By Jay Kernis
Rock Center
Scientists from around the world are building the world’s most advanced radio telescope in Chile’s Atacama Desert, on a plateau half-way between Earth and space above 40 percent of the planet’s atmosphere.
The observatory, referred to by the acronym ALMA, officially known as the Atacama Large Millimeter/Submillimeter Array, is the highest ever built. Located at 16,500 feet, the antennas will pick up radio and microwave signals from the edge of the universe to see things in space that were once invisible.
Eventually there will be 66 antennas spread across the plateau. All of them can be pointed at the same time at a patch of outer space.
When Rock Center Correspondent Harry Smith found out we could report the ALMA story, he said, “Find me the next Carl Sagan to travel to Chile with us—someone who is passionate about astronomy and can really explain what is going on there.”
We did.
Rock Center
Rock Center's Harry Smith & National Radio Astronomy Observatory Astronomer Scott Ransom
When he was around eight years old, Scott Ransom watched Carl Sagan’s Cosmos series on PBS, read Sagan’s books and decided that he wanted to be an astronaut. He told us, “Once I found out how big the solar system was and how big the galaxy is and how big the universe is—and consequently, how tiny we are, what a tiny little, insignificant component—it just blew my mind.”
He thought he’d go to a military academy, become a test pilot, and then apply for astronaut training. “Because of my eyesight,” Ransom says, “there was no way I would be able to become an astronaut.” But Ransom did graduate from West Point and Harvard, and today spends hours each day exploring outer space.
Dr. Ransom has been an astronomer at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Charlottesville, Virginia since 2004. The NRAO leads the North American efforts in Chile, and in Charlottesville, scientists build receivers that capture the radio waves in ALMA’s huge antennas.
"This is the largest, most sophisticated ground-based observatory that the world has ever created," Dr. Ransom said. "It could take weeks or months of observing to do what ALMA's going to be able to do in a day or hour."
A few days after touring ALMA in Chile, Ransom returned to NRAO headquarters in Virginia and talked about his favorite images from space.
CLICK ON EACH IMAGE BELOW to see Harry Smith’s conversation with Dr. Ransom.
In 2010, Ransom received one of his field’s top honors from the American Astronomical Society. He studies neutron stars and pulsars—the exotic objects that form after the largest stars burn all their hydrogen and explode into a supernova. They may be only 10 or 20 miles across, but, explains Ransom, they can “give off 10-thousand times more energy from its rotation than all the energy than our sun puts out.” Personally, Ransom has discovered nearly 100 of them.
Leave a Comment:
When will the radio telescopes be completed ? And how far back are they predicted to peer ?
There are roughly 39 dishes at the high plateau as of now; by March 2013 all 66 dishes (54 of which will be 12 meters in aperture and 12 of which will be 7 meters in aperture) will be in place. ALMA is expected to be able to peer back some 13 billion years in the past to the so-called 'Dark Ages,' when the fog of neutral hydrogen was being burned away by the first stars and protogalaxies. By studying this crucial era of galaxy formation and evolution, we can better understand how galaxies like our own Milky Way were assembled over cosmic history.
The NRAO says the array will be completed in Sept. 2013.
(Hi Jay, greetings from Chile!) ...actually with 35 telescopes already at the AOS (the "High Site"), the ALMA Observatory is already operational and has been collecting scientific data since October 2011. The full 66-telescope array is scheduled to be completed by Sept 2013...
To answer the second part of your question: We can not see further than the microwave background that is echoing the big bang. Which is 300,000yrs after the big bang took place. The WMAP pretty much picked up the edge of what we can see.
This may be true, but I am not sure. As we have read, the microwave radiation represents the extent of what might be picked up by any visible light, and ostensibly microwaves, but some radio frequencies might be able to push that back a bit .... I honestly do not know, and think it a most fascinating question!
300,000 years is when it became cool enough for electrons and protons to form neutral atoms. That's when photons could start moving longer distances in space.
However, peering back is not necessarily just the only thing we need to do. We know so little being able to look anywhere could well bring exciting discoveries.
Kind of close to that volcano over there! Wonder what ash and tons of static would do to the equipment. :(
Not sure which volcano you refer. There is Lauca National Park in the north with two very high volcanoes, Parinacota and Pomerape in Chile as well as Sajama in Bolivia in this area. If I recall correctly,these all sit to the east of the actual desert. I don't believe any of these have been active since early AD. Most volcanic activity in Chile is in the Lakes region much farther south, Puyehue and Chaitén come to mind.
I would add though even with earthquakes and volcanoes Chile has some incredibly beautiful areas. (I spent about 8 months travel there a few years back and would recomend the country to anyone). It is roughly the equivalent in North America to taking everything from Baja California to southern Alsaka turned upside down. Atacama desert in the north and the largest icefields outside the poles in the south.
The active volcano, Láscar (5592 m), is roughly 30 kilometers south of the ALMA site and is sufficiently far away to not pose a danger to the observatory. It had a brief "ash" eruption about 6 years ago...
Thanks Art S. Didn't recall this event.
This is simply amazing!
I know many will scoof. But I say praise the Creator for his many creation, including space
as we know and the talent and intelligence He gave to humans to figure things out.
LOL
It sounds as if you think people "scoof" (it's scoff, which makes some of us wonder just how educated you might be) because of someone's cynical nature, but what we are discussing here is the eye-opening facts of science that make the open-minded wonder how anyone could ever believe explanations that are best suited for children.
Harry, you are one lucky man to get an assignment like this.
Interesting that the other 'Observatory at the Top of the World' on Mauna Kea on the Big Island of Hawaii also sits near an active volcano.
The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.
Day to day pours out speech,
and night to night reveals knowledge.
There is no speech, nor are there words,
whose voice is not heard.
Their voice goes out through all the earth,
and their words to the end of the world.
In them he has set a tent for the sun,
(Psalm 19:1-4 ESV)
Dongus.... I'm reading in Psalm at present and sure enough that one hit home... thanks for posting.... I've a saying to those who "think" Christians deny science"
"Christians Believe in God deeply.... Christians believe in deep Science... There is no conflict."
Carl Sagan smoked 'billion and billions' of spliffies. Is that really what you want?
" ...The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. ... "
I'd much, much rather have ANY "spliffie" smoker then the person that posted this.
They are more rational, intelligent, reasoning and interesting to talk to.
So yes, give me spliffie smoker.
@George form WAAAAAA!!
I'm afraid you sir are limited and have no rational to think of. You are limited to what you see as "fact" and what theory can be born of the scientific process. I (and other Christians) Conceive not only of an Infinite God but Life everlasting... We not only realize AND live in the "real" factual world but we akcnoledge a world you know not of. I didn't "slam" your non belief sir don't degrade mine... (I find that "Free Thinkers" are the most narrow minded, intolerant of others views on the vine that I met) We (Christians) enjoy science... it does not "supersede" God. God "created science.... science can't prove nor disprove God.
and by the by.... No where in the Bible does it say the earth is ANY years old.... If you can find it Ill shave my head...(if I had any hair.... snicker)
.."pass the Spliffie on the left hand side Oh.." (Bob Marley belts out a tune)
This is so cool. I work for a company that supplies NRAO with parts for the ALMA project. It is nice to see the product of your work used to capture such amazing images.
We lived in central Chile while the ESO Very Large Telescope was being constructed in the mid 1990's. We never got up there to see it, but fondly recall the country and its people. Not only does Chile have a most fascinating history, but in recent years, it is very much on the forefront of Astronomy. ¡Viva Chile!
About 25 years or so ago, Carl Sagan & top astronomers said, ' With our new equipment we will be able to see farther out toward the edge of the big bang where galaxies are really old.' So they looked and lo & behold they ran smack dab into a wall of galaxies that weren't old but new. Then they said,'Well if we could see beyond this wall of galaxies that's where the really old ones are from the beginnings of the big bang.' And sure enough around five years later they were able to see past that wall of new galaxies and there were the really old ones like they predicted. Five years passed and they were able to see past this area of really old galaxies and instead of being older they were even newer than that wall of galaxies they had encountered previously. So suddenly someone said,'Oh look we did the math wrong. We didn't carry the decimal place here. That explains it.' And so with the new math they looked beyond where they were looking and newer, older , newer & newer yet kept happening so they kept tweaking the math to fit their 'big bang theory'. Problem is, there never was a 'big bang' to begin with. It's a childish fantasy stimulated by elliptical optical illusions that happen whenever anyone looks out into deep space supported by constantly changing math. "Where did the stars come from, Sunny?" "There was a bang daddy. A really 'Big Bang'." 'Oh your so bright Sunny. I'll have to wall paper our house with your degrees!"
What a strange story. Did you hear that in Sunday School? As if the greatest minds in the world would repeatedly make simple mathematical mistakes. It reminds me of the demonstration of condom failure, where the teacher tosses peas through a tennis racket as "proof" that viruses can pass through a condom.
You must be too young to have paid attention over the last forty years or so. Everything about them finding newer galaxies as they've looked deeper toward the edge of their 'Big Bang Theory' is factual. It's now always their math that needs correcting not the bogus theory they and your teachers hold as well. But don't get your panties in a bunch. No need to feel threatened by anyone who doesn't march in lockstep alongside you.
I'm not certain i understand the statement? Science is meant to be proven wrong. The current minds then reevaluate and redefine. It is a learning process. That is the way we as a species evolve. Religion, well, it's just said we accept it on faith or not, dependant on our beliefs. I'll leave it at that.
" ... not the bogus theory ... "
So what would you call an imaginary friend who created everything in the blink of an eye, just by wishing it to happen?
One who demands to be worshiped. Demands to be feared. One who reaps all the glory, but accepts none of the responsibility. One who's worshipers practice fear, hate and bigotry.
So THAT delusion is a better theory?
Ok. Fine.
Actually, when it comes to viewing astronomical objects, the further away the object is, effectively, the further back in time we are viewing. For example, due to the limit of the speed of light, if we view an object 600 light-years away, we are in fact seeing that object as it appeared 600 years ago, due to the time it takes for the light emitted by that object to reach earth.
We now know, scientifically, that the Big Bang is practically a certainty due to the research by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson back in 1964. They discovered the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (). It is a very weak electromagnetic field seemingly emanating from all directions in the sky at roughly the same intensity, temperature and frequency.
Initial speculation regarding the Big Bang predicted the existence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), but it wasn't until Penzias and Wilson directly observed the phenomenon that the majority of the scientific community accepted the Big Bang theory as the most plausible explanation for the creation of the universe.
As the universe expanded and cooled, so did the temperature of the CMBR, which resulted in the slow reduction in the frequency of the CMBR, from beyond the visible spectrum into the radio frequencies. The current frequency of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation currently lies at approximately 160.2 GHz, with a temperature of 2.725 Kelvin (-270.275 Celsius), near absolute zero.
OK, I never mentioned God but some seem determined to assign that to me anyway. The Big Bang Theory states that the Universe was once in an extremely hot and dense state. After it's initial expansion from a singularity the Universe cooled sufficiently to allow energy to be converted into various subatomic particles. Now why was the Universe in an extremely dense and hot state? Was that about the time God needed to scratch His Ass since you're bringing Him into this? The friction, right, scritching the old balls or what? I'd say that the immense pressures of all that nothingness in the Universe caused it but I didn't know nothingness had pressures. Perhaps it was the intense blackness of the immense surrounding darkness that did it. I mean isn't darkness dense and hot? Oh but it was in a 'state'. I almost missed that. I'll have to correct my math, forgot to carry that decimal point. The 'Big Bang Theory', (so-called theory) is just a bust, a lot of made up childish fantasy by those who need to impress upon others how 'intellectual' they are. "No, you see Martha, all that hot and dense nothingness is what lead to the initial explosion we call the 'Big Bang'. If you're not busy later I'd like to show you my house. We just had it wallpapered with my degrees. *Belch*!"
I like what Stephen Hawking has said about God and how the universe never had "time for God". Sums things up nicely.
In the beginning the Universe was without form and void. And it was frozen. It stayed frozen for a jigillian millenia. But then it melted. When it at first melted the subatomic partcles glided over one another. As it melted more the particles began to rub up upon each other like that ole lady's horny toy poodle. They rubbed so much they burst into flame. When the flame went out and the hot microwave background waves cooled, it eventually became what we have today. That's why it is known as the 'Big, Wet, Sart. Silent & wet but still deadly. Most amazing, the universe came out of nothingness. I not only understand this universally held theory but can explain it at a given notice. That's why I hold so many degrees.
No, it didn't work this way. The Big Bang wasn't a bang and it wasn't particularly big. The phrase "Big Bang" was, in fact, coined by Professor Fred Hoyle, who was a proponent of the Steady State theory, as a term of derision. As such, it is not surprising that it is inaccurate.
There was no explosion. Space started expanding, and as it expanded, the matter in the universe was carried along with it.
Great story, but some inaccuracies...
The article goes on to say that the array is 16,500 feet above sea level, which is not nearly 1/2 way to even the beginnings of outer space.
The article is correct. Because the pressure of the atmosphere drops as you ascend towards space, the amount of air (largely nitrogen) in a given volume also becomes less. Once at 16,000 ft., you're above 40 percent of the atmosphere, on a molecule-by-molecule count. When you reach "outer space," you've reached an altitude where the air pressure (density) is effectively zero. The air density/pressure just inside that limit is also extremely low compared to sea level. In other words, the effect is not linear. You do not have to get half way to outer space to be above half the atmosphere. Half the gas surrounding our planet is well within 20,000 ft. of the surface of the earth.
What you are talking about is the height of the atmosphere (from the surface to outer space), in which case you'd be correct.
40% doesn't equal 50%, so it's not half-way to space by any definition.
@DaveGinOly
That is what I'm talking about and that is why the article is NOTcorrect. The passage I quoted:
is saying two things:
1. "on a plateau half-way between Earth and space"
This is the incorrect part. 16,000 feet (the height of the plateau) is not nearly 1/2 way between earth and space.
2. "above 40 percent of the planet's atmosphere."
That is correct and not in dispute.
The two statements are mutually exclusive and the former is wrong.
The statement should not have even alluded to the distance to space because:
a. it's wrong
b. it's irrelevant to the entire point of why the telescope array is so effective - - it's being above most of the moisture in the atmospere that matters. The height is not the significant factor as scientists will tell you they need the telescope to be above a certain portion of the atmosphere for good results.
At 78 and in poor health I still yearn to learn factual things. I have a B.S. in Biology and I'm a firm believer in Evolution. I admire those who have dedicated their lives unlock secrets such as how the Universe was formed.
At the big bang when protons, neutrons and electrons collided and fed off the recently-discovered Higgs-Boson, where had they all come from? For that matter where had space come from? In other words, can these guys take me back to the beginning? I can.
" ... can these guys take me back to the beginning? I can. ... "
No you can't. All you can do is to recite the myth, that YOU say explains it. You have no facts to support it. None at all.
It is all based of faith. Faith in an all powerful imaginary being who uses magic. And can create things with its mind. Create things out of nothing. POOF!
Yep, that is some "fact" you have there. I think I'll just stick this "bogus" theory that we call science.
And you too idiots who make fun of his comment...your lives have absolutely no meaning nor does your existence on this earth if you have no faith. With a belief like yours we should be able to do what ever we want and suffer no consequences other than the laws that man has created. I on the other hand know my life has more meaning than just a bunch of atoms stuck together by chance and chance only. Yee of little faith...
Not really sure why it is necessary for my life to have any meaning for you. As an atheist, I am perfectly happy with the meanings I put on my life. You are also welcome to any delusional meaning you wish to put on your own life. It's fine by me.
I look forward to the wonderful things this "telescope" will reveal.... this is a exciting time for a science buff like me..... Higgs Boson, New observation equipment, Mars exploration. commercial suborbit crafts. There was even a "Allen" blog on building a USS Enterprise. Science is awesome.
"I believe in God deeply, I believe in deep Science.... There is no conflict."
@rittktn
At the beginning, there were no neutrons or electrons. That's the whole point of particle colliders like the LHC. They smash these particles into their constituents to find out what the basic building blocks of these particles are. We do know for a fact that at unbelievably small fractions of a second after the big bang (ATB), that particles like the ones you mention hadn't formed yet.
Each new discovery gets us a bit closeer to those answers. The importance of the Higgs theory is that electrons and neutrons and the other elementary particles got their mass because of the they they interact with the Higgs field, meaning that the Higgs field was there first.
Well, I suspect you can't, scientifically, which is what this article is discussing. I'm not trying to knock your faith, but in a forum, such as this, you are unlikely to get many people who agree with your assertion.
Amazing work! I think we are getting pretty close to the day we see life beyond earth.
Even though i might not really know everything about space and galaxies, but all i know is that science and the knowledge they find everyday is simply amazing. I have alwaysbeen interested in the uknown universe and i feel like one day scientist will fidn a place like our own. They should have more videos like this to update people like us on whats new.
Event though i might not know a lot of about the universe and science, i feel like it is amazing what scientist do everyday to find new things and the way they are made. Time will come when they find a place like our own out in the vast space. They should post videos like this to keep us that are interested posted on new discoveries ect.
Putting all the dog-tired religious bickering aside, how about a question about this marvelous facility?
I live where the altitude is around 4200 feet. Many people think that's "high altitude." No, not when compared to some other placs, obviously.
The question is, at over 3 miles above seal level, is any sort of pressurized environment required at the facility? Or am I wrong in assuming that the control systems are at the same location as the antennae/telescopes? How about working on those pieces of equipment? Is assisted breathing apparatus needed at that altitude?
Keep up the great work!
wb
I can't answer your questions about the facility, but persons can certainly live at that altitude. Acclimatization takes time more than anything else. Persons living for generations at this type of altitude have larger lung capacities and larger heart muscles I believe. I think the actual "Death Zone" lack of sufficient oxygen in the air is 26,000 ft., though persons certainly die from this at lower elevations, from too rapid of ascent.
If you ever land in La Paz, Bolivia "International" airport, you'll get a taste of rapid ascent. It is the highest international airport in the world at 13,400 feet. People have collapsed upon arrival and they used to keep oxygen available for this, not sure of current situation.
Rapid ascent, there are some things possible. Acetazolamide,(Diamox) used for glaucoma is frequently used. It acidifies the blood, which stimulates ventilation. I have used it flying from near sea level here in the states to La Paz and it did help. I certainly felt better quicker.
oddly enough, some of the closest solar systems are visible from our southern hemisphere.....I am hoping this facility takes full advantage of that fact and places a larger degree of interest in them, particularly in the search for miniscule evidence of life!!...as for the edge? surely we are in a hubble bubble, again, we place our selves at the center as if we are the most important things and it is all about us, my biggest proof is that basically we see the same amount of time no matter what direction we look, instead, that one tiny offset in the big bangs symmetry should mean the edge would be closer and further away depending on the direction we look, but to make it all more confusing, the whole thing (observable universe) has rotated an unknown number of times and the edge we see is as skewed as looking at an ocean beach from an offshore ship...WITH A PAIR OF COKE BOTTLE GOGGLES!!!....we ain't even close to addressing that issue yet, knowing this is like listening to a bunch of third graders argue about how ice cream is made. We all like ice cream, and I think WE ALL love astronomy.....have at it, but let's not call any of it the final word....spliffies, ice cream and carl sagen videos for all!! the party is in chile for the foreseeable future!!!....one of these days some body is gonna want to drag a big mirror through kashimir and on up mount everest!!
There is a video of this place on you tube I think
AFTER THOUGHT: All of this occurred in less than a miniscule fraction of a cosmic eyeblink as the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
There is no conflict between science and Creation, all the noise surrounding the discussion is like sugar ants scurrying around somewhere "out there."
He... I like that post Theo... I might reuse it (with proper billing of course)
TOOBAD it can'T see the Edge of the End of Muslim Terrorists!