Galaxy collisions dominate the local universe

[newtonian]

SiriusMrE - Actually, stevehw33 posted on another thread somewhere a movie - a computer simulation in motion based on extrapolation of data - I believe it was of the upcoming Andromeda - Milky Way merger.<br /><br />You may find the movie of interest even if you feel it is science fiction!<br /><br />But there is real observational data it is based on.<br /><br />Computer simulations of future motion are fascinating.<br /><br />Ditto past motion!

 

[telfrow]

Not ignoring. I had to leave. I'm back now. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[telfrow]

<font color="yellow">...a computer simulation in motion based on extrapolation of data - I believe it was of the upcoming Andromeda - Milky Way merger...</font><br /><br />Probably this one: http://www.cita.utoronto.ca/~dubinski/tflops/spiralmetamorphosis.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[telfrow]

I'm not sure what you want me to respond to, Newtonian. If you're asking me if I agree with evidence of some form of intelligent design in the appearance of galaxies, I don't. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[bonzelite]

look at how this phenomenon thread has grown.

 

[telfrow]

Read my post earlier in the thread. If you think this - or any other thread - belongs in Phenomena, then go to "Suggestions," "Please Move This Thread," and put your request in with the mods. Let's see what happens. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[siriusmre]

<font color="yellow">"...a computer simulation in motion based on extrapolation of data..."</font><br /><br />OK. I've seen other computer simulations that use different algorithms that are also able to account for what we see. They are also based on "real observational data."<br /><br />The key is to Truthfully INTERPRET the data. All interpretation is based on assumption. I merely challenge the established set of assumptions because we have so much data that calls them into question. Again, how often do we read stories about space science that say that an observation or piece of data is "mysterious," "unexpected," or "strange?" Any true scientist would ask himself the question, "What else could it be?" <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[unlearningthemistakes]

... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>pain is inevitable</p><p>suffering is optional </p> </div>

 

[unlearningthemistakes]

nothing against you....<br /><br />check some cool materials from hubblesite.org...<br /><br />colliding galaxies doesn't necessarily mean <font color="yellow">collision</font>or allision. If collision is to take place within our milky, it doesn't mean that our planet/s will collide with stars and stars with stars. It will just swap some matter from each other. In hubblesite, you can find some possible scenario pictures of what our sky would look like after a galactic collision. <br /><br />( I have been visiting that site for years, I hope you also could... ) <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>pain is inevitable</p><p>suffering is optional </p> </div>

 

[unlearningthemistakes]

ah, Paul, (me side-stepping the thread) have you got any news about the comet cloud? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>pain is inevitable</p><p>suffering is optional </p> </div>

 

[siriusmre]

I'll say it again: I will stipulate ALL observations. And, yes, the universe is remarkable and humbling to see. What I question are the interpretations of what we see... <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[neutron_star69]

thats a cool picyure. where did ya get it.

 

[telfrow]

If you're talking about the picture <i>unlearningthemistakes</i> posted, see: http://hubblesite.org/ <br /><br />(It's printed at the bottom of the photo.) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[neutron_star69]

thanks

 

[neutron_star69]

who are you objecting to? i dont even see a post with that stuff in it.

 

[telfrow]

Steve is referring to this statement by SiriusMrE at the bottom of the last page (I think): <font color="yellow"> I'll say it again: I will stipulate ALL observations.</font>/safety_wrapper> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>

 

[solrfusion]

if galaxies were atracted, via,the great attractor, and many galaxies combine to their individual great atractor. Then giant galaxies would form, align, and begin to rip each other apart if equal force and distance were separatring the alignment.

 

[solrfusion]

supergalaxies will form, then align,equally seperated by distance and mass. they will rip surface material from each other heating the univese,until all matter is deleted, black holes included. then all thats left is the first and the last. u no him?

 

[newtonian]

SiriusMrE - Yes, a good scientist will be humble and question. It is one thing to follow through on an assumption and then draw tentative conclusions.<br /><br />It is quite another thing to be dogmatic about a specific interpretation or model before it is proven - note my signature.<br /><br />So, do you agree we [ I.e., the Milky Way] are heading towards Andromeda? <br /><br />I listen to alternate models - feel free to post a link to an alternate model or your own ideas - I intend to respectfully respond.

 

[newtonian]

telfrow - Thank you for your response. Of course, I also had to leave for a while!<br /><br />Now we merge again - but no destruction will result - in fact, we may be mutually enhanced.<br /><br />And likewise with merging galaxies, as the interactions often produce new stars.<br /><br />Whether the merging galaxies actually stay together or simply pass through (or pass through and then back through until merging as expected with Milky Way and Andromeda).<br /><br />Thank you, and you all, for the links and photos, etc.

 

[newtonian]

solrfusion - Interesting model. Most astronomers espouse the "heat death" scenario where entropy causes cooling due to expansion, and even the dark sky scenario for our future - this does, of course, ignore the thousands of local galaxies that are not leaving our section of universe.<br /><br />Or are you talking about our local section or universe which is not expanding but travelling on a sort of 'river' in space towars The Great Attractor in the Virgo supercluster?<br /><br />Did you know that the IGM (=intergalactic medium) is heating up?<br /><br />I hope to post the Scientifc American article (i.e. cite it with an excerpt) that reported on this relatively recent discovery.

 

[bonzelite]

i think what some people are saying who do not fully buy that all galaxies collide are simply saying just that: all galaxies that appear to be colliding may not be doing that. i don't think there is a denial that galaxies do collide. there is evidence for this and in some cases is nearly incontrovertably true. but a good many galaxies may be in the process of birthing another galaxy, hence the myriad galaxy pairs in apparent collision. the vast distances in space between anything at all casts doubt, for me, that every visually close pair of galaxies is either colliding or headed for such a collision. <br /><br />scientific american is not exempt from printing fallacies. inasmuch as i look up to that publication, it can only go so far. it is the putting of all of the eggs in one colliding basket, and not even entertaining the possibility of another, concurrent, process, that is problematic. <br /><br />i know that a scientist must be critical and go about observations based on accepted facts. and if no such facts exist that point the way to "birthing" galaxies, then such an idea will be thrown out and not taken seriously as possibly happening --even if it really is. perhaps what is being observed is not fully understood, and incorrect facts are applied to SOME of these observations. <br /><br />

 

[newtonian]

SiruiusMrE - Note that I am aware of the limitations of science. Scientific American is a good source but I agree one should be aware that many theories and models lack proof.<br /><br />On the other hand, Scientific American reported on observations - actual seeing through what was once a blocked view through the denser portions of Milky Way.<br /><br />Observations are extremely valuable in weighing the validity of theories and models.<br /><br />Including what actually happens when galaxies interact or even merge.

 

[newtonian]

unlearningthemistakes - Hi! Sorry I was away.<br /><br />What comet cloud?

 

[unlearningthemistakes]

oort cloud. but thanks anyway, I already got an update about it . <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>pain is inevitable</p><p>suffering is optional </p> </div>