If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Hubble spots a record-breaking galaxy a soul-crushing 13.3 billion light years away   (slate.com) divider line 74
    More: Cool, light-years, galaxies, Hubble, Milky Way Galaxy, Hubble Space Telescope, spectrographs, gravitational lensing, Galaxy groups and clusters  
•       •       •

4539 clicks; posted to Geek » on 16 Nov 2012 at 1:06 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



74 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-11-16 12:50:22 PM
The light we see from it started on its way when the universe itself was only 420 million years old.


Awww, they're so cute at that age.
 
2012-11-16 01:07:38 PM
I want to go to there.
 
2012-11-16 01:09:35 PM
The light that we're seeing from it records events that happened a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.
 
2012-11-16 01:11:48 PM
Nothing really goes happens out there. God is busy helping some guy score a touchdown here on Earth.
 
2012-11-16 01:17:28 PM
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'.

Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars.
It's a hundred thousand light years side to side.
It bulges in the middle, sixteen thousand light years thick,
But out by us, it's just three thousand light years wide.
We're thirty thousand light years from galactic central point.
We go 'round every two hundred million years,
And our galaxy is only one of millions of billions
In this amazing and expanding universe.

The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding
In all of the directions it can whizz
As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know,
Twelve million miles a minute, and that's the fastest speed there is.
So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure,
How amazingly unlikely is your birth,
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space,
'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth.
 
2012-11-16 01:18:18 PM
Gah. A science article from Slate? Gimme a break. FoxNews has better science reporting.

Oh wait, it's Phil Plait. I take that back.
 
2012-11-16 01:18:55 PM

Decillion: Nothing really goes happens out there. God is busy helping some guy score a touchdown here on Earth.


...unless he fumbles. Then it's the player's fault.

Is it news that Hubble found a light source from a galaxy within the currently theorized limits of the universe's expansion?
 
2012-11-16 01:21:04 PM

Mutt Farkinov: Decillion: Nothing really goes happens out there. God is busy helping some guy score a touchdown here on Earth.

...unless he fumbles. Then it's the player's fault.

Is it news that Hubble found a light source from a galaxy within the currently theorized limits of the universe's expansion?


Unless that player is Ernest Byner, then it's God again.
 
2012-11-16 01:22:08 PM
www.rockyhorrorcostumelist.info
So, they could tell from the Magenta shift?

quizilla.teennick.com
Great Scott!

/Subby dropped the ball on all the Rocky Horror references
 
2012-11-16 01:25:51 PM
Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.
 
2012-11-16 01:26:46 PM
probably just some dead pixels on their sensor. =PP
 
2012-11-16 01:32:55 PM
Do they have Jesus?
 
2012-11-16 01:38:01 PM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: 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'.

Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars.
It's a hundred thousand light years side to side.
It bulges in the middle, sixteen thousand light years thick,
But out by us, it's just three thousand light years wide.
We're thirty thousand light years from galactic central point.
We go 'round every two hundred million years,
And our galaxy is only one of millions of billions
In this amazing and expanding universe.

The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding
In all of the directions it can whizz
As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know,
Twelve million miles a minute, and that's the fastest speed there is.
So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure,
How amazingly unlikely is your birth,
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space,
'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth.


It's a great big Universe/and we're all really puny
Just tiny little specks/about the size of Mickey Rooney
 
2012-11-16 01:40:47 PM
What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?
 
2012-11-16 01:44:51 PM

Uzzah: I want to go to there.


It was there, 13.3 billion years ago. Don't have any idea what's there now.
 
2012-11-16 01:45:05 PM

moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?


we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that
 
2012-11-16 01:55:24 PM
And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time, lost in space
And meaning.
 
2012-11-16 02:08:11 PM

tanman1975: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?

we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that


We certainly won't. Humanity itself may at some point.
 
2012-11-16 02:12:21 PM

moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?


Total Perspective Vortex.

// and crawling...
// on the planet's face...
// some insects...
// called the human race...
// lost in time...
// and lost in space...
// and meaning...
// meaning.
 
2012-11-16 02:12:31 PM

StopLurkListen: Gah. A science article from Slate? Gimme a break. FoxNews has better science reporting.

Oh wait, it's Phil Plait. I take that back.


Darn it! I got tricked into clicking one of his links. Man, that guy is annoying and sucks the brain tickling wonder right out of astronomy. Hasn't gotten any better, it seems.

almandot: probably just some dead hot pixels on their sensor. =PP


FTFY.

Right down near the noise floor, just a few pixels wide and all after gravitational lensing to enhance it. Just imagine what might be found with better tech? I'm rooting for the James Webb Space Telescope and keeping my fingers crossed that it doesn't end up a smoldering ruin at the bottom of a failed rocket launch or budget cut.
 
2012-11-16 02:12:56 PM

Ed Grubermann: And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time, lost in space
And meaning.


Fark you with a bagel.

// I have no excuse for not having seen that
 
2012-11-16 02:33:05 PM

Dr Dreidel: Ed Grubermann: And crawling on the planet's face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time, lost in space
And meaning.

Fark you with a bagel.

// I have no excuse for not having seen that


Peter Griffin: Yes. You watch the ticker. I'm gonna microwave a bagel and have sex with it.
Quagmire: Butter's in the fridge!
 
2012-11-16 02:39:16 PM
When I think of the universe, I like to think of it contained in a box on the shelf of a really really really huge toy store. Sitting next to the 10 other boxes of universes just waiting for a child to pick it out and take it home.
 
2012-11-16 02:59:59 PM

tanman1975: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?

we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that


And that's defeating/depressing to you to the point that it crushes your soul?
 
2012-11-16 03:10:05 PM

simplicimus: Uzzah: I want to go to there.

It was there, 13.3 billion years ago. Don't have any idea what's there now.



A Starbucks and a Kinkos. They were gonna put in a Jamba Juice, but the deal fell through.
 
2012-11-16 03:21:10 PM

Sybarite: The light we see from it started on its way when the universe itself was only 420 million years old.


Awww, they're so cute at that age.


420. time to get high!!
 
2012-11-16 03:29:17 PM

moos: tanman1975: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?

we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that

And that's defeating/depressing to you to the point that it crushes your soul?


The insignificance of Earth and humanity in the terms of a universe 13.3 billion light years big can be pretty depressing, I think.

Soul crushing, eh that's kinda dramatic. I like to try to be blissfully unaware of my insignificance, enjoy whatever time I have and not worry too much about the day to day.
 
2012-11-16 03:30:24 PM

Sybarite: The light we see from it started on its way when the universe itself was only 420 million years old.


Awww, they're so cute at that age.


This is how I know I'm not cut out to be an astrophysicist. How the heck can something be 13.3 billion light years away in 430 million years?
 
2012-11-16 03:34:48 PM

simplicimus: Sybarite: The light we see from it started on its way when the universe itself was only 420 million years old.


Awww, they're so cute at that age.

This is how I know I'm not cut out to be an astrophysicist. How the heck can something be 13.3 billion light years away in 430 million years?



It was busy being born when the universe was just 430 million years old. That was 13.73 billion years ago.
 
2012-11-16 03:36:02 PM

tanman1975: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?

we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that


I may never go to Japan but you don't see me getting all Emo about it.
 
2012-11-16 03:44:28 PM
I think I messed the math up a bit...the universe is 13.73 billion years old...this planet was born in the 430 millionth year....making it 13.3 billion years old.

right?
 
2012-11-16 03:55:19 PM

busy chillin': I think I messed the math up a bit...the universe is 13.73 billion years old...this planet was born in the 430 millionth year....making it 13.3 billion years old.

right?


Right. I checked the math. But the sucker had to be moving at the speed of light to get that far.
/still not an astrophysicist
 
2012-11-16 04:11:16 PM

Diogenes Teufelsdrockh: StopLurkListen: Gah. A science article from Slate? Gimme a break. FoxNews has better science reporting.

Oh wait, it's Phil Plait. I take that back.

Darn it! I got tricked into clicking one of his links. Man, that guy is annoying and sucks the brain tickling wonder right out of astronomy. Hasn't gotten any better, it seems.

almandot: probably just some dead hot pixels on their sensor. =PP

FTFY.

Right down near the noise floor, just a few pixels wide and all after gravitational lensing to enhance it. Just imagine what might be found with better tech? I'm rooting for the James Webb Space Telescope and keeping my fingers crossed that it doesn't end up a smoldering ruin at the bottom of a failed rocket launch or budget cut.


Wow, so much fun with this comment!

First, it was observed using Hubble and Spitzer, so it's not a hot pixel. Second, they use techniques to minimize that sort of thing - look up "dithering". Third, you don't know what the signal-to-noise is since the paper hasn't been published yet. But it sounds like you can win a million bucks from Randi.

Fourth, assume I just make some "your mom" just here about your personal comment.
 
2012-11-16 04:13:54 PM

ArcadianRefugee: tanman1975: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?

we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that

I may never go to Japan but you don't see me getting all Emo about it.


Japan is ~3500 miles away from California, about a 10-hour flight. Can you fathom making that trip 22,338,299,278,000,000,000 times?

// 22 quintillion, assuming my math is right
 
2012-11-16 04:23:57 PM
I'm in over my head a bit now...but light years have nothing to do with time, right? It is a unit of distance, right? so we don't know how old this galaxy is...the light could have been there for a million years. a billion years, and we just now found it, right? We just know how far away it is, right? Not the exact age?

I probably shouldn't have posted, but yet, here we are.
 
2012-11-16 04:47:26 PM

busy chillin': I'm in over my head a bit now...but light years have nothing to do with time, right? It is a unit of distance, right? so we don't know how old this galaxy is...the light could have been there for a million years. a billion years, and we just now found it, right? We just know how far away it is, right? Not the exact age?

I probably shouldn't have posted, but yet, here we are.


If something is X Billion light years away that means (Barring local spatial anomalies) that that it's been traveling for X billion years and is at this point observable. This establishes an upper limit for the age of the source of the light via Y-X where Y is the calculated age of the universe. As we cannot observe this phenomena before the point we detected it due to the linearity of time we can not determine the lower limit, we can only check it against existing models. If we detect objects +15 billion light years away we will be forced to reexamine this model but currently there's no need.
 
Bf+
2012-11-16 05:04:49 PM
noiselesschatter.com
Approves
 
2012-11-16 05:09:02 PM

sp86: busy chillin': I'm in over my head a bit now...but light years have nothing to do with time, right? It is a unit of distance, right? so we don't know how old this galaxy is...the light could have been there for a million years. a billion years, and we just now found it, right? We just know how far away it is, right? Not the exact age?

I probably shouldn't have posted, but yet, here we are.

If something is X Billion light years away that means (Barring local spatial anomalies) that that it's been traveling for X billion years and is at this point observable. This establishes an upper limit for the age of the source of the light via Y-X where Y is the calculated age of the universe. As we cannot observe this phenomena before the point we detected it due to the linearity of time we can not determine the lower limit, we can only check it against existing models. If we detect objects +15 billion light years away we will be forced to reexamine this model but currently there's no need.


Okay, thanks...so my first impression was correct. But then of course this galaxy might no longer exist, but we are still seeing the light, right? But I guess that is neither here nor there.


I love thinking about the edge of the universe...it makes no sense. how can it end? and even if it stops having galaxies and stars there is still dark matter with sub atomic particles. forever. and ever.

it can't end. even if there is nothing there, there is still quarks at the subatomic level. Nothingness is impossible. and if it does end, what is beyond that edge?

/probably should have quit while I was tied
 
2012-11-16 05:11:00 PM

moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?



I read a book a year or so ago about Edward Hubble and the events that led up to his discoveries. Someone from the time period was quoted in there as saying, and I am grossly paraphrasing here:

"As you imagine yourself moving out the distances being discussed in the scientific community, the scope involved becomes amazing, then incredulous, then disturbing, then ghastly, and finally terrifying."
 
2012-11-16 05:15:06 PM
...when the universe itself was only 420 million years old.

Old enough to have formulated a galaxy? Might be time to recalc that universal age.
 
2012-11-16 05:17:57 PM

busy chillin': it can't end. even if there is nothing there, there is still quarks at the subatomic level. Nothingness is impossible. and if it does end, what is beyond that edge?


The universe is not thought to have an edge. Either it's infinite, or else it curves back on itself (so if you could go far and fast enough, you'd eventually come back around to your starting place).
 
2012-11-16 05:21:13 PM

ArcadianRefugee: I may never go to Japan but you don't see me getting all Edo about it.


Hee hee.
 
2012-11-16 05:31:21 PM

Ambitwistor: busy chillin': it can't end. even if there is nothing there, there is still quarks at the subatomic level. Nothingness is impossible. and if it does end, what is beyond that edge?

The universe is not thought to have an edge. Either it's infinite, or else it curves back on itself (so if you could go far and fast enough, you'd eventually come back around to your starting place).


That's right. it is thought to be infinite. I guess the edge thinking is outdated.

I love this stuff, but as said, I am in over my head.

have you heard the new theory that we are in a black hole but being transferred onto the surface of a black hole or something like that? i don't like that theory at all....but whatever.
 
2012-11-16 06:20:20 PM

busy chillin': it can't end. even if there is nothing there, there is still quarks at the subatomic level. Nothingness is impossible. and if it does end, what is beyond that edge?


No. At some point there is nothing - not even space.
 
2012-11-16 06:33:25 PM
We can see it the way it was because it is moving away from our relative perspective.

Why am I supposed to sit here and pretend that I believe in things that we can't know?

Wouldn't that be dangerous?

Golden ratio?

Hey! I know!

Bomb Israel.
 
2012-11-16 07:02:55 PM
Meh, not that far away. We can still see it, and some believe we won't be able to see anything from the absolute beginning because the space between us and that light is expanding faster than the speed of light.
 
2012-11-16 07:17:04 PM

busy chillin': sp86: busy chillin':
Okay, thanks...so my first impression was correct. But then of course this galaxy might no longer exist, but we are still seeing the light, right? But I guess that is neither here nor there.


I love thinking about the edge of the universe...it makes no sense. how can it end? and even if it stops having galaxies and stars there is still dark matter with sub atomic particles. forever. and ever.

it can't end. even if there is nothing there, there is still quarks at the subatomic level. Nothingness is impossible. and if it does end, what is beyond that edge?

/probably should have quit while I was tied


Option 1:
If you go past the outer reaches of known space, there is nothing. No further atomic rendering is completed. You have to reboot the matrix. This is colloquially known as a 'big bang'.

Option 2:
It is round. Just how humans thought the earth was flat, and then infinite, before acquiring the technology to see the truth. At the center of each galaxy is a black hole, which causes the gravitational pull against nearby celestial bodies. These holes are portals to other locations within the expanding spherical universe; shortcuts, effectively. Unfortunately, the longer it takes humans to discover FTL tech, the infinitely larger the sphere grows. However, once you circumnavigate the universe, you gain +1 to naval unit movement.

Option 3:
Our universe is one of an infinite number of universes that are attached in a dodecahedral tessellation, like a honeycomb. Each new universe is created when the individual honeycombs can no longer hold the quantity of energy contained within (e.g. time travel). When that occurs, they divide, like a cell, creating universes that are exact duplicates of each other, but move forward in time independently of each other. Each additional 'cell' adds to the honeycomb, growing in perpetuity. Thus, you have a potentially infinite number of universes that represent infinite number of historical periods and their resulting actions. 

Option 4:
The universe is actually just some dude's brain. Link

Option 5:
The universe is a meticulously crafted finite space because God.
 
2012-11-16 08:15:29 PM
Wait 'till they find stuff farther away than 13.73 light years.
 
2012-11-16 08:20:38 PM

Ambitwistor: busy chillin': it can't end. even if there is nothing there, there is still quarks at the subatomic level. Nothingness is impossible. and if it does end, what is beyond that edge?

The universe is not thought to have an edge. Either it's infinite, or else it curves back on itself (so if you could go far and fast enough, you'd eventually come back around to your starting place).


Time get's weird near the edge of the universe. You can approach it, but never reach it, like the event horizon of a singularity.

Because we are inside a singularity.
 
2012-11-16 08:37:15 PM

busy chillin': it can't end. even if there is nothing there, there is still quarks at the subatomic level. Nothingness is impossible. and if it does end, what is beyond that edge?


img528.imageshack.us
 
2012-11-16 09:09:09 PM
If we are nowhere near the edge of the universe, and the universe is 13.73 billion years old, how are we able to see 13.3 odd light years across the universe? We would be able to see the near side of the Big U .43 billion light years the opposite direction, 'cause nothing can travel FTL. Right?
 
2012-11-16 09:47:13 PM

RedVentrue: If we are nowhere near the edge of the universe, and the universe is 13.73 billion years old, how are we able to see 13.3 odd light years across the universe? We would be able to see the near side of the Big U .43 billion light years the opposite direction, 'cause nothing can travel FTL. Right?


We're seeing back into time. the universe is everywhere and we're not in the center of it. Everything that has happened 13 billion years ago is in the sky at once and the closer things are to us, the more modern the image and closer to the present. The night sky is a time machine that only goes to the past.
 
2012-11-16 09:48:30 PM

RedVentrue: If we are nowhere near the edge of the universe, and the universe is 13.73 billion years old, how are we able to see 13.3 odd light years across the universe? We would be able to see the near side of the Big U .43 billion light years the opposite direction, 'cause nothing can travel FTL. Right?


Also, space/time can apparently expand much faster than light. It doesn't have that handicap.
 
2012-11-16 10:04:34 PM

Snark Shark II: RedVentrue: If we are nowhere near the edge of the universe, and the universe is 13.73 billion years old, how are we able to see 13.3 odd light years across the universe? We would be able to see the near side of the Big U .43 billion light years the opposite direction, 'cause nothing can travel FTL. Right?

Also, space/time can apparently expand much faster than light. It doesn't have that handicap.


Then something CAN move FTL.

Also, The "nothing can be created, nor destroyed" rule is complete bunk.
 
2012-11-16 10:57:23 PM
www.stargaters.de

/Gots this covered
 
2012-11-16 11:23:18 PM

ArcadianRefugee: tanman1975: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?

we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that

I may never go to Japan but you don't see me getting all Emo about it.


Does that make you enlightened or domesticated?
 
2012-11-16 11:28:57 PM

Cubicle Jockey: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?


I read a book a year or so ago about Edward Hubble and the events that led up to his discoveries. Someone from the time period was quoted in there as saying, and I am grossly paraphrasing here:

"As you imagine yourself moving out the distances being discussed in the scientific community, the scope involved becomes amazing, then incredulous, then disturbing, then ghastly, and finally terrifying."


"We are either alone in the Universe or we're not. Both are equally terrifying."
 
2012-11-16 11:38:11 PM

simplicimus: Uzzah: I want to go to there.

It was there, 13.3 billion years ago. Don't have any idea what's there now.


God lives there. And he needs a starship.
 
2012-11-17 01:34:28 AM

Mart Laar's beard shaver: [www.stargaters.de image 300x200]

/Gots this covered


I miss the hell outta that show.
 
2012-11-17 01:44:18 AM
If all matter came from a singular point, why am I looking at it now, the way it was then when I was a part of it when it happened in the first place?
 
2012-11-17 03:22:48 AM

Diogenes Teufelsdrockh:

Right down near the noise floor, just a few pixels wide and all after gravitational lensing to enhance it. Just imagine what might be found with better tech? I'm rooting for the James Webb Space Telescope and keeping my fingers crossed that it doesn't end up a smoldering ruin at the bottom of a failed rocket launch or budget cut.



AAAUUUUGGGGHHHHH!!

Don't JINX it!!

[pawslap]
 
2012-11-17 07:27:35 AM

RedVentrue: Time get's weird near the edge of the universe.


Apostrophes are weird right here.
 
2012-11-17 08:53:29 AM
Several questions:
1. Have we observed deep field objects (say, 13 or more billion light years away) in multiple areas across the universe, or only in an isolated section? Put another way: If we start plotting a 3D surface using polar geometry with the radius set as the distance to the furthest object away we have observed in each direction, what does that surface look like?

2.We have deduced that the universe is expanding because objects that are further away from us are redshifted. Is there a way to prove that this redshift is from expansion of the universe rather than light's interaction with gravity or another force over very long distances? I know there are all kinds of theories about this, including ones where the laws of physics were different at some time in the past.

/Should have taken an astrophysics class rather than just quitting after the 3 required semesters.
 
2012-11-17 08:53:36 AM

MatrixOutsider: simplicimus: Uzzah: I want to go to there.

It was there, 13.3 billion years ago. Don't have any idea what's there now.

God lives there. And he needs a starship.


kunochan.com
 
2012-11-17 09:18:54 AM

RedVentrue: Snark Shark II: RedVentrue: If we are nowhere near the edge of the universe, and the universe is 13.73 billion years old, how are we able to see 13.3 odd light years across the universe? We would be able to see the near side of the Big U .43 billion light years the opposite direction, 'cause nothing can travel FTL. Right?

Also, space/time can apparently expand much faster than light. It doesn't have that handicap.

Then something CAN move FTL.

Also, The "nothing can be created, nor destroyed" rule is complete bunk.


Inflationary cosmology
 
2012-11-17 10:48:54 AM

tanman1975: ArcadianRefugee: tanman1975: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?

we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that

I may never go to Japan but you don't see me getting all Emo about it.

Does that make you enlightened or domesticated?


Just poor.
 
2012-11-17 11:27:49 AM
meh.
 
2012-11-17 12:10:59 PM

sp86: busy chillin': I'm in over my head a bit now...but light years have nothing to do with time, right? It is a unit of distance, right? so we don't know how old this galaxy is...the light could have been there for a million years. a billion years, and we just now found it, right? We just know how far away it is, right? Not the exact age?

I probably shouldn't have posted, but yet, here we are.

If something is X Billion light years away that means (Barring local spatial anomalies) that that it's been traveling for X billion years and is at this point observable. This establishes an upper limit for the age of the source of the light via Y-X where Y is the calculated age of the universe. As we cannot observe this phenomena before the point we detected it due to the linearity of time we can not determine the lower limit, we can only check it against existing models. If we detect objects +15 billion light years away we will be forced to reexamine this model but currently there's no need.


This is where we start to get into the kind of thinking that my mind can't quite follow. Probably because there's too much I don't know (is the universe spherical? it seems like it would be spherical).

FTFA: ...the Universe started with a Big Bang 13.73 billion years ago, so that's a hard limit to how far away we can see.
...We're seeing it, quite literally, clear across the universe.


Why is that a hard limit to how far we can see? Do we know where we sit relative to the center of the universe? Maybe we're 13.73 billion light years from the center, in which case "clear across the universe" would be at least double that. What if we're only halfway out relative to the center? Then the universe would be twice as old and we'd have the potential to see three times farther than the current accepted limit.

/it's a good think smarter and more creative people then me are working on these things.
 
2012-11-17 12:43:55 PM

geek_mars: sp86: busy chillin': I'm in over my head a bit now...but light years have nothing to do with time, right? It is a unit of distance, right? so we don't know how old this galaxy is...the light could have been there for a million years. a billion years, and we just now found it, right? We just know how far away it is, right? Not the exact age?

I probably shouldn't have posted, but yet, here we are.

If something is X Billion light years away that means (Barring local spatial anomalies) that that it's been traveling for X billion years and is at this point observable. This establishes an upper limit for the age of the source of the light via Y-X where Y is the calculated age of the universe. As we cannot observe this phenomena before the point we detected it due to the linearity of time we can not determine the lower limit, we can only check it against existing models. If we detect objects +15 billion light years away we will be forced to reexamine this model but currently there's no need.

This is where we start to get into the kind of thinking that my mind can't quite follow. Probably because there's too much I don't know (is the universe spherical? it seems like it would be spherical).

FTFA: ...the Universe started with a Big Bang 13.73 billion years ago, so that's a hard limit to how far away we can see.
...We're seeing it, quite literally, clear across the universe.

Why is that a hard limit to how far we can see? Do we know where we sit relative to the center of the universe? Maybe we're 13.73 billion light years from the center, in which case "clear across the universe" would be at least double that. What if we're only halfway out relative to the center? Then the universe would be twice as old and we'd have the potential to see three times farther than the current accepted limit.

/it's a good think smarter and more creative people then me are working on these things.


The Universe has no center. (about 2:40)

\full episode here
 
2012-11-17 02:24:00 PM

Quantum Apostrophe: RedVentrue: Time get's weird near the edge of the universe.

Apostrophes are weird right here.


Well, to be fair, you are by far the weirdest apostrophe I've ever encountered.
 
2012-11-17 02:44:59 PM

GypsyJoker:

The Universe has no center. (about 2:40)

\full episode here


Thanx for the link. I get what he was saying, but my mind has trouble letting go of the concept of "Big bang = explosion, expansion = from point of detonation" and from there making the leap that there must be a physical location that is the site of the big bang and thus the center.
Though I really appreciated the bit about how the perspective from every galaxy is that the rest of the universe is rushing away from their particular galaxy.
 
2012-11-17 05:09:57 PM

geek_mars: GypsyJoker:

The Universe has no center. (about 2:40)

\full episode here

Thanx for the link. I get what he was saying, but my mind has trouble letting go of the concept of "Big bang = explosion, expansion = from point of detonation" and from there making the leap that there must be a physical location that is the site of the big bang and thus the center.
Though I really appreciated the bit about how the perspective from every galaxy is that the rest of the universe is rushing away from their particular galaxy.


It does take a bit of thinking to get away from that "point of detonation" concept. That's one of the things that's so endlessly fascinating--the way the Universe challenges so many of our preconceived notions.

If you haven't had a chance to watch the whole series, see if you can get a chance. It's still (cheesy effects and datedness and all) one of the best introductions to astronomy, and the way that astronomy is so entwined with the other sciences and our culture itself.
 
2012-11-17 11:38:36 PM

serial arseonist: busy chillin': sp86: busy chillin':
Option 2: ...However, once you circumnavigate the universe, you gain +1 to naval unit movement.


Well, that made me spit out my iced tea with mint leaves.
 
2012-11-19 09:08:54 AM

ArcadianRefugee: tanman1975: ArcadianRefugee: tanman1975: moos: What's soul crushing about it, sensationalistmitter?

we live in a fish tank and will never explore any of that

I may never go to Japan but you don't see me getting all Emo about it.

Does that make you enlightened or domesticated?

Just poor.


Awww.. you just had to go make it get real.
 
Displayed 74 of 74 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report