never walked on the moon? Surely that could be done cheaply and easily.

http://news.yahoo.com...

http://cache.gawker.com...

They have more somewhere else; but they have taken pictures. As well, it isn't that cheap; why waste money only to disprove conspiracy theorists that will only find more excuses in the face of new evidence anyways?

Another very good point. Conspiracy theorists will find a way to believe what they want to believe.

At 9/9/2009 3:02:38 PM, leet4A1 wrote:
Man, awesome photos!

I read a question in New Scientist a while ago which hasn't been answered yet, and I'm dying for an answer... if they can look out and get such clear pictures thousands (millions?) of lightyears away, why can't they just take a photo of the moonlanding site and put an end to the conspiracy that man never walked on the moon? Surely that could be done cheaply and easily.

The time and money required to relocate and refocus, and refit Hubble to take an close-up photo shoot I would imagine be prohibitively costly. It's not designed for such. As for proof - they bounce lasers of receptors placed at the landing site - measurement of the light returned confirms the receptors are there. :P

off*