>>13361982>no need to get so defensive over your 9 billion dollar failureOh yes, I'm the project scientist and I waste my days on 4chan. JWST has been a titanic failure, but throwing it away at this point because there are new detectors is beyond retarded. You won't build a new telescope in 5 years with comparable sensitivity. It's like throwing away your phone the day a newer one is announced, it's irrational. JWST is not obsolete because nothing has surpassed it's capabilities. Just because you can imagine a better telescope doesn't mean it's actually obsolete. By this logic Hubble has been obsolete for 15 years, and yet it's still producing good science.
>also that graph you posted clearly shows the newer ones are better in every way with extra features tooThe parameters that really matter are not listed there. Read noise, dark current, persistence, QE. Those are the parameters which determine the sensitivity. In those ways the detectors are no better.
