Starship Asterisk*

This image for some unknown reason set me to wondering about the relationship between time and distance as viewed from earth. If I understand correctly :?: If the universe were large enough and we could see far enough :?: we would see the original event at that point :?: Something like that. There ...

I don't know of any recorded incident of a meteor hitting the moon. but how would you record it? its not like the meteor will light up like it does in the earth's atmosphere. the moon is probably pelted with dust all the time since it doesn't have an atmosphere like the earth's. we can easily see m...

FieryIce wrote:You can side step the issue, go ahead but the facts remains.

Please quote who and what you are responding to. What issue exactly is being sidestepped?

They can take a picture of a planetary pole without the blacked out area, so there is no excuse for the data block out. Only if the camera can actually image the pole at some point in its orbit. As I noted before, the satellite is in a 97.8° inclination orbit. That means it never gets closer than a...

June 11, 2007 image of NLC's from the AIM satellite posted at Earth Observatory latest images. It is impossible to take a straight down picture and have the centre blacked out. The image wasn't taken straight down over the pole. The AIM spacecraft is in a 97.8° inclination orbit, so it never passes...

At the fastest rate that we can currently muster, it would take over 400,000,000 (4 hunderd, million) years just to travel 4ly to our next nearest stellar neighbor. Where did you come up with that? You could jog to the nearest star in that time! Voyager 1 is currently traveling away from the Sun at...

The dynamic range of a camera just isn't wide enough to capture both the very dim stars and the sunlit subjects at the same time. One additional comment: it is often believed that the stars appear exceptionally bright or numerous from space, but in fact, the attenuation of the atmosphere is slight-...

The argument the the universe is infinite "because" it has not been proved to be finite is far to passive of an argument for me. I'm not arguing that, and I don't see that anybody else is, either. The point is simply that nobody can say one way or the other whether the Universe is finite ...

This discussion has been going in circles for quite some time now. The bottom line is simple. From a scientific standpoint, it is currently unknown if the Universe is infinite. Nothing requires it and nothing precludes it. It isn't even known if the extent of the Universe can be determined. There ar...

Phil G wrote:My non-scientifically-trained mind is having trouble with this.
I presume that Planck's Lengths are mathematical units. Correct?

No, a Planck length is a unit of absolute distance, 1.6 e -35 meters. It's not a simple concept, but you can read about it in this Wikipedia article.

OK, Chris, I bite. I have to admit I appreciate your observations and explanations, sometimes I can even see where they're going before you get there. Most of the time they confirm what my limited expertise(?) has led me to believe. Now, I think I would like to see your explanation of how any point...

If you wish to try the Moon/ Star thing, it could be accomplished with some assistance. Go to a large open area. Either import large quantities of white sand (if on open ground) or if on black top, (like a parking lot) paint the entire surface white. Shine many large spot lights on the surface from...

If you wish to try the Moon/ Star thing, it could be accomplished with some assistance. Go to a large open area. Either import large quantities of white sand (if on open ground) or if on black top, (like a parking lot) paint the entire surface white. Shine many large spot lights on the surface from...

Yes, it would have to be the center of the observable universe since our observations are made from here. That it's in the center of the observable Universe is self evident. It's likely in the center of the entire Universe, as well, since- in three dimensions- any point in the Universe can be consi...

bystander wrote:I suppose next you'll tell me that earth isn't the center of the universe.

Of course, in a very real sense, the Earth likely is in the center of the Universe. It's just not unique in that respect.

BMAONE23 wrote:Understanding that the Northern Lights are caused by Solar activity rather than Gods.

Well, I think we had already figured that out without space exploration!

ETC.
ETC.
ETC.

And then some.

Harry: the collision of 2, 3 or many galaxies create progressively larger bangs/quasars. Guess what occurs when most of the known galaxies in the local universe are collected together into the increasing gravity of a single black hole. Except that isn't going to happen. Except for very local areas ...

We see apparent size of stars in the beautiful Hubble photos. Are these because bright objects burn bigger areas on the image? Can the photos actually record a size of such distant things? The HST cannot resolve stars, possibly outside a handful of large, nearby ones. Its aperture (as with all tele...

That I completely disagree with. You like the word transform. I think the correct word is ALTER. I use the word "transform" because it accurately describes the typical process used in scientific image processing. No new data is created. You can take the transformed image and reverse what ...

That is exactly why quantum mechanics states there are a finite number of units between 1 and 3, in both time and space. The imagination can perceive an infinite amount of units, the science of quantum cannot. I can't speak to the limitations of your imagination, but I assure you that quantum mecha...

I'm fully aware of the definition of infinity, infinity is simply no limit. That isn't any definition of infinity I've ever encountered. What happens if any of these values are assigned infinity? Values can't be "assigned infinity"; infinity itself isn't a value. If the "Whole" ...

Hello I'm wondering if all the stars we see with the naked eye are within our Milky Way Galaxy. Just to clarify Case's answer, you are correct that all the individual stars you can see with the naked eye are in our own galaxy, and in fact, are in our local region of the Galaxy. Any more distant lig...

Then I would like you to explain to me the mechanics on how you can increase the limit on a limitless value - I can't see it. I don't know what to say, except that you need to review a first year calculus text. You don't seem to understand either limits, nor the mathematical meaning of infinity. Th...

Dr. Skeptic wrote:The universe cannot be infinite, (implying static) and expanding at the same time.

Infinite does not in any way imply static.

You can conceive infinity but it can't be measured, it can't be divided, it can't be added to, it can't be put on paper, it cannot be placed in a ratio, it cannot manipulated by integers in any way - its simply the intellectual concept "If there is no limit". Quantum mechanics has set lim...