Disagree. This is the sharpest photo of the stars:
Damn, that's one hell of a watch chain.
Apologies if this is a dumb question, but what is that photo from?
Bruno Ponce-Jones and Francesa Fiore?
I'm a librarian, so literally - literally - any question you ask me cannot by definition be a dumb question; it's in the Code of Hammurabiblio, so:
In the pic, the lovely pachuca with killer shoes is played by Alma Martinez.
ETA: I've never seen it the movie.
Yea, right, like that's gon-
ALL HAIL THE HYPNOTOAD!
Hooooooooo. I needed to see something like this right now. A little perspective goes a long way, as it were.
awesome. Love looking at the stars. Real stars.
a little perspective does go a long way. That's why I'll sit outside looking up for awhile before I go to bed. Good medicine.
Astrophysicist here. I just wanted to clarify for those who don't want to click through that the sharpness has to do with the fact that they use "adaptive optics" to counter the blurring effect of the atmosphere. That's why optical telescopes are usually placed on top of mountains—-to get above as much of the turbulent atmosphere as possible. Up to now, the Hubble Space Telescope has always won the sharpness contest since it's above virtually all the atmosphere (and that was part of the motivation in sending it up in the first place), but since this ground-based telescope has a much bigger mirror than the Hubble, it has been able to get images that are twice as sharp using this new technology.
So it IS about size. I knew it!!
I think I love you.
Well, in the context of the resolution limit of a telescope, it really is all about size. There is a physical limit to how well even a "perfect" lens can resolve fine details, and it's inversely proportional to the size of the lens. The bigger the lens, the smaller the details it can make out. It's the Little Red Riding Hood phenomenon—-big eyes really are better to see you with!
thanks for this! I enjoy gawker the most whenever i read comments by people who are in industries or have jobs related to the article. It's always the most useful. I remember reading an article by hamilton once where he was frothing at the mouth condemning re-insurance, blah blah blah. And then a re-insurance lawyer actually started commenting and responding to various questions with facts and candor, and not in an asshole sort of way, but rather in a "i really enjoy teaching people" way. Very refreshing.