Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > If the Hubble were turned earthward

Reply
Thread Tools

If the Hubble were turned earthward

 
 
Quaoar
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-06-2004
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> Would it be able to photograph extremely tiny objects like paramecium
> or subatomic particles?


Hubble is a KeyHole spy satellite turned to the heavens. If you recall
the "problem" with the object lens that required the Shuttle astronauts
to fix, the "problem" was that the objective lense was the same as used
in the KeyHole. The KeyHole has resolution that is classified, but
reportedly good enough for basic facial and auto plate identification;
the lens is designed for correcting atmospheric dispersion effects.
Heh...or so it is reported.

Q


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Joseph Meehan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-06-2004
Al Dykes wrote:
> In article <sSbcc.6600$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Joseph Meehan <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> nospam wrote:
>>> "Joseph Meehan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:nM9cc.117559$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>>>>> Would it be able to photograph extremely tiny objects like
>>>>> paramecium or subatomic particles?
>>>>
>>>> No, it can't focus that close.
>>>>
>>>> The second problem is the same as why we can't photograph them
>>>> on earth, they are too small for the wavelength of light.
>>>>
>>> Would it be possible to build an orbiting telescope using todays
>>> technology that could read small news print?

>>
>> Right now they can read licience plates and that is the
>> technology the military will talk about.
>>

>
> I've always wondered how you read a license plate from overhead.
>
> Not that's a bad example, if you mean you put the plate flat on the
> ground.


Not all photos are taken straight down. Your argument is not much
different than suggesting I would have to suggest I could not take a photo
of a license plate while standing on the sidewalk.

Just for the record. I tend to believe they were not using visible
light for the photo. I don't believe much detail was given, I doubt if the
people saying it really knew. However I did see photos that showed license
plates of a car, but the detail was only enough to show they had a plate,
nothing more.

Another note, I was working for the government at the time and while
these photos (the ones I saw, not the ones that showed plate numbers) were
"public" you could not just go order one.


--
Joseph E. Meehan

26 + 6 = 1 It's Irish Math



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
mark_digital
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-06-2004

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:4070BD84.29451.B884CA@localhost...
:Would it be able to photograph extremely tiny objects like paramecium or
:subatomic particles?
--------
No. But the military does have the ability to fly over your
house and photograph you inside even with the shades
down. they can even spot you in your basement if you
have one. it's usually done with helicopters.

If you don't believe me, go outside at night if you hear
the helicopters. Flip them the finger. they'll be back for
at least a week checking you out. Every telephone
conversation you have will sound like someone's
listening in on an extension line. they can shut the power
off to the room you have a dvd burn going on and waste
a disc. they'll notify the cable company you're stealing
cable. you'll be missing impoortant mail. your car's digital
odometer will have an extra 10,000 miles all of a sudden.
they play rough,they play hard, but it's only a game to
them. they like the experience.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Harry Conover
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-06-2004
MaDDog <MaDDog@.com> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>. ..
> On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 11:59:20 GMT, "Joseph Meehan"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >nospam wrote:
> >> "Joseph Meehan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> news:nM9cc.117559$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >>> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> >>>> Would it be able to photograph extremely tiny objects like
> >>>> paramecium or subatomic particles?
> >>>
> >>> No, it can't focus that close.
> >>>
> >>> The second problem is the same as why we can't photograph them
> >>> on earth, they are too small for the wavelength of light.
> >>>
> >> Would it be possible to build an orbiting telescope using todays
> >> technology that could read small news print?

> >
> > Right now they can read licience plates and that is the technology the
> >military will talk about.

>
> How the hell can they read license plates? Do you have to stand the
> car end on end?


You're pretty naive. What makes you believe that they shoot from
directly overhead? Heck, we could do this when I still worked for
Kodak back around 1966! It's trivial today.

IIRC, there's already satelite photos where car license plates are
readible posted on the web. Use Google and you can likely find a few.

Harry C.
 
Reply With Quote
 
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-06-2004
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "Quaoar" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>> Would it be able to photograph extremely tiny objects like paramecium
>> or subatomic particles?

>
>Hubble is a KeyHole spy satellite turned to the heavens. If you recall
>the "problem" with the object lens that required the Shuttle astronauts
>to fix, the "problem" was that the objective lense was the same as used
>in the KeyHole. The KeyHole has resolution that is classified, but
>reportedly good enough for basic facial and auto plate identification;
>the lens is designed for correcting atmospheric dispersion effects.
>Heh...or so it is reported.
>

Not just wrong, but doubly wrong.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
(E-Mail Removed) | chances are he is doing just the same"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlie Dilks
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-06-2004
Harry Conover <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> IIRC, there's already satelite photos where car license plates are
> readible posted on the web. Use Google and you can likely find a few.


You're the one trying to prove a point.
Post urls.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Todd Allcock
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-06-2004
MaDDog <MaDDog@.com> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>. ..


> > Right now they can read licience plates and that is the technology the
> >military will talk about.

>
> How the hell can they read license plates? Do you have to stand the
> car end on end?


Spy satellites have incredibly focused electro-magnets for lifting the
vehicle's back end into view...
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Hunter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-06-2004
Joseph Meehan wrote:

> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
>>Would it be able to photograph extremely tiny objects like paramecium
>>or subatomic particles?

>
>
> No, it can't focus that close.
>
> The second problem is the same as why we can't photograph them on earth,
> they are too small for the wavelength of light.
>

You forget the most significant reason, and WHY the Hubble is in space,
ATMOSPHERE.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Venom¥8
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-07-2004
<SNIP>
:A simple Google search will show you some of the capabilities of the satellites
from quite a long time ago. If they were this resolute then, one can only
imagine their capabilities at present.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Don Stauffer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-08-2004
Unfortunately, the laws of physics have not changed greatly in the last
half century. Recon satellites today have about the same resolution as
they did many decades ago. The response times have changed as more went
from film re-entry capsules to on-board development and scanning, to
electronic focal planes and telemetered readout. But resolution
performance hasn't changed much.

"Venom¥8" wrote:
>
> <SNIP>
> :A simple Google search will show you some of the capabilities of the satellites
> from quite a long time ago. If they were this resolute then, one can only
> imagine their capabilities at present.


--
Don Stauffer in Minnesota
(E-Mail Removed)
webpage- http://www.usfamily.net/web/stauffer
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
best of Hubble images Paul Furman Digital Photography 64 03-02-2008 10:38 PM
Hubble telescope's top ten greatest space photographs berry001 Digital Photography 0 08-27-2007 10:03 PM
Are Hubble Pictures Public Domain? John Louis Digital Photography 3 03-20-2005 08:16 PM
Buffering cannot be turned off once it is already turned on. Lord Merlin ASP General 0 04-11-2004 06:04 PM



Advertisments