Top
Best
New

Posted by pppone 3 hours ago

Radiation damage to Hubble has been 4.3 years out of phase with the Solar cycle(arxiv.org)
58 points | 16 comments
two_handfuls 33 minutes ago|
This sounds like the "hmm this is strange" first step of discovery.
ck2 2 hours ago||
you should see what cosmic rays do to space telescopes

public almost never sees what raw images look like

RAW https://blog.galaxyzoo.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/spiral...

FINAL https://blog.galaxyzoo.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/spiral...

* https://blog.galaxyzoo.org/2010/04/12/how-to-handle-hubble-i...

they also slowly destroy the sensors since they are physical particles moving at almost the speed of light

netsharc 1 hour ago||
Reminds me of the radiation after Chernobyl causing flashes on the physical film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOLBEx5DBaE
jurebb 23 minutes ago||
thank you so much for this link! I have been trying to search for footage of this phenomenon (in the pre-llm era) 10+y ago
plmpsu 1 hour ago|||
Oh wow, I thought those were stars at first.
r_lee 2 hours ago|||
thanks for the links, that's really interesting to look at

do you happen to know how exactly those artifacts are cleaned up?

icegreentea2 35 minutes ago|||
The blog link describes the cleanup process.

They take two pictures, each taking up half the total observation period. If you subtract the two images, the deltas should be the cosmic ray flashes. You can then subtract those out. They use two pictures as opposed to more to minimize the impact of readout noise.

To deal with "stuck pixel" type errors, they can slightly shift the camera between the two observations. They can counter act the shift before doing the initial subtraction.

shrubble 1 hour ago||||
One way is to take a “blank” picture which will then show just the noise; then use that as a reference for what can be removed from the image.
rbanffy 1 hour ago||
The blank should only show long term damage. Hits while the sensor is collecting light can be averaged out from multiple readings of the sensor.
javier2 38 minutes ago||||
its actually quite doable. any cosmic rays will not be present in two pictures in a row. any permanent damage will be exactly the same in all pictures.
lofaszvanitt 1 hour ago|||
photoshop ;D, or using multiple pictures
superkuh 2 hours ago|
It's well known that higher solar wind/CMEs density/speed/etc that comes with the peak of the 11 year intensity cycles scatters cosmic rays before they enter the inner heliosphere. Combine this with the 1~3 years it takes for the solar wind to travel out through the heliosphere and you get the phase difference. Really cool unintended sensor empirical data on it though.

Don't try to correlate with the sun spots, correlate with the solar wind/cmes from the spots getting out far enough to effectively scatter the incoming cosmic rays away.

3lambda 1 hour ago||
I thought it only takes a few days for solar wind to travel from the sun to the Earth? Can you clarify?
terminalbraid 2 hours ago||
The paper claims directly "the rate of degradation over time remains unsatisfactorily unpredictable" but you are claiming the authors do not understand or are unaware of the point you are making?
superkuh 2 hours ago|||
I think what I explained is known by anyone in solar physics. I cannot believe they would not have discussed it. It's absence in the paper is weird. But I think unpredictable refers more to LEO in the context of the paper where things are indeed more dynamic that just the 11 year periodicity of cosmic rays from solar activity causing scattering in the heliosphere.
DANmode 1 hour ago|||
Identifying a mechanism is not predicting its rate.

There may be another variable they’re trying to pin down.