Behold! World's Largest Camera Snaps Millions of Galaxies in First Pics
For 10 hours, the US National Science Foundation and Department of Energy facility stared deep into the cosmos, using its powerful camera to record in near-ultraviolet, optical, and near-infrared wavelengths. The result is a tantalizing and exciting set of observations that bode well for the years to come.
"NSF-DOE Rubin Observatory will capture more information about our Universe than all optical telescopes throughout history combined," says Brian Stone, acting director of the NSF. "Through this remarkable scientific facility, we will explore many cosmic mysteries, including the dark matter and dark energy that permeate the Universe."
Rubin's first mission is a 10-year survey of the southern sky called the Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST). Every few days, it will observe the entire sky, recording each section around 800 times using the telescope's 3,200-megapixel camera (the largest in the world) to effectively compile an unprecedented 10-year timelapse of the Universe.
Related:
The mission is designed to capture anything that moves, flashes, or pulses – a remit that includes asteroids, comets, supernovae, and pulsars; from taking an asteroid inventory of the Solar System to cataloguing exploding stars billions of light-years away.
In its first images, Rubin demonstrates some of that range, recording an extremely detailed, massive image of the Milky Way Trifid and Lagoon nebulae, two dense molecular clouds bubbling with hidden star formation. In 7.2 hours, the telescope took 678 individual images for a final mosaic coming in at just under 5 gigapixels.
You should go have a play with the interactive zoomable image – it's a delight.
In another image, the observatory showcases its ability to zoom in on a patch of sky, revealing around 10 million galaxies in a tightly focused field of view around the Virgo cluster. There's a zoomable version here.
Finally, the Rubin team revealed the Solar System asteroids the telescope was able to observe – including a whopping 2,104 orbiting bits of rock we've never seen before, in just over 10 hours of observations.
Annually, about 20,000 new asteroids are discovered by all other ground-based telescopes combined – Rubin looks to blow them out of the water.
None of the asteroids discovered by Rubin pose a hazard to Earth, but the discoveries show what a powerful tool the observatory will be in Earth defense against hazardous space rocks.
"Rubin Observatory is the first of its kind: its mirror design, camera size and sensitivity, telescope speed, and computing infrastructure are each in an entirely new category," the NSF and DOE say.
"With Rubin data we will all understand our Universe better, chronicle its evolution, delve into the mysteries of dark energy and dark matter, and reveal answers to questions we have yet to imagine."
Excelsior.
2032 'City-Killer' Impact Threatens Earth's Satellites, Study Finds
Check It Out! Rubin Observatory Reveals First Glimpses of Stunning Space Images
Fast Radio Bursts Reveal Where The Universe's Missing Matter Is Hiding
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
a day ago
- Boston Globe
In troubled times on earth, the cosmos offers transcendent images
The Vera C. Rubin Observatory opened in June. Jointly operated by the National Science Foundation and US Department of Energy, it's located in northern Chile. The observatory's mission is to conduct a 10-year survey of the southern night sky. The images released so far have been astounding. They can be seen at The Vera C. Rubin Observatory. MARCOS ZEGERS/Marcos Zegers/The New York Times For almost as long as there has been photography, there have been photographs taken of the nighttime sky. The The Trifid and Lagoon nebulas, as seen from the Vera C. Rubin Observatory. VERA C. RUBIN OBSERVATORY/NSF/DOE/Vera C. Rubin Observatory Advertisement Rubin was an astronomer who did pioneering work on galactic rotation rates. The Hubble is named for the cosmologist Edwin Hubble, and Webb was a pioneering NASA administrator. Both the Hubble and Webb have the advantage of being in outer space, without Earth's atmosphere to contend with. The Rubin has the advantage of possessing the world's largest digital camera. Advertisement The size of a small SUV, the observatory's Legacy Survey of Space and Time camera weighs more than three tons and has a 3.2-gigapixel sensor. That means the camera's resolution is more than 1,500 times greater than that of a high-definition television. Not surprisingly, distant galaxies require, let alone deserve, a greater degree of detail than Netflix does. Calibrating the camera at the Vera C. Rubin Observatory. MARCOS ZEGERS/Marcos Zegers/The New York Times The observatory and telescopes afford a technological portal to a realm not just beyond comprehension but effectively beyond the imagination. 'The game I play is a very interesting one,' the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman once said. 'It's imagination in a tight straitjacket.' The celestial photography produced by the Rubin, Hubble, and Webb removes that straitjacket. Or as the poet Paul Celan once wrote, 'there are/still songs to sing beyond/mankind.' The LSST camera is a particularly stunning reminder that before it's anything else a camera is a machine. That machine can be a tool or a plaything, a means to create art or a selling point for a smartphone upgrade — or, yes, all of the above. Yet whatever the intended purpose, that machine executes the same action. A camera captures a moment in time that also existed in space. How artfully it does so is up to the camera operator. How memorably it does so is owing to some combination of the ability of that operator, the quality of the machine, and the nature of the subject. The "Cosmic Cliffs," photographed by the James Webb Space Telescope. NASA With art photography, the emphasis is on the ability of the operator: the artist. With celestial photography things are different. The operator rarely matters, albeit there are notable exceptions, one of which we'll also get to later. It's far more likely to be an algorithm than an actual person deciding where, when, and how to direct the lens. So rather than the emphasis being on the operator it's on these phenomenal machines and the even more phenomenal subjects they record: galaxies and nebulae and constellations. Advertisement Time assumes a different aspect with celestial photography. It becomes the intersection of the instant when the lens registers light — that's true of all photography — and the light years it took for that light to reach the lens. Space, too, assumes a different aspect. It becomes literally cosmic, a distance defying dimensionality, a realm so vast the human mind cannot begin to comprehend it even as the camera documents small slices of it — which is also to say small slices of that vastness. Galaxy M83, the Southern Pinwheel, in a photo mosaic taken by the Hubble Space Telescope. REUTERS/NASA A certain much-used cliché has it that a picture is worth a thousand words. Like most clichés, it has a basis in reality. It acknowledges the uniquely thick descriptive power of the photographic image. Here, though, words take a back seat to wonder. Images like these render meaningless adjectives like 'spectacular' and 'astonishing' and 'overwhelming.' They seem not just earthbound but Earth-bound. Actually, that's not quite right. When the words are names, rather than mere modifiers, then they have a capacity to evoke that complements the images' power to reveal: Virgo Cluster, Large Magellanic Cloud, Triffid Nebula, Pillars of Creation, Cosmic Cliffs, Christmas Tree Galaxy Cluster, Lagoon Nebula, Southern Pinwheel, Pandora's Cluster. The names are as poetic as the images are epic (far too weak a word, but you get the idea). Advertisement If the statement 'a picture is worth a thousand words' is one cliché that's relevant here, another is the question 'But is it art?' If we define art as beauty mediated through human handiwork, then of course these images are. They are so utterly alien to human experience as to confound our standard aesthetic ideas. They don't just transcend our sense of beauty. They transcend our sense of … everything. Vincent van Gogh, "The Starry Night," 1889. Museum of Modern Art Long before telescopes, let alone space telescopes, Joining their ranks is the photographer An-My Lê. Earlier this year, the Marian Goodman Gallery in New York showed her series Advertisement An-My Lê, "Sun Point View, Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado, 2024," from "Dark Star," 2024. Courtesy of the artist and Marian Goodman Gallery/© An-My Lê 'Dark Star' is both a marked departure for The series shares a dynamic with the images from Hubble, Webb, and Rubin: the stars above, a human viewer below. But 'Dark Star' crucially differs from them in two key respects. First, there's the matter of human agency. Lê is the image-maker here, not an algorithm or computer program. Comparing the photographs within the series, one is aware of the countless decisions she had to make in deciding where to place the camera, when to click the shutter, what to emphasize. Also, 'Dark Star' explicitly connects the cosmos with Earth. The Rubin and space-telescope images leave out the planet. What they show is out there — way, way out there. Part of the power of Lê's photographs is the way they include the Earth. Each has a horizon line in the lower portion of the image, serving as a further, internal frame. It's a frame felt as well as seen. A Dec. 24, 1968, photo that shows the Earth behind the surface of the moon during the Apollo 8 mission and Earth as seen from Apollo 17 in 1972. NASA As it happens, the two most famous astronomical images show Earth, not outer space. They were taken on Apollo missions: 'Earthrise,' from 1968, and 'The Blue Marble,' from 1972. Both look back at the planet, not out from. How much of the appeal of the Rubin and space-telescope images is that they let us leave terrestrial concerns so exceedingly far behind? In April, Lê gave a lecture at Harvard. It included slides from 'Dark Star.' 'Perhaps it's the right time to look for a little comfort in the cosmos,' she mused. Advertisement Globe staffer Matt Juul contributed to this article. Star songs for the starry-eyed Celestial photography lets us see the music of the spheres. Here are 10 tunes to listen to while star gazing. Mark Feeney can be reached at
Forbes
6 days ago
- Forbes
Nonprofit Refuses $1.5M Science Grant Due To New Federal DEI Rules
The Carpentries, a nonprofit that has trained over 100,000 researchers in coding and data skills, turned down a $1.5 million NSF grant after being asked to strip diversity-related content from its programming. For an organization with just three months of cash on hand, it was a decision that threatens the organization's very existence. The Carpentries' experience reveals the real-world consequences of the Trump administration's policy shift prohibiting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in federally funded science programs. These restrictions, added to NSF's Grant General Conditions on May 19, 2025, are reshaping what kinds of research the US government will fund and which organizations can participate. For a community-led group like The Carpentries, whose mission is fundamentally inclusive, compliance would have meant abandoning core values. So they said no. Why organizations like The Carpentries are crucial for national competitiveness Since its founding in 1998, The Carpentries has grown from a single lesson program into a global nonprofit teaching foundational data and coding skills to novice researchers across 71 countries. In its 2024 annual report, the organization cites more than 4,600 workshops, over 5,100 trained instructors, and more than 100,000 learners served worldwide over the past decade. Their entire curriculum is open source, volunteer-led, and centered around inclusivity and reproducible science. The organization's mission—empowering a diverse, global scientific community capable of interpreting and leveraging data—aligns with broader economic imperatives. According to the National Skills Coalition and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, over 92% of jobs in the U.S. economy require digital skills, yet one-third of workers lack this foundational capability. Similarly, according to a June 2025 report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) many countries are now shifting labor markets toward skills over credentials, and digital fluency has become essential to economic competitiveness. The share of U.S. employers having difficulties filling jobs due to a lack of available talent increased from just greater than 30% in 2013 to more than 70% in 2023. All of this is unfolding just as the rise of artificial intelligence across industries is accelerating demand for data-literate workers—especially those with the skills to manage, interpret, and audit complex computational systems. I have written previously about the tight relationship between long-term productivity growth and basic scientific research. Many say the administration of Donald Trump has resulted in nothing short of a war on science. In this context, The Carpentries is more than a niche teaching organization, but rather a contributor to economic resilience and, from that vantage point, an important public good. By providing accessible pathways to digital literacy, it equips future data workers with the technical skills increasingly required across all sectors of the economy. Its volunteer-led model, multilingual curriculum, and global reach also help close persistent gaps in access to technical education. In this sense, it is also crucial for workforce development. As digital tools become foundational to modern research, business, and public service, organizations like The Carpentries are building the knowledge necessary for data-driven innovation and national competitiveness. The grant and a line in the sand In September 2024, The Carpentries submitted a proposal to the National Science Foundation through a program called Pathways to Enable Open-Source Ecosystems, or POSE, a federal initiative designed to stimulate the growth and long-term sustainability of open-source projects that serve the general research enterprise. Phase II of POSE provides substantial funding for well-established organizations, like The Carpentries, to formalize governance structures, improve contributor engagement, and expand community participation. The Carpentries' proposal requested $1.5 million over two years to strengthen multilingual programming, build mechanisms for recognizing and retaining community contributors, and test a more flexible membership model to develop greater financial stability. In February 2025, the proposal was recommended for funding, meaning it had been rated highly meritorious through peer review by leading scientists, was prioritized by NSF program staff, and only required final administrative approval to be awarded. But in May, the NSF informed The Carpentries that their project had been flagged for diversity-related content. In communications shared with me by Directors Erin Becker and Kari Jordan, the agency wrote: 'Your project contains activities for the retention of underrepresented students which has a limitation or preference in outreach, recruitment, participation that is not aligned to NSF priorities.' Later, NSF announced new general conditions that included that grantees must certify that they did not—and would not—'operate any programs that advance or promote DEI' where DEI is a federally recognized abbreviation for the phrase 'diversity, equity, and inclusion.' While long embraced by universities and nonprofits as a framework for expanding access and representation, DEI has also become a point of contention in U.S. conservative politics, where it is often viewed as an instrument of soft political power within traditionally left-leaning institutions. For an organization whose mission is grounded in inclusive access to data skills, this was untenable. The Carpentries formally withdrew. 'We are unable to certify that our organisation does not and will not operate any programs that advance or promote DEI' they wrote to the NSF. Inclusion Isn't Peripheral—It's the Point For The Carpentries, diversity, equity, and inclusion are not ancillary values—they are embedded in the organization's core design. As Becker and Jordan emphasized to me, their mission is not about preference but about access: providing subsidies for participants from low-income backgrounds, translating materials into local languages, and using teaching methods that welcome learners of all levels and identities. This ethos has allowed The Carpentries to train over 100,000 people in foundational coding and data skills across more than 70 countries. In response to the NSF's new restrictions, the team briefly discussed whether they could reframe their mission in more politically neutral terms—perhaps using language like 'democratizing data science.' But they rejected the idea. 'Where do we draw the line?' Becker asked. 'If we scrub the word 'diversity,' do we rewrite our code of conduct next?' Jordan was blunt: 'We want to be explicit—this is for everyone.' That commitment to inclusivity has required grappling with real tensions. Wondering how much viewpoint diversity the organization would really be open to, I asked how far their openness reached. Would they be open to specifically Republican points of view? Becker recalled a recent example from their instructor training curriculum, which had listed belief in a young Earth as a common scientific misconception. A community member flagged the example as unnecessarily divisive, pointing out that some people who hold that belief could still be effective coding instructors. After a public and respectful debate, the community chose to remove the example—not because they endorsed creationism, but because they wanted to maintain a space where a truly broad range of perspectives could contribute to shared learning. 'If we all care about science,' Jordan said, 'we should be able to work through our challenges together.' The Broader Implication The implications of this case extend beyond one nonprofit. Universities, companies, and research organizations across the country now face a stark choice: adhere to restrictive federal conditions that may conflict with longstanding institutional values or forgo the funding that supports their operations. The NSF's policy shift risks disqualifying organizations not because their work lacks scientific merit, but because of differences in how they define fairness, access, or institutional responsibility. That sets a troubling precedent, not just for science, but for American institutions more broadly. While federal funders have a legitimate interest in setting ethical and legal boundaries, the principle at stake is that participation in public research should be judged by quality and contribution, not political conformity.
The Hill
7 days ago
- The Hill
Congress wants to cut the smartest investment taxpayers ever made
Virtually every smartphone on the planet runs on a chip paid for by American taxpayers — a chip that I helped invent. Now Congress is moving to cut funding for the National Science Foundation that could lead to future breakthroughs. Investing in innovation is not wasteful spending. It is one of the smartest investments Washington makes, creating new jobs, stronger businesses and higher tax revenue in every corner of the country. Cutting the level of government funding for scientific research now would rip those future returns out of American hands and deliver them to our global competitors. I built my career in public universities. Over four decades, I helped lead a dozen federally funded research labs. Five of them produced breakthrough technologies that became part of the backbone of modern life. In the 1980s, we developed a much more efficient style of microprocessor (the RISC chip) in a university lab with graduate students funded by the government. At the time, few imagined that breakthrough would one day power 300 billion chips. The National Science Foundation also funded research that made digital storage much more reliable and affordable (called RAID storage), enhancing everything from cloud computing to online banking. These innovations helped launch entire industries and are used daily by billions of people. These breakthroughs did not come from corporate boardrooms or billionaire-backed startups. They were built by students, developed in public labs and funded by American taxpayers. For decades, my research received support from the NSF's Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering, through grants and Ph.D. fellowships. All told, American taxpayers invested just under $100 million in the labs I helped lead. Accounting for inflation, technologies that came out of them went on to generate over $1 trillion in product sales. That is a 10,000-to-1 return on investment to the public and surely at least 1,000-to-1 return directly back to the government in taxes. Not from luck, but from decades of public investment. And the payoff is real. These gains show up as jobs in 44 states, tools that power small businesses and tax revenue that supports public schools, infrastructure and national defense. These returns belong to the American taxpayer. This isn't some ivory tower experiment or elite subsidy. It is an innovation engine and one of the most powerful drivers of U.S. economic strength. So what is Congress doing with one of the few federal programs that consistently creates value for everyday Americans? Preparing to cut National Science Foundation funding by $2 billion, a 23 percent reduction from 2025. The Trump administration has signaled that it wants to prioritize artificial intelligence, with efforts such as the recent AI Action Plan and the announcement of $100 million in NSF investment. These efforts can't begin to offset the damage of deep cuts to the broader ecosystem that makes future AI breakthroughs possible. Cutting the budget of the Directorate for Computer and Information Science and Engineering would be a self-inflicted blow to American competitiveness. Lawmakers say they're prioritizing programs with the greatest national impact, but this cut targets the very office funding the administration's top priorities: AI, quantum computing and cybersecurity. That's not prioritization. It's a fiduciary failure. AI is advancing fast, but it depends on breakthroughs throughout the computing stack. My own specialty, computer design, may seem distant from AI, but it's fundamental. Just look at NVIDIA's stock price. None of this appeared out of thin air. It came from researchers trained through NSF fellowships. Shrink the pipeline, and we lose the lead. Anticipating cuts, NSF has already halved its fellowships for 2025. We need more computer scientists, not fewer, and we need them trained here, not in countries eager to claim our place. China has more than tripled its research spending since 2010 and continues to raise it every year. China understands what is at stake: leadership in AI, semiconductors, cybersecurity and advanced computing. If we back off now, foreign firms will not hesitate to build on the breakthroughs that American taxpayers made possible. They will turn our investment in research into their dominance, and the jobs and industries that should grow in Atlanta, Boston and Dallas will take root in London, Bangalore and Shenzhen. As a scientist, I'm scared. As a taxpayer, I'm livid. We built a lead. Now Washington is ready to give it away. Since its founding, America has capitalized on innovation as the primary engine of wealth creation and nationwide prosperity. History is full of nations that failed to innovate and lost their edge. The U.S. has done the opposite. We invested in research, trained generations of scientists and engineers and built the most dynamic innovation ecosystem the world has ever seen. Every American taxpayer is a silent shareholder in that success. If we walk away now, we lose not just future breakthroughs but also what we have already earned. If Congress fails to preserve this funding, we hand our competitive edge and prosperity to someone else.
