Yeah. But interferometry is also a tool that expands the power of ground-based telescopes. The ESO has tested it for their optical telescopes and it worked! Of course, building an interferometer with ground-based and space telescopes would really expand our view. So, yes, both are needed, but the urge is not so big…

GIF: http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/3fd517267e.gif
SWF (smoother, smaller size and colorful): http://megaswf.com/view/511c0d0d3f4ccf1238023d52ec38cef3.html

Not quite. Ground-based telescopes are competitive with HST over very small fields of view and while they will get better, they will not be able to engage in wide field imaging or diffraction-limited imaging at the short end of the optical passband (not to mention the UV) that could compete with a second-generation Hubble. We need both.

Maybe we should be giving them nicks – this one could be Cyclops?

It’s a long way from home so I guess there wont be any repair missions. It’s website says its got an operational life of 3 years – that’s not long, bit sad actually

Well done ESA

His legacy is the proposed James Webb Space Telescope, being built to his design, and due to be launched in 2014.

Phil, do you have any more details, or any connection in your career with the Pioneer of this particular facet of Astronomy?

Ivan.

[yes, I have Finding Nemo on the table next to me]

J/P=?

I am so excited for the day that we create lightspeed or nearlightspeed technology. Imagine how exciting it would to visit these galaxies that we can only take low resolution pictures of now.

I thought Hershey’s makes chocolates.

No, I’m pretty sure that is a Herschel bar galaxy: “M51 also has a small central bar (Pierce 1986; Zaritsky & Lo 1986).”

2. SnakeLinkSonic

“Any likely surprises,,,”

Ummm, no, I expect they will be UNlikely, ’cause if they were likely, they wouldn’t really be surprises,,,

GAry 7

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/182268

Someday we’ll have very high IR resolution images just as good as hubble’s optical light images. Without the IR scopes we would never be able to see into the Galactic Center and other regions obscured by dust. Still there must be limitations, I don’t think the IR scope can look all the way across and show us what’s behind the core we see…

The concept you want to look up is “Diffraction Limit”. Roughly the resolution is limited by wavelength/diameter of the optical system (+some constants etc). The problem with far infrared is that the wavelengths are *much* longer than visible light, in the case of the three cameras onboard Hershel 1000-10000 times longer!

Select my username for a link to an Astronomy Picture of the Day posting from 2003 July 6 which answers this question quite well.

To quote from the article:
Our universe is a very dusty place. Dust usually shows its presence by blocking out light emitted from stars or nebulae behind it, sometimes creating the illusion of a horse’s head or a sombrero hat. But nobody really knows what a typical interstellar dust grain looks like. By studying how dust absorbs, emits, and reflects light, astronomers do know that interstellar dust is much different than the cell and lint based dust found around a typical house. Interstellar dust grains are composed mostly of carbon, silicon, and oxygen and are usually less than about 1/1000 of a millimeter across. Recent work indicates that most dust grains are not spherical. The above picture shows the result of a fractal adhesion model for dust grains involving random conglomerates of spherical compounds of different properties, here artificially highlighted by different colors.

Mark my words, anytime you see a well-defined double-armed galaxy, you’ll find its partner nearby…

~sLs~