Just.... WOW

yes just fascinating stuff, our (read my) brain just cant comprehend the vastness and infinity of it all..............

Now tell me after seeing this and the fact they have 'discovered' another 5500 galaxies, GALAXIES not planets :eek: that theres not other life out there, intelligent or not.


P.S I saw the space debris fireballs the other night, looked like a convoy of UFO's, spectacular doesnt describe it.
 
Imurg said:
It's impossible to really get your head around the numbers as far as Space is concerned.

Awesome stuff......
Click to expand...

Totally agree.

They are launching a new telescope (2018) to replace Hubble apparently it's instruments are more sensitive so will be able to see further, allegedy to the fist stars seen in the universe.

Now that will be something special when that day comes...... Looking 13.7 Billion years into the past :thup:
 
I guess as its so mind boggling it actually leaves me with no interest. I don't mean the post or your interest in it but for me its not exciting. I was however interested in the Mars landing and pics even though its just a desert.
 
What gets me is that some of the stars that we see don't exist anymore.
The light takes so long to reach us that they could have gone SuperNova millions of years ago...
 
Imurg said:
What gets me is that some of the stars that we see don't exist anymore.
The light takes so long to reach us that they could have gone SuperNova millions of years ago...
Click to expand...

exactly, proof we can see into the past, who says time travel isnt possible
nanu nanu
 
Sorry, but I don't understand the fascination. Nothing out there interests me. I would suspect, given the vast amounts of money spent of space research, world famine and poverty could have been wiped out
 
Gareth said:
Looking 13.7 Billion years into the past :thup:
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how that is possible, especially how you're supposed to be able to see the oldest stars/galaxies etc etc, I'm sure someone can explain but here's my take on it.....

The first galaxy was formed and the light from it heads off into the empty universe, some time later we are formed and we head off into the universe, the light from that first galaxy is already long gone.... so how are you supposed to see it or 'look back at it'? let alone say that it's from the begining of time?

Now I understand the concept that it's possible that the universe expanded faster than the speed of light (yet that is still to be explained) so we could basically catch up with that first light and somehow overtake it? hmmmmm...
 
JustOne said:
Now I understand the concept that it's possible that the universe expanded faster than the speed of light (yet that is still to be explained) so we could basically catch up with that first light and somehow overtake it? hmmmmm...
Click to expand...

According to Einstein, nothing can move faster than the speed of light. It's a universal constant and a major factor in the theory of relitivaty(sp?).

However, if the universe were to expand at the speed of light, you would not notice the passage of time due to time dilation.
 
JustOne said:
I'm not sure how that is possible, especially how you're supposed to be able to see the oldest stars/galaxies etc etc, I'm sure someone can explain but here's my take on it.....

The first galaxy was formed and the light from it heads off into the empty universe, some time later we are formed and we head off into the universe, the light from that first galaxy is already long gone.... so how are you supposed to see it or 'look back at it'? let alone say that it's from the begining of time?

Now I understand the concept that it's possible that the universe expanded faster than the speed of light (yet that is still to be explained) so we could basically catch up with that first light and somehow overtake it? hmmmmm...
Click to expand...

your assuming light stops, i understood it would still be there, and if anything travelled faster than light it would then start to go back in time.........

my brain is starting to hurt now
 
Gareth said:
However, if the universe were to expand at the speed of light, you would not notice the passage of time due to time dilation.
Click to expand...

Whatever that says means nothing to me, what is time dilation, without jargon? :p

I understand that if we are moving away from a center at the speed of light whilst another galaxy is heading away from the center in the opposite direction at the speed of light then we are effectively parting at a speed of twice the speed of light, so the light from that galaxy would never catch up with us, so we'd never see it :p

On that thought if we were travelling towards each other then the closing speed of the light from both parties would also measure twice the speed of light so what happens to the part in the middle before the two lightstreams meet (it's shrinking at twice the speed of light which is impossible)... or is it simly shrinking from each end at the speed of light.... to a bystander in theory you'd be able to see the middle part disappear at twice the speed of light.... or not see it, or see it twice :mad:, ...whatever the case may be :whistle: LOL

Haven't neutrinos (sp?) been proven to travel faster than light (and shown Einstein to be just a little bit erm, wrong)?
 
DarthVega said:
your assuming light stops, i understood it would still be there, and if anything travelled faster than light it would then start to go back in time.........
Click to expand...

I meant it would be long gone as it's still way ahead of us and travelling further and further out....never coming back to us basically (like ripples on a pond) so we'd never be able to see it if it had a 'head start'. If i shine a torch into space that light will never hit earth... it's gone, heading off into space, i couldn't somehow get ahead of it or possibly then look back in time as if it left 13.6 billion years ago :mad:
 
Last edited:
JustOne said:
I meant it would be long gone as it's still way ahead of us and travelling further and further out....never coming back to us basically (like ripples on a pond) so we'd never be able to see it if it had a 'head start'. If i shine a torch into space that light will never hit earth... it's gone, heading off into space, i couldn't somehow get ahead of it or possibly then look back in time as if it left 13.6 billion years ago :mad:
Click to expand...

ahhh I see, good point obe wonkynobby.:clap:

I just love time paradoxes
 
Does this help or hinder?

Looking at stars and galaxies and how many light years away they are is where “time” comes in.

Time is a weird thing when it comes to the speed of light because with the speed of light, the farther something is away from us, the more time it took those photons of light traveling through the universe to reach us for us to see. The farthest galaxies we can see today, we see them after they have traveled the universe for the last 13.2 billion years (13 billion, 200 million). As these photons arrive for us to see, they carry with them a picture of their place of origin. In essence, the further light has traveled to us, the further back in time we are seeing. When we look at these 13 billion light year distant galaxies, we are seeing the light that left these galaxies 13.2 billion years ago.

What we see is how these galaxies looked 13.2 billion ago, about 500 to 700 million years after the Big bang. To see where these galaxies are today, we’d have to wait about 45 billion years because today those galaxies are about that far away from us as for the last 13.2 billion years, these galaxies have been expanding with space away from us. telescopes. The only time machines around today are telescopes that let us see deep into the universe’s past.
 
JustOne said:
Whatever that says means nothing to me, what is time dilation, without jargon? :p
Click to expand...

Taken from someone who can word it much better then me.

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed slows down the rate of passage of on-board time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human traveling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on Earth. For sufficiently high speeds (I.E the speed of light) the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home.
 
Gareth said:
Taken from someone who can word it much better then me.

Time dilation would make it possible for passengers in a fast-moving vehicle to travel further into the future while aging very little, in that their great speed slows down the rate of passage of on-board time. That is, the ship's clock (and according to relativity, any human traveling with it) shows less elapsed time than the clocks of observers on Earth. For sufficiently high speeds (I.E the speed of light) the effect is dramatic. For example, one year of travel might correspond to ten years at home.
Click to expand...

Probably the one concept that I just could never grasp. If someone travels away from the planet at the speed of light and then turns round and comes back they should arrive 2 years later should they not? as they spent one year going and one year coming back.

When they leave the light they leave behind would be chasing them in tandem so the Earth would almost appear to stop but when they turn round and come back they would restart the clock and come back 'very fast', but they'd still have been gone for 2 yrs and travelled xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx miles, or more :mad:

I don't see how someone could be gone for a year and then come back again but be (for example) 1000yrs into the future, if that is so, and travelling at the speed of light does funny things to time, then how can we determine that light from the Sun takes 8 minutes to reach us? maybe it takes 20,000yrs or 1 millisecond? How can we say that light from the center of the universe takes 13.2 billion years and we are looking back in time when in fact it might be 20 million years into the future :confused:

Time is a measurement of the 'flow' and also used as a measurement for velocity so if we the speed and the distance we can calculate the time... in what way is it not 'constant'? If we are measuring the age of the universe in 'time' then it must be constant, no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Filling the Gaps
Replies
6
Views
6K
ntommo
N
Orikoru
New Swing Video
2 3
Replies
56
Views
8K
SocketRocket
SocketRocket
D
20 Years Out of Bounds - Taking Up Golf Again!
Replies
4
Views
1K
Deleted member 21258
D
Duckster
Royal Birkdale
Replies
6
Views
10K
Duckster
Duckster
F
Cleveland Golf Club
Replies
6
Views
6K
2blue
2blue
Top