Hubble: 0.04 arcsec at 500 nm
JWST: 0.068 arcsec at 2 μm
(If I remember correctly JWST took this image in less than 12 hours, Hubble stared at it for much longer. Correct me if I'm wrong).
We don’t call the first telescope the Edwin Hubble Space Telescope
Think of Google, Facebook, Netflix, Workday, Coinbase: two syllables, each name an iamb (which is especially effective in English). Sure, there are numerous counterexamples (microsoft, Amazon), but generally the corners get knocked off and even turn into acronyms in public usage (GM, GE).
Single syllables are too short for infrequently used words (this appears to be true for any language) -- you don't want to waste a lot of time saying "am" since you say it a lot; when you say "biceps" you want enough variability that your brain has time to parse it.
https://www.nasa.gov/image-feature/goddard/2022/nasa-s-webb-...
Exoplanets are too far away and too small to image directly.
If you mean resolving details of the exoplanet, then yes that is currently true. But we have imaged exoplanets directly, meaning taken an image of a star where one can also see the planet directly in the image. [0] has a list of directly imaged exoplanets.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_directly_imaged_exopla...
Else i could say, just the same.
E.g. think about far away galaxies that have been redshifted so much (due to the expanding universe) that they fell below the lower wavelength threshold of Hubble.
I also want to normalize calling JWST just "James" :)
I like "James Webb Science Telescope" for JWST.
