Why Hubble?

In 1923, a German scientist by the name of Hermann Oberth published “Die Rakete zu den Planetenraumen" ("The Rocket into Planetary Space") which mentioned the idea that a telescope could be propelled into space with a rocket.[1]This initial thought was mostly ignored until 1946, when Lyman Spitzer, a Princeton Astrophysicist, wrote about the advantages of a telescope placed into orbit outside of Earth’s atmosphere in “The Astronomical Advantages of an Extra-terrestrial Observatory”.[2] This paper launched the Hubble Space Telescope from a dream to a possibility. However, until the 1960s, the Hubble Telescope remained mostly off the radar of the United States, as the Cold War loomed front and center.

Had World War II not crippled German infrastructure, Germany would likely have been the first nation to launch a satellite, and would likely have led the space race after that.[3] However, World War II put Germany out of the running as a space superpower. The US captured Wernher Von Braun, an instrumental figure in the German rocketry program, who became the leader of the American program.[4] Von Braun led the US to what they thought was the forefront of rocketry and space exploration, but were surprised when on October 4, 1957, Sputnik was launched, and the US had to drastically revise their view of the Soviet Union as a technologically backwards nation.[5] After this setback, the US redoubled its space race efforts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) was founded the year after Sputnik-1 was launched, and the US began to retake the space race. With the founding of NASA, Lyman Spitzer began in earnest to push for the development of an orbital telescope. He won approval from the National Academy of Sciences for his Large Space Telescope (LST) project in 1969, and active development and testing began.[6]

The path leading up to the Hubble Space Telescope was fraught with budget issues, malfunctions, and delays. After the Apollo Program landed Neil Armstrong on the moon, funding dried up for the LST, and so Spitzer tightened constraints and tried to cut corners.

The Hubble telescope has given researchers around the world and unprecedented ability to explore space by showing them pictures and data far more detailed and long-reaching than ever before. Not only has the Hubble fed over a million observations to scientists around the world, but has taught politicians, engineers, and scientists important lessons about the success of such a large scale scientific project.

In addition to revolutionizing the science of astronomy, the Hubble Space Telescope also brought astronomy into the public eye. Discoveries such as an age of the universe down to 5% and pictures of exasolar planets captured the public eye in a new way.

When compared to one of Hubble’s biggest early discoveries, the 4 year delay comes out rather miniscule. Until Hubble was launched, Scientists best guess at the age of the universe was something between 10 and 20 billion years.[7] Their estimates were so vague because of the unknown value of the Hubble constant, the current rate of expansion of the universe. However, using the Hubble Telescope, researchers looked at the brightness of certain blinking Cepheid stars.[8] By comparing the brightness to the rate of pulsation, they were able to observe the distance to the Cepheid’s home galaxy. Using this method, researchers were able to calculate the value of the Hubble constant with such precision to place an age value for the universe at 12 to 13.5 billion years of age.[9]

Hubble’s path to launch was fraught with delays, malfunctions, and expenditures bringing Hubble far over budget. The original plan called for a budget of 400-500 million USD.[10] This is quite a steep price now, but in the 1970s, was exorbitant. It was so expensive that it was initially turned down by the House Appropriations Subcommittee. In 1977 congress accepted the proposal, with a budget reduced to 200 million.[11] These budget shenanigans were not the first, and they would not be the last. Money was the first issue that Hubble ran into, with a final cost totaling 1.5 billion USD, 1.3 billion dollars over budget.[12] This was the first lesson the Hubble Telescope taught us, one of realism and budget management. The first lesson was a tough one, that in order for great scientific leaps to be taken, the bureaucracy of government would need to be overcome. Not only that, but funding was always vital, with everyone asking: “What can we get out of this?” instead of “How can we break the boundaries of human capability?” To scientists looking to do the most cutting edge research, one of the greatest obstacles to be overcome is funding. Ergo: proposals must be realistic, for it will not only make the end result more successful, it will get a much better reputation. However, the cost was not the only thing that had gotten a little screwed up.

Even before Hubble got into space, there were clear flaws with its design. Not its physical design, but its digital one. The Hubble Telescope joined a new innovation sweeping the world: computers. The Hubble notoriously featured an SOGS (Science Operations Ground System), a computer system and programs that were integral to the telescope aligning itself correctly to take quality pictures, as well as planning out the taking of said pictures. The $70 million system was supposed to have been finished in 1986, but bugs were appearing at a dramatic rate in 1989.[13] The system was in trouble from its outset, with lessons clear in hindsight. The first problem that plagued Hubble was the way the programming was structured. While the programming was clearly difficult from the outset, it was by no means impossible. The TRW Corporation was given the job and sent the specifications of the job.[14] However, although the TRW team delivered the code to the specifications, it did not work as desired. NASA had taken a completely “hands off” approach to the code, and had not worked with TRW during their project, instead opting to just ask and receive. What this meant was that if one small thing changed in NASA’s mechanical plans, TRW was not made aware of the change; therefore the code produced was out of date with the current software. This event therefore serves as a textbook example of why what is called black-box programming, putting in specifications and expecting code, is a horrible idea.[15]

In addition to this issue with the code, SOGS was also incredibly inefficient, taking ten times the amount of time to schedule observations that it would have taken to perform them in the first place.[16] This issue rested on a conceptual flaw in the way the program was designed. SOGS’s algorithms handled data on a minute-by minute data, working with the basic details of the Telescope, positioning etc. NASA assumed that scheduling observations would be as simple as scheduling millions of these basic details to create a plan. However, because of the extreme level of detail, the amount of possibilities the computer needed to prepare for ballooned in what is called “the combinatoric explosion.”[17] This explosion turned the circuit boards of the computer into electric molasses. The computer was at least 30 times slower than intended.

These errors took several years and 40 million dollars to correct. It is agreed that NASA will need to apply this sort of stubbornness to its projects, but it is also clear that NASA will need to evolve with the times if it wants to continue to be successful in its ventures.[18]

In addition to learning from these codes, the Hubble Space Telescope also had a notorious issue with its mirror. When it was launched in 1990, all were hopeful for its success, the launch went perfectly. At 8:34 the Space Shuttle Discovery launched from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, carrying with it the hopes and dreams of scientists around the world.[19] However, after its various components were tested, it became clear that there was a problem. There was a major flaw in the light gathering mirrors of the Hubble. This flaw, a "spherical aberration" in the mirrors prevented the mirrors from working together in concert correctly.[20] At first, many thought that this flaw would spell the end of the Hubble Telescope's work.[21] However, despite its many flaws, the Hubble was able to overcome the issues. It proved itself to be capable of discoveries after the Discovery was sent up again to repair the mirror. It discovered new stars, proving the world wrong.[22] After this discovery, it continued to impress, despite the broken mirror.

With revolutions to the scientific community apparent from the beginning, despite massive delays, Hubble managed to impress. From pictures of Pluto, to discoveries of black holes, to the first picture of an extrasolar planet, Hubble amazed. Today, Pluto is known as something less than a planet, a dwarf planet. However, in 1996, history was made when the Hubble Space Telescope took the first pictures of the then-planet Pluto. While the telescope was unable to see intricate surface details over the 3 billion mile distance, it took pictures which clearly defined Pluto’s size and gave a general overview of Pluto’s surface.[23] This achievement by Hubble was a stepping stone, showcasing Hubble’s abilities. In more concretely scientific achievements, it observed dramatic variations of light and dark areas on the surface of Pluto, possibly made from frozen nitrogen and methane post interaction with sunlight.[24] Hubble brought Pluto from a dot on the map to a real observable planet.

Hubble’s pictures have made history many times over, and on November 13, 2008, they did so once again with the first picture of an extrasolar planet. Fomalhaut B was observed by the Hubble Telescope, following initial speculation in 2004, and then repeated imaging to confirm.[25]

Black holes have always been a pop culture heavy part of astronomy. They show up in movies and books and are generally mystical objects that have catastrophic effects on space around them. However, the actual black hole is not quite as simple. In fact, for a long time no one had verifiable proof of black holes, despite the fact that Einstein predicted their existence as part of his general theory of relativity. However, in 1994, Hubble found proof of their existence.[26] In the center of the giant elliptical galaxy M87, there is an attractive force of collapsed matter equal in weight to as much as three billion suns concentrated in a space no larger than the solar system.[27] The discovery of a black hole shook scientists around the world. Up until their discovery, black holes had obtained a large pop culture following, and were seen as one of the biggest goals of astronomical research.[28] By looking at gasses forming a disk around the black hole, scientists were able to calculate the mass of the black hole. Upon reaching reasonable figures, it became clear that the only possible explanation was a supermassive black hole. Not only was this finding relevant for significance, it also changed the focus of research directed toward black holes: from proving their existence, to trying to understand their formation and effects on space.

​Despite the Hubble Telescopes numerous issues and delays, it is hard to overstate its effect on the scientific community and the world. It furthered numerous scientific studies, took millions of pictures, and brought astronomy much further into the spotlight. Despite its flawed mirror, it proved that setbacks like this could be overcome. Through its mistakes, it also set a precedent for how to undertake a similarly massive scientific project. Its coding issues serve as lessons to this day, teaching that it is important for the developers of the code to be involved with the contractors throughout the entire coding process. In addition, the budget issues and delays show the important of developing a realistic budget and planning out a detailed schedule. The Hubble Telescope has many things to teach us, and thanks to its latest repair mission will continue teaching until possibly 2020, where it will be followed by its successor, the James Webb Space Telescope.[29]

[1] Brian Dunbar. "The Hubble Story." NASA. October 26, 2006. Accessed June 14, 2015. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/story/the_story.html.

[2] Lyman Spitzer Jr. "Report to Project Rand: Astronomical Advantages of an Extra-terrestrial Observatory." Astronomy Quarterly 7, no. 3 (1990): 131-42. doi:10.1016/0364-9229(90)90018-v.

[3] Tim Furniss, A History of Space Exploration: And Its Future-- (London: Mercury, 2005), pg. #10.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Willim J Jorden. "SOVIET FIRES SATELLITE INTO SPACE; IT IS CIRCLING THE GLOBE AT 18,000 M. P. H.; SPHERE TRACKED IN 4 CROSSINGS OVER U.S." The New York Times, October 5, 1957.

[6] Brian Dunbar, “The Hubble Story”

[7] Ron Cowen, "Hubble Telescope Dates the Universe," Science News 155, no. 22 (May 29, 1999): pg. #, accessed May 27, 2015, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/4011563?ref=no-x-route:1bfa12dfffa2bb4a90b23889691ec1d0.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ron Cowen, “Hubble Telescope Dates the Universe”

[10] NASA, "A Brief History of the Hubble Space Telescope," A Brief History of the Hubble Space Telescope, section goes here, accessed June 18, 2015, http://history.nasa.gov/hubble/.

[11] Ibid.

[12] John Noble Wilford, "Excitement and Dismay at Space Telescope Center," The New York Times, April 9, 1990, accessed June 11, 2015, http://www.nytimes.com/1990/04/09/us/telescope-is-set-to-peer-at-space-and-time.html.

[13] M. Mitchell Waldrop, "Will the Hubble Space Telescope Compute?," Science 243, no. 4897 (March 17, 1989): pg. #1437, accessed May 27, 2015, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/1703124?ref=no-x-route:401982093e6842ffed46665a40c026c7.

[14] Ibid.

[15] M. Mitchell Waldrop

[16] Ibid.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] John Noble Wilford, "Shuttle Soars 381 Miles High, With Telescope and a Dream," The New York Times, April 25, 1990, accessed June 5, 2015, http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE|A175462304&v=2.1&u=mlin_m_cambrls&it=r&p=SPN.SP24&sw=w&asid=a7e8ceb42910405c860b28b00cd975da.

[20] Warren E. Leary, "HUBBLE TELESCOPE LOSES LARGE PART OF OPTICAL ABILITY," The New York Times, June 28, 1990, http://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/28/us/hubble-telescope-loses-large-part-of-optical-ability.html.

[21] Ibid.

[22] "Despite Flaw, Hubble Finds New Stars," M, accessed August 14, 1990, http://www.nytimes.com/1990/08/14/science/despite-flaw-hubble-finds-new-stars.html.

[23] Warren E. Leary, "Hubble Provides First Glimpses of the Surface of Distant Pluto," The New York Times, March 8, 1996, http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/08/us/hubble-provides-first-glimpses-of-the-surface-of-distant-pluto.html.

[24] Ibid.

[25] NASA, "Hubble Directly Observes Planet Orbiting Fomalhaut," news release, November 13, 2008, Hubble Site, accessed June 5, 2015, http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2008/39/.

[26] John Wilford Noble, "Space Telescope Confirms Theory of Black Holes," The New York Times, May 26, 1994, http://www.nytimes.com/1994/05/26/us/space-telescope-confirms-theory-of-black-holes.html.

[27] Ibid.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Yudhijit Bhattacharjee, "Shuttle Crew Set to Prepare Hubble for a Star-Studded Grand Finale," Science 324, no. 5928 (May 08, 2009): pg. #, accessed May 27, 2015, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/20493869?ref=no-x-route:ae8ed513be9ecaebdbb0f496f8d22dfa.

Photo Credit: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap021124.html