How many stars in the universe?

[vogon13]

We've had a recent discussion on eleventy 'leven too.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[oscar1]

I don't know for sure, but I recall that it was Dr Carl Sagan who launched the word 'google' in the first place (he denied ever having uttered the phrase 'billions and billions'). In any case, I would put it: 'there are google stars in a google number of galaxies'. And we are actually lucky that the question was limited to 'the universe', for there could be google universes too! One thing is certain though, Google (the company) is google away from google.

 

[vogon13]

Googol, actually.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[oscar1]

Indeed. I stand corrected!

 

[alokmohan]

Google universe.Carl Sagan stated ?Any reference?Very interesting.

 

[oscar1]

There I stand corrected again. Apparently the word 'Googol' stems from 1920 (meaning a number ranging from unimaginable to infinite). My first introduction to it was however an episode of "Cosmos", presented by Dr Sagan, where he uttered the word. So, from that point of view, he was the one making the word [more] known.

 

[yales]

WARNING! <br /><br />TeamAmerica AND Flash_Gordon are sockpuppets of the pornspammer Wayne Smith AKA PO/ProjectOrion/NuclearSpace/etc/etc ad nauseum. <br /><br /><b>The link in his posts are phish redirects.</b><br /><br />WARNING! <br /><br />Mods... Feel free to delete this post after disarming or deleting the spammer's posts<br />

 

[alokmohan]

Stars are no more interesting.ANY WAY GOOD TO COUNT IF YOU SUFFER FROM NSOMNIA.

 

[vanillacoke]

I prefer counting sheep. But then I live on a sheep farm.

 

[alokmohan]

Double effect.May sleep in peace.

 

[brazilian_and_proud]

there are trillions of stars in the universe

 

[derekmcd]

<i>there are trillions of stars in the universe</i><br /><br />squared. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>

 

[doubletruncation]

<font color="yellow">Stars are no more interesting.ANY WAY GOOD TO COUNT IF YOU SUFFER FROM NSOMNIA.</font><br /><br />I disagree that stars are no longer interesting - they're very interesting! There are actually many open problems in the study of stars. <br /><br />- The biggest one, which really ties into other aspects of astronomy, is how're they're formed - I think it's fair to say that this process is really not known in detail at all. <br /><br />- Related to that are some other unknowns. For example, there is a suggestion that most of the very massive binary systems are actually twins - that is, big stars in binaries seem to always come in pairs where both stars are nearly identical in mass. Whether this is really true or the result of some observational bias is unknown - if it is true, how it came to be that way is unknown, and its implications may be fairly important for other fields of astronomy. <br /><br />- Stellar activity is another big open problem - how is the magnetic field of the sun generated, how is the corona heated, what causes the observed cycles in the activity of the sun and what are the long term trends - and how does all of this apply to other stars? I think people have ideas (e.g. the solar dynamo which is supported in a hand-wavy way by the observation that stars that rotate faster are more active), but in detail the answers to these questions aren't really known. <br /><br />- Recently there was a big upheaval in solar physics - it seemed like the metallicity of the sun was actually 25-30% lower than has been assumed for many years, if this was true the agreement between solar models and helioseismology would be ruined. This problem arose only within the last 5 years and its resolution (that the metallicity of neon only is off) has only come about in the last year or so. (See for example: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0506182 and h</safety_wrapper <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[harmonicaman]

<b>Yales -</b><br /><br />Welcome back! Your continued monitoring of the predatory activities of the vile PO and his various sock puppets is appreciated!<br /><br />Hope you stick around to make more contributions to the forums!

 

[scepterium]

That's interesting, I always thought it was an actuall number and because they estimated that there are 70 sextrillion stars I thought it went: hundred, thousand, million, billion, trillion, sextrillion, zillion and finally googolplexian and you know I really think it should be true. I'm a little sadined that there really is no zillion in our mathematics. Is googolplexian after sextrillion then?

 

[derekmcd]

bi, tri, quad, quint, sext, sept, oct, non, dec are latin prefixes for 2-10. This link goes further. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>

 

[search]

But you still find those who are still not sure:<br /><br />http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~gmackie/billions.html<br /><br />And those who disagree:<br /><br />http://www.astro.utu.fi/~cflynn/sand.html

 

[bdewoody]

Insn't it true that there is a difference in the definitions of billion and trillion between the U.S. and the U.K.? The U.S. def of a billion is 1,000 million and the U.K is 1,000,000 million. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em><font size="2">Bob DeWoody</font></em> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

Incredibly large number of stars are there in the Universe.

 

[MeteorWayne]

I just assume it's bazillions, and leave it at that <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

If I remember correctly, yes. What we would call a "Billion," the UK refers to as a "Milliard." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[rhodan]

The UK has the same system as the Dutch then; miljoen (10^6) - miljard (10^9) - biljoen (10^12) - biljard (10^15).

 

[derekmcd]

The difference is in Long and Short scales. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>

 

[plutocrass]

After reading a Space.com newsbreak, Don Rumsfeld said, "Mr.President, yesterday three Brazilian astromers were killed by an asteroid."<br /><br />President Bush responded, "Oh my Lord, that's terrible news!!!" His staff was stunned at this unprecedented display of emotion, and watched as Bush sat, head in hands.<br /><br />Finally he looked at them, tears in his eyes, and asked. "Uh, how many is a Brazillian?"<br /><br /><br /><font color="yellow">"...Uranus, Neptune, and The Pluto Family."</font>/safety_wrapper>

 

[MeteorWayne]

LMAO!!!! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>