Subscribe to New Scientist magazine
ARTICLE

Telescope could focus light without a mirror or lens

  • 18:08 01 May 2008
  • NewScientist.com news service
  • David Shiga
Printable versionEmail to a friendRSS FeedSyndicate
 
An 8-centimetre prototype carved in stainless steel foil has demonstrated the Fresnel imager concept in laboratory tests (Image: L Koechlin et al/OMP)
An 8-centimetre prototype carved in stainless steel foil has demonstrated the Fresnel imager concept in laboratory tests (Image: L Koechlin et al/OMP)
Tools
digg thisAdd My YahooAdd Google Reader reddit submitNewsvineciteulike submit
Light passing through a pattern of holes in a metal foil is focused to form an image (Illustration: E Hinglais et al/CNES/OMP)
Light passing through a pattern of holes in a metal foil is focused to form an image (Illustration: E Hinglais et al/CNES/OMP)
The Fresnel imager would consist of two spacecraft, one holding the foil sheet, and the other holding the camera and other instruments at the focus a few kilometres away (Illustration: L Koechlin et al/OMP)
The Fresnel imager would consist of two spacecraft, one holding the foil sheet, and the other holding the camera and other instruments at the focus a few kilometres away (Illustration: L Koechlin et al/OMP)
 

A proposed space telescope would focus light primarily with a patterned sheet of metal rather than a large mirror or lens. The telescope would have amazingly sharp vision and could spot Earth-size planets around other stars, its backers say.

Telescopes used for astronomy normally focus light using a curved mirror. But there are limits to how large a mirror can be sent into space. That's because of the tremendous cost of lofting heavy objects into orbit, as well as the limited cargo capacity of launch rockets.

But a team of scientists is experimenting with a completely different approach for focusing light. It does not require a large primary mirror or lens, though it does use a smaller secondary mirror and lens.

The technique takes advantage of the wave nature of light, which causes light to bend around an object's edge. The same phenomenon, called diffraction, is the reason you can hear sounds coming from around the corner of a building.

This means that light can be focused into an image simply by passing it through a certain pattern of holes carved in an opaque sheet. Such patterned sheets have long been used for focusing laser beams, but have so far not been used for astronomy. They are called Fresnel zone plates, after the French physicist Augustin-Jean Fresnel, who studied diffraction in the 1800s.

But a team led by Laurent Koechlin of the Observatoire Midi Pyrénées in Toulouse, France, says a powerful "Fresnel imager" could be made by launching a piece of metal foil, cut with the Fresnel pattern and attached to a solid frame, into space. A spacecraft equipped with a camera and other scientific instruments would sit at the focal point some distance away and record the observations.

Sharp vision

Because it relies on a foil sheet rather than a massive mirror, it could be much more lightweight, and therefore less expensive to launch, than a traditional telescope.

A Fresnel imager with a sheet of a given size has vision just as sharp as a traditional telescope with a mirror of the same size, though it collects just 10% or so of the light. It can also observe in the ultraviolet and infrared, in addition to visible light.

The imager can take very detailed images with high contrast, which is great for "being able to see a very faint object in the close vicinity of a bright one," Koechlin told New Scientist. "We could obtain images of an exoplanet system," he says. Such images have so far been very difficult to make because planets are so faint they get lost in their host stars' glare.

Signs of life

A 30-metre Fresnel imager would be powerful enough to see Earth-sized planets within 30 light years of Earth, and measure the planets' light spectrum to look for signs of life, such as atmospheric oxygen. The Fresnel imager could also measure the properties of very young galaxies in the distant universe and take detailed images of objects in our own solar system.

Although it would be lighter than an ordinary telescope, a 30-metre Fresnel imager would still be daunting to launch and deploy. Such a large piece of foil would have to be folded up for launch and then unfurled in space – a potentially tricky manoeuvre.

Koechlin's team proposed a smaller mission to the European Space Agency, which would have used a 3.6-metre piece of foil. Their proposal was in competition with dozens of other proposed space missions seeking funding as part of ESA's Cosmic Vision 2015-2025 programme, and was not selected as one of the 10 finalists.

Despite its strengths, there are some serious challenges involved in mounting even a smaller Fresnel imager mission.

Precise alignment

For one thing, the light comes to a focus far away from the foil sheet – with distances measured in kilometres, which means the camera and other instruments have to be mounted on a separate spacecraft. The instrument spacecraft would have to stay precisely aligned with the foil sheet, to within a millimetre or so in the plane of the image.

That could be especially tricky considering how much the two spacecraft would have to move around. With every new target, the Fresnel plate would have to swivel around, and the instrument spacecraft would have to move to the new focal point. But Koechlin says the mission should contain enough fuel to observe up to 10,000 different objects.

Another problem is that the Fresnel zone plate focuses light differently depending on its wavelength, which if uncorrected would lead to distorted images. But Koechlin says a specially shaped lens – called a Fresnel lens – placed on the second spacecraft could intercept the light just before it reaches the instruments to correct for this.

Koechlin's team envisions putting the two spacecraft at one of the Earth-Sun Lagrange points, where the gravity from both bodies balances out. There, it is relatively easy to keep the spacecraft precisely aligned with one another, but the formation flying would still be a major challenge.

Star shade

Marc Kuchner of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, US, is studying another approach for detecting Earth-sized planets, which involves a more traditional space-based telescope flying in formation with a star shade that would cut the glare from the parent star to make planets easier to see.

He says the Fresnel imager has an advantage in that the foil sheet can be made very large, giving it very sharp vision. But when practical considerations are factored in, he says it is not clear how it stacks up against other ideas. "We need to study the practicalities of deploying and flying these large optics," he told New Scientist.

One potential difficulty for the Fresnel imager is that even small amounts of sunlight could bounce off the foil sheet and into the camera or other instruments and interfere with observations, he says. Koechlin's team agrees that this is a potential problem and says shades would be needed to block light from reflecting off the foil sheet this way.

Proof of concept

Ben Oppenheimer, a planet hunter at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, US, thinks more research needs to be done before seriously considering using the device in space. "[It's] certainly an interesting thing to pursue, but by no means is this near the level of maturity needed to propose major space missions based on it," he told New Scientist.

Koechlin is leading a series of experiments designed to prove the feasibility of a Fresnel imager. His team has taken images of objects around the laboratory using a credit-card sized sheet of stainless steel carved with the Fresnel pattern.

Next, the team plans to construct a small ground-based Fresnel imager telescope by attaching a 20-centimetre patterned sheet to a telescope mount. When it is ready about a year from now, they plan to take images of astronomical objects as a proof of concept.

The research was presented this week at a conference on formation flying in Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

 
Comment subject
Comment
No HTML except lower case italic tags or lower case bold tags, please:
<i> or <b>
Your name
Your email
 

We need your email in case we need to contact you about the comment. We will not use it for any other purpose.

 
 
There are 44 comments on 4 pages
1  | 
2  | 
3  | 
4
 | Next
 | Most Recent
 | See all

Unfurling?

By The Anonymous Man

Thu May 01 18:59:26 BST 2008

Why not use a memory alloy? You furl, apply a charge and watch it unfurl itself.

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Andrew Beery

Thu May 01 20:02:46 BST 2008

Just a thought... Why not mount on dark side of moon or in a shaded crater? Also an array might allow for smaller sheets while still providing a large aggregate imager

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Duane Lambert

Fri May 02 09:35:22 BST 2008

According to Pink Floyd, there is no dark side of the Moon ;~]

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Terri Main

Fri May 02 17:36:47 BST 2008

This is true. There is no permanently dark side of the moon. There is a "far side" of the moon which geocentric humans assume is dark because we can't see it, but as the moon moves around the earth all of the moon gets some sunlight, but not earth light. But there might be deep shaded craters.

This story does bring up the importance of a significant presence on the moon. Instead of trying to loft mirrors or a fresnel imager fully constructed from earth. Why not bring up raw materials a little at a time and do the final manufacture on the moon?

Admittedly, such a thing could not be done with this project because we don't have that type of permanent habitat on the moon, nor could we have it even within 20 years, but it points to the advantages of thinking about long term settlement of the moon.

Terri

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Mike Devine

Fri May 02 21:14:00 BST 2008

Also, the lens and the imager would need to be kilometers apart. Building a shade for the smaller imager wouldn't be too hard. If you place the lens in the shade of a crater on the moon, the imager would have to be kilometers underground, and then you would have to rotate the moon to aim at different targets.

You would want to larger lens to be shaded, and the smaller imager to be easily moveable.

Perhaps an ultra-black coating on the foil's backside might prevent unwanted reflections? ...

1 more reply »

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Tim Allman

Fri May 02 11:56:52 BST 2008

Perhaps you mean the "far" side of the moon although that would make no sense. Locations on the moon have night and day just like we do except the lunar day is about a month long.

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Alan Sinton

Fri May 02 14:48:01 BST 2008

Still! A Moon based telescope is a pretty darn cool idea. I once visited Mauna Kea with my Dad - all I'm saying is telescopes and craters, man!

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Msjaye

Fri May 02 17:23:12 BST 2008

Erm, and signals between the telescope and the control crew on Earth would get sent how exactly? I'm not entirely sure the Moon is permeable to radio waves...

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Don Jennings

Fri May 02 18:39:37 BST 2008

If there was a base on the far side, a cable could be strung around to the earth side and a comm link established that way using laser or radio. Alternatately, a small fleet of satellites could make a link to earth or anywhere else in the solar system. But really sensitive telescopes on the moon, dark crater or not still has to deal with gigenshien ( if I spelled that right) the light from dust particles in the solar system. To be free of that, the most sensitive scopes would need to be somewhere near Neptune or Pluto. Out that far that glare would be gone and truly sensitive scopes could go to work. Of course you either have a manned mission or the scopes better be REALLY reliable because there would be no rescue mission possible ala Hubble. These new 'pokey' lenses could make such a probe possible, much lighter so it could launch further into space. Would the expert who builds these things be called a, er, Pokeyman?:)

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Barry Smith

Fri May 02 18:53:10 BST 2008

For hobbists and experimenters, does this lend itself to using the toner-transfer method of etching a circuit board, soldering the board to a frame, and then desolving the back of the circuit board (acetone?), to leave just the frame-mounted, etched copper? Are the dimensions of the pattern something a laser printer, with its 600 DPI resilution, can handle?

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Popoyd

Fri May 02 19:06:37 BST 2008

AND, where can you get a copy of the right pattern?

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Popoyd

Fri May 02 19:05:05 BST 2008

WHY the far side? What's wrong with the near side, where it can transmit directly?

And how would you change ogjectives, being ground based, if the receiving side has to mode maybe kilometers to adjust the telescope?

REPORT | REPLY

Moon Based Fresnel Imager Array?

By Popoyd

Fri May 02 19:07:53 BST 2008

*geez* I meant objectives.

Hard to proof-read in the tiny boxes...

REPORT | REPLY

No Mirror Or Lens?

By David V

Thu May 01 20:34:57 BST 2008

Very misleading. It's a lens pattern cut into a mirror. So really it is both a lens and a mirror, and the title is blatantly lying.

Focal point issues? Why not just use an actual lens in addition to this mirror? Or a secondary mirror? You can easily move the secondary lens/mirror to focus for different distances.

REPORT | REPLY

No Mirror Or Lens?

By James

Thu May 01 21:27:42 BST 2008

Its a piece of foil, not a mirror, a mirror is completely different. It is not a lens, because lenses are almost always made of glass. Ever tried a pinhole camera, its a similar mechanism, no mirror, no lense.

REPORT | REPLY

No Mirror Or Lens?

By Rob Chansky

Thu May 01 23:31:59 BST 2008

He's RIGHT! THIS IS A VAST CONSPIRACY TO MISLEAD PEOPLE INTO um MISTAKING A LENS PATTERN FOR A MIRROR! THE ARROGANCE, THE HYPOCRACY!

REPORT | REPLY

No Mirror Or Lens?

By Don Jennings

Fri May 02 18:44:37 BST 2008

You didn't read the part of the piece where it said upfront, it uses 'opaque' materials? Where did you get mirror out of that? Last time I checked, opaque was kinda the opposite of a mirror, maybe I'm wrong but.......

REPORT | REPLY

No Mirror Or Lens?

By Ali Raheem

Mon May 05 04:21:39 BST 2008

'opaque' means not see through so plastic, metal and wood are all opaque. So Mirrors ARE opaque.

REPORT | REPLY

No Mirror Or Lens?

By Popoyd

Fri May 02 19:12:22 BST 2008

"Focal point issues? Why not just use an actual lens in addition to this mirror? Or a secondary mirror? You can easily move the secondary lens/mirror to focus for different distances. "

Such a lens would need to be almost as big as the Fresnel one, negating its lightness advantage. OR, you would have to place it so far away it may not even be worth it; you already have a correction lens at the end...

REPORT | REPLY

There are 44 comments on 4 pages
1  | 
2  | 
3  | 
4
 | Next
 | Most Recent
 | See all

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Printable versionEmail to a friendRSS FeedSyndicate
Cover of latest issue of New Scientist magazine
  • For exclusive news and expert analysis every week subscribe to New Scientist Print Edition
  • For what's in New Scientist magazine this week see contents
  • Search all stories
  • Contact us about this story
  • Sign up for our free newsletter
 
SUBSCRIBER LOGIN
username:
password:
 help
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Subscribe to New Scientist magazine