<h3>Unfortunately, by definition, No  :-(</h3>
<p>From Wikipedia's <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Russell's teapot</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In an article titled &quot;Is There a God?&quot; commissioned, but never published, by Illustrated magazine in 1952, Russell wrote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>...f I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, <strong>nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes.</strong> But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense.</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p>So Russell's teapot is <em>by definition</em> too small to be seen by &quot;even our most powerful telescopes&quot;.</p>
<p>Russell was clever enough not to say &quot;even the most power telescope on Earth&quot; which would have exempted space telescopes.</p>
<h3>But my answer is so incredibly unsatisfying!</h3>
<p>So I hope someone puts a normal china teapot with a favorably dark glaze (high emissivity/low albedo in visible and thermal IR wavelengths) several millions of miles further from the Sun than Earth, and calculates its <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_equilibrium_temperature" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Planetary equilibrium temperature</a> to decide if somebody else's teapot would be detectable and if so, resolvable. :-)</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-20T21:16:00.510Z
As PM 2Ring points out in the above comments, to be resolvable, a standard teapot would have to be within a few hundred kilometers of the JWST.  An incredibly small percentage of elliptical orbits between Earth and Mars would have such a close pass.
Connor Garcia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-20T21:22:39.010Z
And I think you wouldn't use the NIRCam, but instead use the MIRC- Metaphorical InfraRed Camera.
Connor Garcia
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-21T00:15:51.710Z
@ConnorGarcia Yes indeed! But this being Stack Exchange I'd like to see (all of) that in the form of an answer :-)
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-21T01:02:34.513Z
@Connor Garcia what filter would you use with the MIRC...  Metaphysical?
BradV
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-21T06:39:17.773Z
Note that the mean distance from JWST to L2 is over 660,000 km. https://i.sstatic.net/2G67K.png Even on a good day (eg, 2023-Dec-28) a body at L2 would need a diameter of ~160 m to have an angular diameter of 0.07".
PM 2Ring
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-21T08:42:04.673Z
@PM2Ring I don't understand why everybody is leaving comments to me about resolving. 1) that's only half of the question (the other is detection) and 2) I don't care! Why doesn't someone leave an actual answer like I've suggested so that future readers and the OP will see it. The OP doesn't get notifications when you comment under my post.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-20T20:58:20.253Z
2022-07-20T21:08:01.660Z
2022-07-20T21:08:01.660Z
uhoh
<p>Was wondering if JWST has the capability to detect and image Russell's teapot. It seems to me that may retain enough IR energy.  ;-)</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-20T18:26:30.103Z
The resolution of NIRCam is 0.07", which is around 0.1 m at 295 km.
PM 2Ring
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-20T19:16:08.480Z
Couldn't the teapot believer just assert that the teapot is smaller than the resolution of JWST, or is further in redshift than JWST can observe?
Daddy Kropotkin
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-20T21:00:01.760Z
*This is an excellent question!* If they ever do rename the telescope, I think I will vote for BRSTT (Bertrand Russell Space Teapot Telescope)
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-07-21T04:38:22.333Z
Of course, you aren't going to resolve an actual teapot at that distance. At short wavelengths, you get 0.031"/pixel. See https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/instrumentation/instruments for details.
PM 2Ring
<james-webb-space-telescope>
Will the James Webb Space Telescope be able to detect/resolve Russell's teapot?
BradV
# Will the James Webb Space Telescope be able to detect/resolve Russell's teapot?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-07-20)

Was wondering if JWST has the capability to detect and image Russell's teapot. It seems to me that may retain enough IR energy. ;-)

**Tags:** james-webb-space-telescope

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The resolution of NIRCam is 0.07", which is around 0.1 m at 295 km.  
> **username_2**: Couldn't the teapot believer just assert that the teapot is smaller than the resolution of JWST, or is further in redshift than JWST can observe?  
> **username_3**: *This is an excellent question!* If they ever do rename the telescope, I think I will vote for BRSTT (Bertrand Russell Space Teapot Telescope)  
> **username_1**: Of course, you aren't going to resolve an actual teapot at that distance. At short wavelengths, you get 0.031"/pixel. See https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/instrumentation/instruments for details.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2022-07-20. Score: 2

### Unfortunately, by definition, No :-(

From Wikipedia's [Russell's teapot](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot):

> In an article titled "Is There a God?" commissioned, but never published, by Illustrated magazine in 1952, Russell wrote:
>
> > ...f I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, **nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes.** But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense.

So Russell's teapot is *by definition* too small to be seen by "even our most powerful telescopes".

Russell was clever enough not to say "even the most power telescope on Earth" which would have exempted space telescopes.

### But my answer is so incredibly unsatisfying!

So I hope someone puts a normal china teapot with a favorably dark glaze (high emissivity/low albedo in visible and thermal IR wavelengths) several millions of miles further from the Sun than Earth, and calculates its [Planetary equilibrium temperature](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_equilibrium_temperature) to decide if somebody else's teapot would be detectable and if so, resolvable. :-)

> **Comments:**
> **username_4**: As username_1 points out in the above comments, to be resolvable, a standard teapot would have to be within a few hundred kilometers of the JWST.  An incredibly small percentage of elliptical orbits between Earth and Mars would have such a close pass.  
> **username_4**: And I think you wouldn't use the NIRCam, but instead use the MIRC- Metaphorical InfraRed Camera.  
> **username_3**: @ConnorGarcia Yes indeed! But this being Stack Exchange I'd like to see (all of) that in the form of an answer :-)  
> **username_0**: @username_4 what filter would you use with the MIRC...  Metaphysical?  
> **username_1**: Note that the mean distance from JWST to L2 is over 660,000 km. https://i.sstatic.net/2G67K.png Even on a good day (eg, 2023-Dec-28) a body at L2 would need a diameter of ~160 m to have an angular diameter of 0.07".  
> **username_3**: @PM2Ring I don't understand why everybody is leaving comments to me about resolving. 1) that's only half of the question (the other is detection) and 2) I don't care! Why doesn't someone leave an actual answer like I've suggested so that future readers and the OP will see it. The OP doesn't get notifications when you comment under my post.  

---

