Comment on Real
Draconic_NEO@mander.xyz 2 days ago
Because one of them (Earth) is based on reality, and the other is a poorly done conceptual render because no human actually knows the shape of the landmasses on that planet on account of having never been there.
Psythik@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Have they considered zooming their telescope in enough until they can see for themselves firsthand?
Octagon9561@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
I know you’re probably joking but even the best telescopes can only directly image a planet that’s like 10 times the mass of Jupiter and even then it’s only like two pixels.
Psythik@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Makes me wonder what a telescope the size of a solar system could see.
Draconic_NEO@mander.xyz 2 days ago
Honestly I’m not even sure it’s possible at that distance. Planets reflect very little light compared to stars, and that already minuscule amount of light gets scattered across an insanely huge area due to the inverse square law. So that tiny amount of light gets spread over an insanely huge area (light years in size).
I feel like to get a clear picture your telescope would have to be light years across in size to get a clear image with fine details in it. The light is just too spread out to get a clear picture of it with anything you can build at a human scale.
Draconic_NEO@mander.xyz 2 days ago
The hard part is that the stars create so much glare and planets are so small and faint that it’s really REALLY hard to zoom in on them. Even with very powerful telescopes. It’s probably straight up impossible actually. Like you can see them and get an idea of what they’re made of (light spectrum analysis) but you’re not going to be able to make out fine details like what the landmasses look like.