We don't yet fully understand matter. energy, and time. Unlocking those secrets may yield huge benefits here on Earth like clean energy and other transformative technologies.

To study the physics in question here on Earth either takes enormous projects like the Hadron Collider, or the experiment in question simply can't be done, like studying black holes.

But we have a whole universe of experiments running all the time in the sky above us. The universe is doing experiments at a scale and intensity we can't even imagine. Studying how things works in outer space teaches us the fundamentals of science here on Earth.

So even if you only desired outcome from all of this is what we can do here on Earth, then the JWST is useful.

The JWST is potentially the user interface to the fundamental laws of physics.

Mike C.

I am maybe poking the bear, but what fundamental laws of physics were discovered in deep space, that are applicable on earth?
The observation of deep space still remains only an observation.
I am actually a big fan of Nasa... My son has worked there...
And I am blown away by what they have accomplished with the James Web Telescope. I just don't see the point. Lots of theoretical assumptions, which are not verifiable, from distances that are so incredibly inaccessible...

Not nearly as theoretical and inaccessible as believing you're going to solve poverty, hunger, war, sickness, etc. simply by throwing NASA's minuscule budget at the problem.

A lot of the big problems on earth are not really science problems, they usually have a big political / social component.

Still there is a lot of cross over. Until two months ago I was working on telescopes for cosmology. Now I'm at Google working on new energy sources. A lot of people move up and back between the different areas.

An old example: Gravity.

The basic inverse square law nature of gravity wasn't discovered by looking at the Earth but by measuring celestial mechanics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27 ... ravitation

The gravity theory wasn't directly measured on Earth until almost 100 years after Newton died (the Cavendish experiment).

Those insights now allow us to have satellites which provide enormous benefits on Earth.

Similar insights are being explored in high energy physics and other fields observing and measuring what goes on in the universe. We still don't really know how gravity works, and there are lots of people looking into that.

If you can explain what is happening in the universe, then you can use that knowledge here on Earth.

Mike C.

Underlying all of this is the question of why the work must be justified. NASA doesn't call for Health and Human Services to justify their budget or send some their way.

There is value in what NASA and other space oriented organizations do. If they're using taxpayer money there is a certain amount of value that should be shown for the expense. I would say that based on the amount allocated to NASA, the bang for the buck is better than a lot of budget areas that get orders of magnitude more.

Every government expenditure should be justified.

IMO, the JWST is FAR more justified than the SLS ($25B so far and counting....).

Mike C.

That is fair, but the question is what measure is used for the justification.



Every government expenditure should be justified.

IMO, the JWST is FAR more justified than the SLS ($25B so far and counting....).

Mike C.

We need programs like JWST to keep the astrophysicists off the streets. Those guys probably wouldn't be much help at the soup kitchen anyway.

That would be up to Congress to decide. They are supposed to be our representatives. They make the budget and are responsible for overseeing the way it is spent. If we disagree with their choices then it’s up to us to replace them with better representatives.

you do not have to look very hard to see the value that space exploration (microgravity experiments) has contributed to the tech development of society. tons of examples in micro-electronics, LEDs (including organic LEDs), portable power units, pumps (insulin pumps), scratch-resistant lenses, materials (insulators and foams), medical devices, etc.

we don't know what we don't know, until we search. scientists are great at "observe and report." and that's how we advance.

The problem is that congress looks at very big slices of money, and can't put attention into the billion dollar details.

From the national lab perspective, moving project decisions higher up has been a big problem because congress is very slow to react to changing situations and some projects are funded long after they should have been abandoned, while others are tremendously delayed.

I'd rather seem the money given to organizations (NASA, DOE, etc) and have project decisions made at a much lower level.

Even JWST: the pictures are fantastic - but was that the best use of that much money for astrophysics research? How would you weigh it against say CMB-S4? https://cmb-s4.org/ or PUMA.

Should SLS be abandoned because its far over budget and behind schedule? JWST was the same just a couple of years ago.

These are all tricky *technical* questions





That would be up to Congress to decide. They are supposed to be our representatives. They make the budget and are responsible for overseeing the way it is spent. If we disagree with their choices then it’s up to us to replace them with better representatives.

from Quantum Magazine:


Two Weeks In, the Webb Space Telescope Is Reshaping Astronomy

https://www.quantamagazine.org/two-week ... -20220725/

One of the newer images of the Cartwheel Galaxy here.

That image is stunning, but what continues to astonish me is that the background of each new photo is filled with galaxies. Everywhere Webb looks, no matter how small the slice of the sky, it shows us uncountable galaxies, each home to billions of stars.

And potentially way better life forms than Earth has spawned. *Hope.