We're in the slow zone. The last line of the article:

"If life has evolved in the outer reaches, though - it could well be billions of years in advance of our civilisation* as the stars there are around twice the age of the Sun."


* it's UK spelling, not a typo

Uncle Wiggly: We're in the slow zone.



/whoohoo! new Vinge novel out.
//...DAMMIT, he's building to at least a trilogy...
^{///no, not counting the Deepness In the Sky prequel}

abb3w: /whoohoo! new Vinge novel out.

I prefer his short stories like True Names.

Should I be happy that I learned we are more in the "inner" part of our spiral arm, or sad that my entire life I thought we were nearer the end of our spiral arm?

♪♫♪
Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving
And revolving at nine hundred miles an hour,
That's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it's reckoned,
A sun that is the source of all our power.
The sun and you and me and all the stars that we can see
Are moving at a million miles a day
In an outer spiral arm, at forty thousand miles an hour,
Of the galaxy we call the 'Milky Way'.

Uncle Wiggly: "If life has evolved in the outer reaches, though - it could well be billions of years in advance of our civilisation* as the stars there are around twice the age of the Sun."

But they're all first generation stars, which means no heavy elements, which means no planets, which means no life.

The inner stars are mostly second generation stars (like our sun), good for bearing lots of rocky worlds n stuff. If there is life out there, it's probably teeming with it closer to the galactic core.

abb3w

I've just ordered his new novel but it's going to be your fault if it sucks.

Do people really click that button on Amazon to tweet to the universe and blast to facebook a notice that they've just bought something?

GilRuiz1: Much of the Milky Way is only assumed to exist

Interesting.


Well, it's not like we can get Milky Way photos from a different angle.

This came to mind.

GilRuiz1: Much of the Milky Way is only assumed to exist

Interesting.

Plato did it. Article says "found", one could say postulated or hypothesized, but found, not so much.

Nem Wan: Dinobot: GilRuiz1: Much of the Milky Way is only assumed to exist

Interesting.


Well, it's not like we can get Milky Way photos from a different angle.

If we're really, really patient, beings in the Andromeda galaxy have probably recorded how the Milky Way looks from there, and they'll be here eventually.

By the time they get here, we'll be dead

/Kinda wish I was alive by the time Andromeda takes about 60% of the night sky on its way to crash into us.

Dinobot: /Kinda wish I was alive by the time Andromeda takes about 60% of the night sky on its way to crash into us.

We're right in the middle of the Milky Way and it's not exactly a brilliant band of light across the sky. We can only really see the core of Andromeda with the naked eye, and it's basically a fuzzy patch. The true extent of the galaxy in the sky is much larger than the full moon.

Even when it's right on top of the Milky Way, Andromeda will still be a diffuse cloud-like object on a dark night, albeit one with vague spiral arms and satellite galaxies.

ActionJoe: CSB Time,

I am one of the observers for the telescope. It's a really cool job if you like what you are doing and are ok with overnight shifts. It is also really cool that a telescope that is relatively small and 30 years old is still finding out new things about our galaxy. The article is also a bit off. It is not really a new arm, it is just confirmation of an arm that was predicted to be there.

/starting another observing season in a couple weeks
//yay

This is why I keep coming back to Fark. Groove on your bad self, man.

Le Grand Inquisitor: When do we find our find Mass Effect Relay?

About the time we find our Crazy Eddie point.

The All-Powerful Atheismo: Isn't he in the space-time continuum?

Along with a velvet paisley-covered Chesterfield sofa.

PonceAlyosha: It is fantasmazing.

The parts that Niven wrote, at any rate. The Pournelle stuff is mostly military-fellating authoritarian garbage.

Ishkur: Uncle Wiggly: "If life has evolved in the outer reaches, though - it could well be billions of years in advance of our civilisation* as the stars there are around twice the age of the Sun."

But they're all first generation stars, which means no heavy elements, which means no planets, which means no life.

The inner stars are mostly second generation stars (like our sun), good for bearing lots of rocky worlds n stuff. If there is life out there, it's probably teeming with it closer to the galactic core.

Very cool. Never knew that. Unless, of course, life developed in a different way ... but we're the only life we know of so ...

I realize this is fark, but i have a sincere question.

People in these comments and in the article comments mention the differing ages of parts of the galaxy. That the galaxy is older closer to the core and younger further out. Does this mean the galaxy is expanding?

Actually that doesn't sound right. Even if it were expanding the "age" would be uniform throughout. Does this mean new matter is being created somewhere? I don't understand how you can have entire star clusters considerably YOUNGER than others if all matter in the universe is the same age. Or is it?

There is a question in there somewhere if someone would like to take a crack at explaining it.

MuonNeutrino: First generation stars, with no metals at all, aren't around anymore. Those were all huge, and died out within a few hundred million years. The halo stars, second generation stars, are still old and metal-*poor* compared to the sun, but not completely metal free. It'd be possible, albeit unlikely, to get terrestrial planets around a more-metal-rich-than-usual halo star. The sun is much later than a second generation star.

Not necessarily. An overwhelming number of stars in the Milky Way (something like 80%) are dwarfs, and they take forever to dissipate. That indicates we are in an old galaxy that consumed much of its ravenous nuclear energy eons ago, and that it is slowing down and cooling off.

Nem Wan: Dinobot: GilRuiz1: Much of the Milky Way is only assumed to exist

Interesting.


Well, it's not like we can get Milky Way photos from a different angle.

If we're really, really patient, beings in the Andromeda galaxy have probably recorded how the Milky Way looks from there, and they'll be here eventually.

I wonder how much they'll charge for "souvenier photos of your galaxy".