• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    316 hours ago

    Considering their instance, I’d assume they’re more out of their mind than huffing Elmo.

    Another important part in this argumentation is that each type of telescope has its use case:
    Extraterrestrial telescopes, as they are not objected by atmospheric blur can obtain much better ‘images’ from the cosmos even of weak, low brightness signals, which makes them best for observing the ‘far’ cosmos until the boundaries of recognition.
    Yet, they are and always will be much more expensive and more difficult to maintain than terrestrial telescopes. Thus, using them for observing our cosmic front yard, the milky way, is like shooting with canons at sparrows.
    Due to their cost, extraterrestrial telescopes also will always be ‘few’, too few to effectively keep track of the objects around us. Thus, ‘cheap’ terrestrial telescopes, large professional ones and small ones run by amateurs, will always be needed to observe the objects ‘closely’ around us, i.e. in our galaxis.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      010 hours ago

      Yes, extraterrestrial telescopes are hard. And, we need more of them. And we need to give access to amateurs.