Members Can Post Anonymously On This Site
Hubble Space Telescope Finds a Double Nucleus in the Andromeda Galaxy
-
Similar Topics
-
By NASA
The Apollo 11 mission in July 1969 completed the goal set by President John F. Kennedy in 1961 to land a man on the Moon and return him safely to the Earth before the end of the decade. At the time, NASA planned nine more Apollo Moon landing missions of increasing complexity and an Earth orbiting experimental space station. No firm human space flight plans existed once these missions ended in the mid-1970s. After taking office in 1969, President Richard M. Nixon chartered a Space Task Group (STG) to formulate plans for the nation’s space program for the coming decades. The STG’s proposals proved overly ambitious and costly to the fiscally conservative President who chose to take no action on them.
Left: President John F. Kennedy addresses a Joint Session of Congress in May 1961. Middle: President Kennedy addresses a crowd at Rice University in Houston in September 1962. Right: President Lyndon B. Johnson addresses a crowd during a March 1968 visit to the Manned Spacecraft Center, now NASA’s Johnson Space Center, in Houston.
On May 25, 1961, before a Joint Session of Congress, President John F. Kennedy committed the United States to the goal, before the decade was out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth. President Kennedy reaffirmed the commitment during an address at Rice University in Houston in September 1962. Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson, who played a leading role in establishing NASA in 1958, under Kennedy served as the Chair of the National Aeronautics and Space Council. Johnson worked with his colleagues in Congress to ensure adequate funding for the next several years to provide NASA with the needed resources to meet that goal.
Following Kennedy’s assassination in November 1963, now President Johnson continued his strong support to ensure that his predecessor’s goal of a Moon landing could be achieved by the stipulated deadline. But with increasing competition for scarce federal resources from the conflict in southeast Asia and from domestic programs, Johnson showed less interest in any space endeavors to follow the Apollo Moon landings. NASA’s annual budget peaked in 1966 and began a steady decline three years before the agency met Kennedy’s goal. From a budgetary standpoint, the prospects of a vibrant, post-Apollo space program didn’t look all that rosy, the triumphs of the Apollo missions of 1968 and 1969 notwithstanding.
Left: On March 5, 1969, President Richard M. Nixon, left, introduces Thomas O. Paine as the NASA Administrator nominee, as Vice President Spiro T. Agnew looks on. Middle: Proposed lunar landing sites through Apollo 20, per August 1969 NASA planning. Right: An illustration of the Apollo Applications Program experimental space station that later evolved into Skylab.
Less than a month after assuming the Presidency in January 1969, Richard M. Nixon appointed a Space Task Group (STG), led by Vice President Spiro T. Agnew as the Chair of the National Aeronautics and Space Council, to report back to him on options for the American space program in the post-Apollo years. Members of the STG included NASA Acting Administrator Thomas O. Paine (confirmed by the Senate as administrator on March 20), the Secretary of Defense, and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology. At the time, the only approved human space flight programs included lunar landing missions through Apollo 20 and three long-duration missions to an experimental space station based on Apollo technology that evolved into Skylab.
Beyond a general vague consensus that the United States human space flight program should continue, no approved projects existed once these missions ended by about 1975. With NASA’s intense focus on achieving the Moon landing within President Kennedy’s time frame, long-term planning for what might follow the Apollo Program garnered little attention. During a Jan. 27, 1969, meeting at NASA chaired by Acting Administrator Paine, a general consensus emerged that the next step after the Moon landing should involve the development of a 12-person earth-orbiting space station by 1975, followed by an even larger outpost capable of housing up to 100 people “with a multiplicity of capabilities.” In June, with the goal of the Moon landing almost at hand, NASA’s internal planning added the development of a space shuttle by 1977 to support the space station, the development of a lunar base by 1976, and the highly ambitious idea that the U.S. should prepare for a human mission to Mars as early as the 1980s. NASA presented these proposals to the STG for consideration in early July in a report titled “America’s Next Decades in Space.”
Left: President Richard M. Nixon, right, greets the Apollo 11 astronauts aboard the U.S.S. Hornet after their return from the Moon. Middle: The cover page of the Space Task Group (STG) Report to President Nixon. Right: Meeting in the White House to present the STG Report to President Nixon. Image credit: courtesy Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum.
Still bathing in the afterglow of the successful Moon landing, the STG presented its 29-page report “The Post-Apollo Space Program: Directions for the Future” to President Nixon on Sep. 15, 1969, during a meeting at the White House. In its Conclusions and Recommendations section, the report noted that the United States should pursue a balanced robotic and human space program but emphasized the importance of the latter, with a long-term goal of a human mission to Mars before the end of the 20th century. The report proposed that NASA develop new systems and technologies that emphasized commonality, reusability, and economy in its future programs. To accomplish these overall objectives, the report presented three options:
Option I – this option required more than a doubling of NASA’s budget by 1980 to enable a human Mars mission in the 1980s, establishment of a lunar orbiting space station, a 50-person Earth orbiting space station, and a lunar base. The option required a decision by 1971 on development of an Earth-to-orbit transportation system to support the space station. The option maintained a strong robotic scientific and exploration program.
Option II – this option maintained NASA’s budget at then current levels for a few years, then anticipated a gradual increase to support the parallel development of both an earth orbiting space station and an Earth-to-orbit transportation system, but deferred a Mars mission to about 1986. The option maintained a strong robotic scientific and exploration program, but smaller than in Option I.
Option III – essentially the same as Option II but deferred indefinitely the human Mars mission.
In separate letters, both Agnew and Paine recommended to President Nixon to choose Option II.
Left: Illustration of a possible space shuttle, circa 1969. Middle: Illustration of a possible 12-person space station, circa 1969. Right: An August 1969 proposed mission scenario for a human mission to Mars.
The White House released the report to the public at a press conference on Sep. 17 with Vice President Agnew and Administrator Paine in attendance. Although he publicly supported a strong human spaceflight program, enjoyed the positive press he received when photographed with Apollo astronauts, and initially sounded positive about the STG options, President Nixon ultimately chose not to act on the report’s recommendations. Nixon considered these plans too grandiose and far too expensive and relegated NASA to one America’s domestic programs without the special status it enjoyed during the 1960s. Even some of the already planned remaining Moon landing missions fell victim to the budgetary axe.
On Jan. 4, 1970, NASA had to cancel Apollo 20 since the Skylab program needed its Saturn V rocket to launch the orbital workshop. In 1968, then NASA Administrator James E. Webb had turned off the Saturn V assembly line and none remained beyond the original 15 built under contract. In September 1970, reductions in NASA’s budget forced the cancellation of two more Apollo missions, and in 1971 President Nixon considered cancelling two more. He reversed himself and they flew as Apollo 16 and Apollo 17 in 1972, the final Apollo Moon landing missions.
Left: NASA Administrator James C. Fletcher, left, and President Richard M. Nixon announce the approval to proceed with space shuttle development in 1972. Middle: First launch of the space shuttle in 1981. Right: In 1984, President Ronald W. Reagan directs NASA to build a space station.
More than two years after the STG submitted its report, in January 1972 President Nixon directed NASA Administrator James C. Fletcher to develop the Space Transportation System, the formal name for the space shuttle, the only element of the recommendations to survive the budgetary challenges. NASA anticipated the first orbital flight of the program in 1979, with the actual first flight occurring two years later. Twelve years elapsed after Nixon’s shuttle decision when President Ronald W. Reagan approved the development of a space station, the second major component of the STG recommendation. 14 years later, the first element of that program reached orbit. In those intervening years, NASA had redesigned the original American space station, leading to the development of a multinational orbiting laboratory called the International Space Station. Humans have inhabited the space station continuously for the past quarter century, conducting world class and cutting edge scientific and engineering research. Work on the space station helps enable future programs, returning humans to the Moon and later sending them on to Mars and other destinations.
The International Space Station as it appeared in 2021.
Explore More
7 min read 15 Years Ago: Japan launches HTV-1, its First Resupply Mission to the Space Station
Article 6 days ago 9 min read 30 Years Ago: STS-64 Astronauts Test a Spacewalk Rescue Aid
Article 6 days ago 5 min read NASA Tunnel Generates Decades of Icy Aircraft Safety Data
Article 2 weeks ago View the full article
-
By NASA
Hubble Space Telescope Home Hubble Examines a Spiral Star… Missions Hubble Home Overview About Hubble The History of Hubble Hubble Timeline Why Have a Telescope in Space? Hubble by the Numbers At the Museum FAQs Impact & Benefits Hubble’s Impact & Benefits Science Impacts Cultural Impact Technology Benefits Impact on Human Spaceflight Astro Community Impacts Science Hubble Science Science Themes Science Highlights Science Behind Discoveries Hubble’s Partners in Science Universe Uncovered Explore the Night Sky Observatory Hubble Observatory Hubble Design Mission Operations Missions to Hubble Hubble vs Webb Team Hubble Team Career Aspirations Hubble Astronauts News Hubble News Hubble News Archive Social Media Media Resources Multimedia Multimedia Images Videos Sonifications Podcasts E-books Lithographs Fact Sheets Glossary Posters Hubble on the NASA App More Online Activities 2 min read
Hubble Examines a Spiral Star Factory
This NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope image features the spiral galaxy NGC 5668. ESA/Hubble & NASA, C. Kilpatrick This NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope image features a spiral galaxy in the constellation Virgo named NGC 5668. It is relatively near to us at 90 million light-years from Earth and quite accessible for astronomers to study with both space- and ground-based telescopes. At first glance, it doesn’t seem like a remarkable galaxy. It is around 90,000 light-years across, similar in size and mass to our own Milky Way galaxy, and its nearly face-on orientation shows open spiral arms made of cloudy, irregular patches.
One noticeable difference between the Milky Way galaxy and NGC 5668 is that this galaxy is forming new stars 60% more quickly. Astronomers have identified two main drivers of star formation in NGC 5668. Firstly, this high-quality Hubble view reveals a bar at the galaxy’s center, though it might look more like a slight oval shape than a real bar. The bar appears to have affected the galaxy’s star formation rate, as central bars do in many spiral galaxies. Secondly, astronomers tracked high-velocity clouds of hydrogen gas moving vertically between the disk of the galaxy and the spherical, faint halo which surrounds it. These movements may be the result of strong stellar winds from hot, massive stars, that would contribute gas to new star-forming regions.
The enhanced star formation rate in NGC 5668 comes with a corresponding abundance of supernova explosions. Astronomers have spotted three in the galaxy, in 1952, 1954, and 2004. In this image, Hubble examined the surroundings of the Type II SN 2004G, seeking to study the kinds of stars that end their lives as this kind of supernova.
Download this image
Facebook logo @NASAHubble @NASAHubble Instagram logo @NASAHubble Media Contact:
Claire Andreoli
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD
claire.andreoli@nasa.gov
Share
Details
Last Updated Sep 12, 2024 Editor Andrea Gianopoulos Location NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Related Terms
Astrophysics Astrophysics Division Galaxies Goddard Space Flight Center Hubble Space Telescope Missions Spiral Galaxies The Universe Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From Hubble
Hubble Space Telescope
Since its 1990 launch, the Hubble Space Telescope has changed our fundamental understanding of the universe.
Hubble Focus: Galaxies through Space and Time
Hubble Focus: Galaxies through Space and Time
Hubble Science Highlights
Name That Nebula
View the full article
-
By NASA
5 Min Read NASA’s Webb Peers into the Extreme Outer Galaxy
This image shows a portion of the star-forming region, known as Digel Cloud 2S (full image below). Credits:
NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI, M. Ressler (JPL) Astronomers have directed NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope to examine the outskirts of our Milky Way galaxy. Scientists call this region the Extreme Outer Galaxy due to its location more than 58,000 light-years away from the Galactic Center. (For comparison, Earth is approximately 26,000 light-years from the center.)
A team of scientists used Webb’s NIRCam (Near-Infrared Camera) and MIRI (Mid-Infrared Instrument) to image select regions within two molecular clouds known as Digel Clouds 1 and 2. With its high degree of sensitivity and sharp resolution, the Webb data resolved these areas, which are hosts to star clusters undergoing bursts of star formation, in unprecedented detail. Details of this data include components of the clusters such as very young (Class 0) protostars, outflows and jets, and distinctive nebular structures.
These Webb observations, which came from telescope time allocated to Mike Ressler of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California, are enabling scientists to study star formation in the outer Milky Way in the same depth of detail as observations of star formation in our own solar neighborhood.
“In the past, we knew about these star forming regions but were not able to delve into their properties,” said Natsuko Izumi of Gifu University and the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan, lead author of the study. “The Webb data builds upon what we have incrementally gathered over the years from prior observations with different telescopes and observatories. We can get very powerful and impressive images of these clouds with Webb. In the case of Digel Cloud 2, I did not expect to see such active star formation and spectacular jets.”
Image A: Extreme Outer Galaxy (NIRCam and MIRI)
Scientists used NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope to examine select star-forming areas in the Extreme Outer Galaxy in near- and mid-infrared light. Within this star-forming region, known as Digel Cloud 2S, the telescope observed young, newly formed stars and their extended jets of material. This Webb image also shows a dense sea of background galaxies and red nebulous structures within the region. In this image, colors were assigned to different filters from Webb’s MIRI and NIRCam: red (F1280W, F770W, F444W), green (F356W, F200W), and blue (F150W; F115W). NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI, M. Ressler (JPL) Stars in the Making
Although the Digel Clouds are within our galaxy, they are relatively poor in elements heavier than hydrogen and helium. This composition makes them similar to dwarf galaxies and our own Milky Way in its early history. Therefore, the team took the opportunity to use Webb to capture the activity occurring in four clusters of young stars within Digel Clouds 1 and 2: 1A, 1B, 2N, and 2S.
For Cloud 2S, Webb captured the main cluster containing young, newly formed stars. This dense area is quite active as several stars are emitting extended jets of material along their poles. Additionally, while scientists previously suspected a sub-cluster might be present within the cloud, Webb’s imaging capabilities confirmed its existence for the first time.
“We know from studying other nearby star-forming regions that as stars form during their early life phase, they start emitting jets of material at their poles,” said Ressler, second author of the study and principal investigator of the observing program. “What was fascinating and astounding to me from the Webb data is that there are multiple jets shooting out in all different directions from this cluster of stars. It’s a little bit like a firecracker, where you see things shooting this way and that.”
The Saga of Stars
The Webb imagery skims the surface of the Extreme Outer Galaxy and the Digel Clouds, and is just a starting point for the team. They intend to revisit this outpost in the Milky Way to find answers to a variety of current mysteries, including the relative abundance of stars of various masses within Extreme Outer Galaxy star clusters. This measurement can help astronomers understand how a particular environment can influence different types of stars during their formation.
“I’m interested in continuing to study how star formation is occurring in these regions. By combining data from different observatories and telescopes, we can examine each stage in the evolution process,” said Izumi. “We also plan to investigate circumstellar disks within the Extreme Outer Galaxy. We still don’t know why their lifetimes are shorter than in star-forming regions much closer to us. And of course, I’d like to understand the kinematics of the jets we detected in Cloud 2S.”
Though the story of star formation is complex and some chapters are still shrouded in mystery, Webb is gathering clues and helping astronomers unravel this intricate tale.
These findings have been published in the Astronomical Journal.
The observations were taken as part of Guaranteed Time Observation program 1237.
The James Webb Space Telescope is the world’s premier space science observatory. Webb is solving mysteries in our solar system, looking beyond to distant worlds around other stars, and probing the mysterious structures and origins of our universe and our place in it. Webb is an international program led by NASA with its partners, ESA (European Space Agency) and CSA (Canadian Space Agency).
Downloads
Right click any image to save it or open a larger version in a new tab/window via the browser’s popup menu.
View/Download all image products at all resolutions for this article from the Space Telescope Science Institute.
View/Download the research results from the Astronomical Journal.
Media Contacts
Laura Betz – laura.e.betz@nasa.gov, Rob Gutro – rob.gutro@nasa.gov
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md.
Christine Pulliam – cpulliam@stsci.edu, Abigail Major – amajor@stsci.edu
Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, Md.
Related Information
Animation Video: “Exploring Star and Planet Formation”
Interactive: Explore the jets emitted by young stars in multiple wavelengths
Video: Did You Know: Images of the Milky Way
Protostars
Star Lifecycle
More Webb News
More Webb Images
Webb Science Themes
Webb Mission Page
Related For Kids
What is the Webb Telescope?
SpacePlace for Kids
En Español
Ciencia de la NASA
NASA en español
Space Place para niños
Keep Exploring Related Topics
James Webb Space Telescope
Webb is the premier observatory of the next decade, serving thousands of astronomers worldwide. It studies every phase in the…
Stars
Stars Stories
Universe
Share
Details
Last Updated Sep 11, 2024 Editor Marty McCoy Contact Laura Betz laura.e.betz@nasa.gov Related Terms
Astrophysics Goddard Space Flight Center James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Protostars Science & Research Star Clusters Star-forming Nebulae Stars The Milky Way The Universe View the full article
-
-
By NASA
5 min read
Preparations for Next Moonwalk Simulations Underway (and Underwater)
This bar graph shows GISTEMP summer global temperature anomalies for 2023 (shown in yellow) and 2024 (shown in red). June through August is considered meteorological summer in the Northern Hemisphere. The white lines indicate the range of estimated temperatures. The warmer-than-usual summers continue a long-term trend of warming, driven primarily by human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. NASA/Peter Jacobs The agency also shared new state-of-the-art datasets that allow scientists to track Earth’s temperature for any month and region going back to 1880 with greater certainty.
August 2024 set a new monthly temperature record, capping Earth’s hottest summer since global records began in 1880, according to scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York. The announcement comes as a new analysis upholds confidence in the agency’s nearly 145-year-old temperature record.
June, July, and August 2024 combined were about 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit (about 0.1 degrees Celsius) warmer globally than any other summer in NASA’s record — narrowly topping the record just set in 2023. Summer of 2024 was 2.25 F (1.25 C) warmer than the average summer between 1951 and 1980, and August alone was 2.34 F (1.3 C) warmer than average. June through August is considered meteorological summer in the Northern Hemisphere.
“Data from multiple record-keepers show that the warming of the past two years may be neck and neck, but it is well above anything seen in years prior, including strong El Niño years,” said Gavin Schmidt, director of GISS. “This is a clear indication of the ongoing human-driven warming of the climate.”
NASA assembles its temperature record, known as the GISS Surface Temperature Analysis (GISTEMP), from surface air temperature data acquired by tens of thousands of meteorological stations, as well as sea surface temperatures from ship- and buoy-based instruments. It also includes measurements from Antarctica. Analytical methods consider the varied spacing of temperature stations around the globe and urban heating effects that could skew the calculations.
The GISTEMP analysis calculates temperature anomalies rather than absolute temperature. A temperature anomaly shows how far the temperature has departed from the 1951 to 1980 base average.
New assessment of temperature record
The summer record comes as new research from scientists at the Colorado School of Mines, National Science Foundation, the National Atmospheric and Oceanic Administration (NOAA), and NASA further increases confidence in the agency’s global and regional temperature data.
“Our goal was to actually quantify how good of a temperature estimate we’re making for any given time or place,” said lead author Nathan Lenssen, a professor at the Colorado School of Mines and project scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR).
This visualization of GISTEMP monthly temperatures with the seasonal cycle derived from the Global Modeling and Assimilation Office’s MERRA-2 model compares 2023 (in red) and 2024 (in purple), with a transparent ribbon around each indicating the confidence intervals from the new GISTEMP uncertainty calculation. The white lines show monthly temperatures from the years 1961 to 2022. June, July, and August 2024 combined were about 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit (about 0.1 degrees Celsius) warmer globally than any other summer in NASA’s record — narrowly topping the record set in 2023.NASA/Peter Jacobs/Katy Mersmann The researchers affirmed that GISTEMP is correctly capturing rising surface temperatures on our planet and that Earth’s global temperature increase since the late 19th century — summer 2024 was about 2.7 F (1.51 C) warmer than the late 1800s — cannot be explained by any uncertainty or error in the data.
The authors built on previous work showing that NASA’s estimate of global mean temperature rise is likely accurate to within a tenth of a degree Fahrenheit in recent decades. For their latest analysis, Lenssen and colleagues examined the data for individual regions and for every month going back to 1880.
Estimating the unknown
Lenssen and colleagues provided a rigorous accounting of statistical uncertainty within the GISTEMP record. Uncertainty in science is important to understand because we cannot take measurements everywhere. Knowing the strengths and limitations of observations helps scientists assess if they’re really seeing a shift or change in the world.
The study confirmed that one of the most significant sources of uncertainty in the GISTEMP record is localized changes around meteorological stations. For example, a previously rural station may report higher temperatures as asphalt and other heat-trapping urban surfaces develop around it. Spatial gaps between stations also contribute some uncertainty in the record. GISTEMP accounts for these gaps using estimates from the closest stations.
Previously, scientists using GISTEMP estimated historical temperatures using what’s known in statistics as a confidence interval — a range of values around a measurement, often read as a specific temperature plus or minus a few fractions of degrees. The new approach uses a method known as a statistical ensemble: a spread of the 200 most probable values. While a confidence interval represents a level of certainty around a single data point, an ensemble tries to capture the whole range of possibilities.
The distinction between the two methods is meaningful to scientists tracking how temperatures have changed, especially where there are spatial gaps. For example: Say GISTEMP contains thermometer readings from Denver in July 1900, and a researcher needs to estimate what conditions were 100 miles away. Instead of reporting the Denver temperature plus or minus a few degrees, the researcher can analyze scores of equally probable values for southern Colorado and communicate the uncertainty in their results.
What does this mean for recent heat rankings?
Every year, NASA scientists use GISTEMP to provide an annual global temperature update, with 2023 ranking as the hottest year to date.
Other researchers affirmed this finding, including NOAA and the European Union’s Copernicus Climate Change Service. These institutions employ different, independent methods to assess Earth’s temperature. Copernicus, for instance, uses an advanced computer-generated approach known as reanalysis.
The records remain in broad agreement but can differ in some specific findings. Copernicus determined that July 2023 was Earth’s hottest month on record, for example, while NASA found July 2024 had a narrow edge. The new ensemble analysis has now shown that the difference between the two months is smaller than the uncertainties in the data. In other words, they are effectively tied for hottest. Within the larger historical record the new ensemble estimates for summer 2024 were likely 2.52-2.86 degrees F (1.40-1.59 degrees C) warmer than the late 19th century, while 2023 was likely 2.34-2.68 degrees F (1.30-1.49 degrees C) warmer.
Read More Share
Details
Last Updated Sep 11, 2024 LocationGISS Related Terms
Earth Climate Change Goddard Institute for Space Studies Goddard Space Flight Center Explore More
6 min read Childhood Snow Days Transformed Linette Boisvert into a Sea Ice Scientist
Article 1 day ago 7 min read Kyle Helson Finds EXCITE-ment in Exoplanet Exploration
Article 1 day ago 5 min read NASA’s Hubble, Chandra Find Supermassive Black Hole Duo
Like two Sumo wrestlers squaring off, the closest confirmed pair of supermassive black holes have…
Article 2 days ago Keep Exploring Discover Related Topics
Missions
Humans in Space
Climate Change
Solar System
View the full article
-
-
Check out these Videos
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.