New telescope brings the power of Hubble down to Earth

From the University of Arizona

UA astronomers take sharpest photos ever of the night sky

MAGAO_telescope
The Magellan Telescope with MagAO’s Adaptive Secondary Mirror (ASM) is mounted at the top looking down some 30 feet onto the 21-foot diameter primary mirror, which is encased inside the blue mirror cell. Credit: Yuri Beletsky, Las Campanas Observatory

Using a new camera and a telescope mirror that vibrates a thousand times each second to counteract atmospheric flickering, astronomers have achieved image resolution capabilities that could see a baseball diamond on the moon

Astronomers at the University of Arizona, the Arcetri Observatory near Florence, Italy and the Carnegie Observatory have developed a new type of camera that allows scientists to take sharper images of the night sky than ever before.

The team has been developing this technology for more than 20 years at observatories in Arizona, most recently at the Large Binocular Telescope, or LBT, and has now deployed the latest version of these cameras in the high desert of Chile at the Magellan 6.5-meter telescope.

“It was very exciting to see this new camera make the night sky look sharper than has ever before been possible,” said UA astronomy professor Laird Close, the project’s principal scientist. “We can, for the first time, make long-exposure images that resolve objects just 0.02 arcseconds across – the equivalent of a dime viewed from more than a hundred miles away. At that resolution, you could see a baseball diamond on the moon.”

The twofold improvement over past efforts rests on the fact that for the first time, a telescope with a large diameter primary mirror is being used for digital photography at its theoretical resolution limit in visible wavelengths – light that the human eye can see.

“As we move towards shorter wavelengths, image sharpness improves,” said Jared Males, a NASA Sagan Fellow at the UA’s department of astronomy. “Until now, large telescopes could make the theoretically sharpest photos only in infrared – or long wavelength – light, but our new camera can take photos that are twice as sharp in the visible light spectrum.”

Equipped with the newly developed MagAO adaptive optics system, the Magellan Telescope revealed details about the Orion nebula. The background image, taken with the Hubble Space Telescope, shows the Trapezium cluster of young stars (pink) still in the process of forming. The middle inset photo reveals the binary nature of the Theta Ori C star pair. The bottom insert shows a different binary young star pair shaped by the stellar wind from Theta 1 Ori C. Credit: Laird Close and Ya-Lin Wu; NASA, C.R. O’Dell and S.K. Wong

 

These images are also at least twice as sharp as what the Hubble Space Telescope can make, because with its 21-foot diameter mirror, the Magellan telescope is much larger than Hubble with its 8-foot mirror. Until now, Hubble always produced the best visible light images, since even large ground-based telescope with complex adaptive optics imaging cameras could only make blurry images in visible light.

To overcome atmospheric turbulence, which plagues earth-based telescopes by causing the image to blur, Close’s team developed a very powerful adaptive optics system that floats a thin (1/16th of an inch) curved glass mirror (2.8 feet across) on a magnetic field 30 feet above the telescope’s primary mirror.

This so-called Adaptive Secondary Mirror (ASM) can change its shape at 585 points on its surface 1,000 times each second, counteracting the blurring effects of the atmosphere.

“As a result, we can see the visible sky more clearly than ever before,” Close said. “It’s almost like having a telescope with a 21-foot mirror in space.”

The new adaptive optics system, called MagAO for “Magellan Adaptive Optics,” has already made some important scientific discoveries, published today in three scientific papers in the Astrophysical Journal. As the system was being tested and received what astronomers call “first light,” the team pointed it to a famous and well-studied massive star that gives the Great Orion Nebula (Object M42) most of its UV light. The Orion Nebula, located just below Orion’s Belt visible as smudge of light even with regular binoculars.

Considered young at about 1 million years old, this star, called Theta 1 Ori C, has been previously known to be in fact a binary star pair made up of two stars called C1 and C2. However, the separation between the two is so small – about the average distance between Earth and Uranus – that astronomers had never been able to resolve the famous pair in a direct telescope photo.

Once MagAO and its visible science camera called VisAO were pointed towards Theta Ori 1 C, the results were immediate.

“I have been imaging Theta 1 Ori C for more than 20 years and never could directly see that it was in fact two stars,” Close said. “But as soon as we turned on the MagAO system it was beautifully split into two stars.”

In another result, MagAO has shed light on another mystery: How do how planets form from disks of dust and gas affected by the strong ionizing light called stellar wind coming from a massive star like Theta 1 Ori C, which has about 44 times the mass of the sun?

The team used MagAO and VisAO to look for red light from ionized hydrogen gas to trace out how the strong UV radiation and stellar wind from Theta 1 Ori C affects the disks around its neighboring stars.

The power of visible light adaptive optics: On the left is a “normal” photo of the theta 1 Ori C binary star in red light. The middle image shows the same object, but with MagAO’s adaptive optics system turned on. Eliminating the atmospheric blurring, the resulting photo becomes about 17 times sharper, turning a blob into a crisp image of a binary star pair. These are the highest resolution photos taken by a telescope. Credit: Laird Close/UA

“Close to Theta 1 Ori C, there are two very young stars surrounded by disks of gas and dust,” said Ya-Lin Wu, a graduate student and lead author on one of the publications. “Theta 1 Ori C pummels those disks with stellar wind and UV light. It looks like they are being bent backwards by a strong wind.”

MagAO’s photo revealed that the two stars and their protoplanetary disks are heavily distorted into teardrop shapes as the strong UV light and wind create shock fronts and drag gas downwind of the pair.

The distribution of gas and dust in young planetary systems is another unsolved problem in planet formation. The team used VisAO’s simultaneous/spectral differential imager, or SDI, to estimate the mass of another intriguing object in the Orion Nebula: one of a few stars in Orion sporting a rare “silhouette disk.” The SDI camera allowed the light from the star to be removed at a very high level—offering, for the first time, a clear look at the inner regions of the silhouette.

“The disk lies in front of the bright Orion nebula, so we see the dark shadow cast as the dust in the disk absorbs background light from the nebula,” said Kate Follette, a graduate student and lead author of one of the three papers published in the Astrophysical Journal. “Picture a moth flying across a bright movie screen: Its body will appear opaque, while the wings will be partially transparent. Our SDI instrument allows us to peer into the silhouette and trace how much dust is at each location in the disk based on how transparent or opaque it is.”

“We were surprised to find that the amount of attenuated light from the nebula never reached an opaque point,” she said. “It seems as though the outer parts of this disk have less dust than we would have expected.”

“It is important to understand how dust is laid out in these objects because that dust and gas is what nature uses to build planets,” Close explained. “Our new imaging capabilities revealed there is very little dust and gas in the outer part of the disk.”

According to Close, the silhouette disk might have been close to the massive star Theta 1 Ori C at some point, which might have blown away its outer dust and gas.

“This tells us something about planet-forming disks in these dense, stellar nurseries,” Close said. “There appears to be a limit to the formation of massive planets very far away from their parent stars. One possible explanation might be the presence of a massive star like Theta 1 Ori C stripping away the outer gas and dust.”

###

The MagAO system was developed with support of the National Science Foundation MRI, TSIP and ATI grant programs. The Adaptive Secondary Mirror itself was produced by Microgate and ADS of Italy, with the UA’s Steward Observatory Mirror Lab. The MagAO pyramid wavefront sensor was developed at the Arcetri Observatory, Italy. The Magellan telescopes are operated by a partnership between the Carnegie institute, the UA Harvard University, MIT and the University of Michigan. The work of NASA Sagan Fellows Jared Males and Katie Morzinski was performed in part under contract with the California Institute of Technology and was funded by NASA through the Sagan Fellowship Program executed by the NASA Exoplanet Science Institute. The work of Kate Follette was funded in part by the NSF Graduate Research Fellowship program.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

77 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David Ball
August 24, 2013 1:42 pm

The mind boggles. Even if our universe is finite, in what does that reside? And beyond that? Embiggening.

cba
August 24, 2013 1:59 pm


Pamela Gray says:
August 24, 2013 at 8:39 am
I have Cannon stabilizer binoculars that do the same thing. Great pair of binoculars. I wonder if stabilizers on binoculars and movie cameras came before or after this technology as applied to telescopes?

Consumer cameras and binoculars have been around several years but not much longer than that. The origins of these image stabilizing systems date back to the 50s using what is referred to as tilt/tip. This is where a flat mirror is adjusted in its position to keep a star at the same point in the frame. The full ‘rubber mirror’ adaptive optics has only been possible for the last couple of decades. It requires very sensitive cameras and lots of processing power. It is also probably not used for anything but rather large telescopes. The original concepts were developed as part of the strategic defense initiative to correct laser wavefronts for taking out nuclear bomb delivery systems by reflecting powerful groundbased lasers off of special satellites. It was tested on space shuttle flights but I never heard of anything more being created. Most of what has been done has been in the infrared because visible light is harder to accomplish.

meemoe_uk
August 24, 2013 2:24 pm

nice of them to make an international report in american jargon. Had to look up what a baseball diamond was. It’s a big square. Maybe in the next improvement of telescope they can see a Pallone col bracciale width. And we all know what that means,.

Curt
August 24, 2013 2:47 pm

Quite a few of the large earth-based observatories now have adaptive optics in the form of a dynamically deformable secondary mirror to counter academic distortion. I had some involvement with the Hawaiian Keck Observatory’s implementation of AO more than 5 years ago. They sent me a picture of the first picture of Uranus’ rings taken from the earth’s surface when they first got it working.
When combined with the very large primary mirrors made possible by controlling segmented sections in coordination, the new capabilities of earthbound telescopes have dramatically reduced the role of orbiting telescopes. They are primarily used now to monitor wavelengths to which the earth’s atmosphere is opaque, notably the far infrared. (Slayers take note – I have seen claims from prominent slayers that if the greenhouse effect were real, we couldn’t have [far] infrared telescopy … and we can’t, not from the earth’s surface!)

John Trigge (in Oz)
August 24, 2013 2:47 pm

Quick, tell Lew that we no longer believe the conspiracy that the moon landing was faked as we can see the baseball diamond they built up there.

John Silver
August 24, 2013 3:20 pm

jones
August 24, 2013 3:23 pm

beng says:
August 24, 2013 at 8:59 am
Impressive. Astronomy is one of my passions. Can close binary stars have stable planetary systems?
I second that comment….

Konrad
August 24, 2013 3:26 pm

Trully amazing. I would be fascinated to know how mirror vibration is calibrated. Reference star?
Given that it is a upgrade to the secondary mirror, every major optical telescope can now be upgraded with this system. This is fantastic news, except for astronomy students. Want time on the new hotness? You will now need hair to rival Rupunzel and a rack to rival May West or you’re not in the running sunshine.

August 24, 2013 4:16 pm

Thanks, Anthony.
The University of Arizona press release is at http://uanews.org/story/ua-astronomers-take-sharpest-photos-ever-of-the-night-sky

Randy
August 24, 2013 4:39 pm

All AO systems need a reference – usually a point source like a star or the distant “star” in the upper atmosphere produced by a laser is used as the source of spherical wavefronts that become distorted in the passage through the atmosphere.
BTW, the Canon system corrects the low order terms of tip/tilt induced by handheld shake. It does this with accelerometers to drive a variable wedge transmissive optic. The next step up in AO would include focus, then the low order aberration terms of coma, astigmatism, and spherical aberration. That takes about 36 actuators – usually describe by the Zernike orthogonal polynomials. After that are the higher order terms (Kolmogorov statistics described turbulence) and that just goes on a ways. At some point as turbulence deepens it’s not possible to unwrap the phase distortion without using more subtle tricks. I wonder what tricks the UA team might be using?
There are other ways of producing the reference, and other methods of sharpening the image without a distant point reference (phase diversity) but these require even more computing power and have intrinsic photon limits (not enough photons!)
I’m about to go off mountaineering, but when I get back I’ll be interested in seeing this new “record” in resolution.

jorgekafkazar
August 24, 2013 4:56 pm

“At that resolution, you could see a baseball diamond on the moon.”
If you build it, no one will come. Not even “They.”

RoHa
August 24, 2013 5:35 pm

I can see the point of being able to find a dime from a hundred miles away, but why would anyone want to see a baseball diamond on the moon?

RoHa
August 24, 2013 5:39 pm

“nice of them to make an international report in american jargon.’
Americans don’t make international reports. They never think beyond the domestic, even when they are getting assistance from other countries.

RockyRoad
August 24, 2013 5:44 pm

RoHa says:
August 24, 2013 at 5:35 pm

I can see the point of being able to find a dime from a hundred miles away, but why would anyone want to see a baseball diamond on the moon?

You’ve never heard of the Fever Pitch Syndrome? Based on a great movie by the same name. /sarc

Owen in GA
August 24, 2013 6:03 pm

beng says:
August 24, 2013 at 8:59 am
Impressive. Astronomy is one of my passions. Can close binary stars have stable planetary systems?

I did a COMPUTER MODEL using only Newton’s gravity (I did not want to tackle Einstein’s equations) that showed several orbital sweet spots for a three body system with two Sol sized stars and an Earth sized planet. The closest stable point for such a planet turned out to be about twice the distance between the two stars outside of their orbits. For wider spaced stars, at about 4AU it was just possible to place the planet in a 1AU orbit around one of the two stars. There was more leeway as the stars were farther apart. NOTE: the model did not even attempt to explain how the planet and stars happened to arrive in those configurations. There have been some pretty neat accretion models run by NASA researchers that have actually started with a cloud and attempted to produce our solar system and other configurations using only Newton and some statistical techniques to improve computation efficiency. They have done a couple of binary systems for this, but I have lost my undergraduate paper in a hard drive crash so can’t find the references again. They were trying to identify markers that might be visible to astronomers to try to detect this type of system. I suffered total processor/algorithm envy reading those papers.
It was a fun project. As my proto-Earths were burned up in one of the stars or flung into deep space numerous times in run after run. Some of the configurations would look promising for the first 10 million years or so then something would perturb an orbit and fling it off or crash it. Unfortunately system memory limitations would not let me run much longer then 10 million years though. I really need to dust off that code and see if today’s more powerful machines can give me more years. Also if things got too close together energy would bleed in my code and I never found the leak (I suspect it was a truncation error.) If I started the two stars closer together than 1 AU, they would drift out to 3AU after a million years or so (faster the closer in they started), but if I started them at 1AU or farther, by the end of a million years they were still very close to their original distances. Some of the smaller systems I tried were interesting as the planet would wind up orbiting around first one then the other star until it finally crashed into one or was flung into interstellar space. The movies I played on the final project presentation brought quite a few chuckles from my classmates.

RACookPE1978
Editor
August 24, 2013 7:12 pm

John Silver says:
August 24, 2013 at 3:20 pm
Cool!!!
So, two questions:
Why so few meteorites?
What was the laser going “up” from the nbr 4 telescope tower?

RockyRoad
August 24, 2013 7:47 pm

RACookPE1978: By way of answer to your question, check out the comment below the video:
Justin Griggs 3 weeks ago
The laser is used as an artificial star for the adaptive optics (AO) system to use. The atmosphere has thermal currents, moisture, etc. that distorts the light from the sky, we call that ‘seeing’. Normally the ‘seeing limited’ image, the max resolution we can get, is about 1 arcsecond. AO uses a wavefront sensor to measure the distortion of the laser star, and it sends signals to a deformable mirror that corrects for the atmospheric turbulence, allowing resolutions around 0.1 arcseconds.

High Treason
August 24, 2013 8:14 pm

In hindsight, the Apollo astronauts should have carved some large graffiti on to the lunar surface in the dust to quell future conspiracy theories. Could have also taken up an enormous advertising banner to lay on the surface of the moon for people to look at with their image stabilized binoculars. A giant company logo perhaps, like a big red “M”. Talk about priceless advertising. The bleeding hearts would all be up in arms and astro imagers would not be impressed with lunar shots being vandalised.

August 24, 2013 8:46 pm

As for the different opinions of ferdberple and Greg wrt NASA mission, I suggest both have good points, so how about a NASA Mission Planet Earth and a separate NASA Mission Extraterrestrial Space. Funding ratio of total budget I suggest should be 10% for Earth Mission and 90 % for Extraterrestrial Mission.
Peace…

DesertYote
August 24, 2013 9:40 pm

Konrad says:
August 24, 2013 at 3:26 pm
Trully amazing. I would be fascinated to know how mirror vibration is calibrated. Reference star?
Artificial reference star produced by a sodium laser is the usual technique.

DesertYote
August 24, 2013 9:56 pm

Owen in GA says:
August 24, 2013 at 6:03 pm
###
You might be interested in this:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/spitzer/news/spitzer-discovers-young-stars-with-hula-hoop/#.UhmOEW2r3BI

August 24, 2013 10:11 pm

Btw, apart from space telescopes, this is the sort of thing NASA should be involved in, I’m sure the Chinese have an extraterrestrial space exploration plan for the 21st century, though not as unrealistically ambitious timewise, as this 1989 one from Rockwell (now Boeing)…
http://makezineblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/space-plan-scan-touched-up-001.pdf

george e. smith
August 24, 2013 10:21 pm

“””””……..Owen in GA says:
August 24, 2013 at 6:03 pm
beng says:
August 24, 2013 at 8:59 am
Impressive. Astronomy is one of my passions. Can close binary stars have stable planetary systems?
I did a COMPUTER MODEL using only Newton’s gravity (I did not want to tackle Einstein’s equations) that showed several orbital sweet spots for a three body system with two Sol sized stars and an Earth sized planet. The closest stable point for such a planet turned out to be about twice the distance between the two stars outside of their orbits. For wider spaced stars, at about 4AU it was just possible to place the planet in a 1AU orbit around one of the two stars. There was more leeway as the stars were farther apart……..””””””
Owen, you should try your computer model with the three bodies (both stars plus the planet) in an equilateral triangle in the plane of the orbits of the binary stars. That configuration is supposed to be stable for any three bodies, so long as they don’t stray too far from the triangle.
It is well known, that two groups of asteroids, accompany the planet Jupiter in its orbit around the sun, one group is 60 degrees ahead of Jupiter, and the other is 60 degrees behind. They are called the “Trojans”.
Jupiter’s orbit is not a perfect circle, so the asteroids, also undergo perturbations of their positions; but evidently the system works ok.
You might try to find out how eccentric the binary pair orbit can get, before the planet, gets kicked out of the system; or worse yet, crashes into one of the stars.
The sun earth moon system evidently has more stable points for paraphernalia than the Trojan situation. They are well known, and are sometimes used to park satellites for observations.

björn from sweden
August 24, 2013 11:17 pm

Fantastic, and finally we can get pictures from the moon of all the Apollo leftovers, the rovers. That would end the “did we go to the moon” debate effectively.
Not that I have invested in it, its just …. well, you never know.
And I like to know, 110% if possible, I am a sceptic by nature.
So turn the telescope to the moon, from wikipedia:
“The rover used on Apollo 15 was left on the lunar surface at Hadley-Apennine ( 26.10°N 3.65°E ). The rover used on Apollo 16 was left on the lunar surface at Descartes ( 8.99°S 15.51°E ). The rover used on Apollo 17 was left on the lunar surface at Taurus-Littrow ( 20.16°N 30.76°E ) ”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Roving_Vehicle

RoHa
August 24, 2013 11:24 pm

High Treason.
The easiest way to find out whether the Moon landings were real is ask the Russians. NASA and Hollywood could probably have fooled me (all I did was watch on TV) but I don’t believe they would have been able to fool the Soviet scientists. If the landings had been fakes, you can be certain that the Soviets would have broadcast the proof far and wide.

Verified by MonsterInsights