Hubble pictures Hall of Fame

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Hubble pictures Hall of Fame

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:23:08 PM EDT

www.spacetelescope.org/images/archive/bestof/

WOW!!!

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:31:44 PM EDT

[#1]

WOW is right. Some really nice photos. Thanks.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:44:00 PM EDT

[#2]

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:46:31 PM EDT

[#3]

Awesome!

I've never had a background "wallpaper" image before.

Until now

www.spacetelescope.org/images/html/opo0328a.html

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:46:32 PM EDT

[#4]

Imagine the pictures they get from the one pointed down.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:48:40 PM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Imagine the pictures they get from the one pointed down.

Hmmmm....
maybe I should put on pants when I go outside.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:49:29 PM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Imagine the pictures they get from the one pointed down.

Hmmmm....
maybe I should put on pants when I go outside.

Nah, leave em off, just be sure to moon the sky next time.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:50:21 PM EDT

[#7]

Cool pictures.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:52:07 PM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Imagine the pictures they get from the one pointed down.

Hmmmm....
maybe I should put on pants when I go outside.

Isn't the Hubble optimized for long range images? It'd be like taking a 10x scope and trying to look at something a half an inch away.

By the way, the Hubble images make me feel small and insignificant.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:53:04 PM EDT

[#9]

I love looking at those pics and seeing ALL the other galaxies in there.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:53:30 PM EDT

[#10]

Am I the only one that thinks that some of those shots are photo-chopped?

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:53:50 PM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
Am I the only one that thinks that some of those shots are photo-chopped?

Yes

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:54:50 PM EDT

[#12]

that galaxy cluster is AMAZING!!! 13hr exposure! its unreal.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:55:06 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Imagine the pictures they get from the one pointed down.

Hmmmm....
maybe I should put on pants when I go outside.

Isn't the Hubble optimized for long range images? It'd be like taking a 10x scope and trying to look at something a half an inch away.

By the way, the Hubble images make me feel small and insignificant.

Surely they could never figure out how to make a version for shorter range.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:56:46 PM EDT

[#14]

Cool pics.

Posted: 12/17/2005 6:57:08 PM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Am I the only one that thinks that some of those shots are photo-chopped?

we never landed on the moon.. there is no such thing as the hubble... bla bla bla.

Posted: 12/17/2005 7:00:54 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Imagine the pictures they get from the one pointed down.

Hmmmm....
maybe I should put on pants when I go outside.

Isn't the Hubble optimized for long range images? It'd be like taking a 10x scope and trying to look at something a half an inch away.

By the way, the Hubble images make me feel small and insignificant.

Surely they could never figure out how to make a version for shorter range.

I thought he meant the Hubble specifically.

Posted: 12/17/2005 7:03:00 PM EDT

[#17]

Hubble is being shut down... it will be crashing into an ocean near you soon...

Posted: 12/17/2005 7:07:01 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Hubble is being shut down... it will be crashing into an ocean near you soon...

Actually, I accidentally shot it down with my new Barrett .50 cal........what do you know, the libs were right after all. Sorry guys.

Posted: 12/17/2005 7:08:35 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Hubble is being shut down... it will be crashing into an ocean near you soon...

Actually, I accidentally shot it down with my new Barrett .50 cal........what do you know, the libs were right after all. Sorry guys.

damn you...

Posted: 12/17/2005 7:08:40 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Hubble is being shut down... it will be crashing into an ocean near you soon...

Actually, I accidentally shot it down with my new Barrett .50 cal........what do you know, the libs were right after all. Sorry guys.

Posted: 12/17/2005 7:09:26 PM EDT

[#21]

I'd like to see the Hubble used to try to image the Apollo landing sites on the moon (as well as find the hidden alien moon bases), and also to get images of the planets in our own solar system.

I just hope nobody goofs and points the Hubble directly at the sun. Oops!

CJ

Posted: 12/17/2005 7:12:02 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

The full sized version of this picture, not the mini above, the full size version it is said that every individual pixel represents the distance between the Sun and Saturn. Be humbled.

Posted: 12/17/2005 7:13:02 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Imagine the pictures they get from the one pointed down.

Hmmmm....
maybe I should put on pants when I go outside.

Isn't the Hubble optimized for long range images? It'd be like taking a 10x scope and trying to look at something a half an inch away.

By the way, the Hubble images make me feel small and insignificant.

Surely they could never figure out how to make a version for shorter range.

yeah, that'd take a bunch of rocket scientists to do that

Posted: 12/18/2005 7:18:13 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Am I the only one that thinks that some of those shots are photo-chopped?

Yes

The images you see are not raw images. The raw images are computer enhanced to bring out the detail in addition to adding color.

Posted: 12/18/2005 7:21:25 AM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
I'd like to see the Hubble used to try to image the Apollo landing sites on the moon (as well as find the hidden alien moon bases), and also to get images of the planets in our own solar system.

I just hope nobody goofs and points the Hubble directly at the sun. Oops!

CJ

Can Hubble see the Apollo landing sites on the Moon?

No, Hubble cannot take photos of the Apollo landing sites.

An object on the Moon 4 meters (4.37 yards) across, viewed from HST, would be about 0.002 arcsec in size. The highest resolution instrument currently on HST is the Advanced Camera for Surveys at 0.03 arcsec. So anything we left on the Moon cannot be resolved in any HST image. It would just appear as a dot.

Here is a picture that Hubble took of the Moon:
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/1999/14/

Can Hubble take pictures of Earth?

The surface of the Earth is whizzing by as Hubble orbits, and the pointing system, designed to track the distant stars, cannot track an object on the Earth. The shortest exposure time on any of the Hubble instruments is 0.1 seconds, and in this time Hubble moves about 700 meters. So a picture Hubble took of Earth would be all streaks.

To find images of Earth from other sources in space go to The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of the Earth: http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/

During normal operations, the telescope does not observe targets that are too close to the Sun or the Moon. Some rare exceptions have been made to these rules. For example, the Moon has been observed, and observations have been made of Venus and a comet despite the viewing angle being somewhat closer to the Sun. However, in all these cases, the scientific rationale was sufficiently compelling to justify the significant work required to support these observations.

Posted: 12/18/2005 7:22:52 AM EDT

[#26]

The soaring tower is 9.5 light-years or about 90 trillion kilometres high, about twice the distance from our Sun to the next nearest star.

... Incomprehensible, I love it!

Posted: 12/18/2005 7:30:00 AM EDT

[#27]

Eagle Nebula. It is Rosie O'Donnell huge!

Posted: 12/18/2005 7:58:09 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:
Imagine the pictures they get from the one pointed down.

Shhhh...don't tell anybody...but "They" have been looking at "Us" for about fifty years now.

Look up "Corona", Keyhole, KH-10/11/12/???

One of those [formerly] invisible agencies...the National Reconaissance Office (NRO) controls the eyes in the sky and the products that they capture.

Here is their web site: NRO

Here is a 1967 pic of the Pentagon:

Here is a pic of a Soviet airfield in the '60s:

Posted: 12/18/2005 2:53:32 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Am I the only one that thinks that some of those shots are photo-chopped?

we never landed on the moon.. there is no such thing as the hubble... bla bla bla.

That is not what I meant; I mean they look kind of fake or something. They look too perfect, too beautiful. They I think they are real pictures just embellished a bit.

Posted: 12/18/2005 2:59:19 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
The soaring tower is 9.5 light-years or about 90 trillion kilometres high, about twice the distance from our Sun to the next nearest star.

... Incomprehensible, I love it!

]

Yeah. That's a big freakin' number.

Posted: 12/18/2005 3:00:03 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:

They look too perfect, too beautiful.

The universe isn't that bad a place sometimes.

Also, these are the best pics Hubble has taken. It's taken a lot of snaps over the years.

Posted: 12/18/2005 3:04:23 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Am I the only one that thinks that some of those shots are photo-chopped?

we never landed on the moon.. there is no such thing as the hubble... bla bla bla.

That is not what I meant; I mean they look kind of fake or something. They look too perfect, too beautiful. They I think they are real pictures just embellished a bit.

I'm sure they all get level adjusted, denoised, sharpened, and many of them are false color. But nothing is airbrushed in, or made up.