Feature Join us for Space Chat every Friday!

MMohammed

Community Manager
Staff member
Oct 10, 2019
80
194
1,710


Ask your space questions here to possibly be answered every week!

If you haven't noticed, Space Chat has taken on some changes in format! Senior Writer Chelsea Gohd will now be answering your most burning questions about space every Friday. It doesn't even matter what sort of question you ask. Wondering about shuttles? Perhaps you've got a meteorite-related query. How about that mysterious Oumuamua? As long as it's about space, Chelsea will be looking to talk about it!

Every week, you can post your questions in this thread to possibly be answered on Friday's stream. You'll be able to see if your question was addressed on Facebook or YouTube!
 
Last edited:
Jun 1, 2020
1,676
1,427
3,560
Hi Chelsea!

I enjoy your articles.

What would be some of your picks for the topics that have the most unexpected results?

For instance, a gigantic telescope cannot ever make an extended surface appear brighter in unit area vs. a small telescope, ignoring optical quality.

Or my pet subject, the “Sun ain’t yeller!”.
 
May 2, 2021
4
1
15


Ask your space questions here to possibly be answered every week!

If you haven't noticed, Space Chat has taken on some changes in format! Senior Writer Chelsea Gohd will now be answering your most burning questions about space every Friday. It doesn't even matter what sort of question you ask. Wondering about shuttles? Perhaps you've got a meteorite-related query. How about that mysterious Oumuamua? As long as it's about space, Chelsea will be looking to talk about it!

Every week, you can post your questions in this thread to possibly be answered on Friday's stream. You'll be able to see if your question was addressed on Facebook or YouTube!
Earth Needs A Good Comet Deflector. It seems to me that they could put new rockets on the International Space Station when its current original useful life is used up and then push it up into higher orbit perhaps a lunar orbit; then make a comet deflector out of it. Perhaps give it a large spiderweb of cables and girders so it can wrap around a number of different types of potentially earth-impacting objects. The added engines would then be used to move the dangerous object. If a hundred years or so goes by and it doesn't get used as a comet deflector, it could be landed on the moon as a tourist attraction saving it for future generations to appreciate. Due to the mass of the International Space Station, it would be very useful under many circumstances as a comet deflector if it could be strengthened and moved to the right orbit. Why not do that when its useful life has passed? The cost to do it is getting cheaper every day
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marlene
Jun 24, 2020
8
2
515
Might not be the right place for this, but it's been consuming me for some time now; how does speed of an object actually work in the vacuum of space? I mean, the speed of an object seems to be relative to other objects? - if so, it seems that when observing something moving in space, it becomes a kind of philosophical question; is the object moving, or is space that moves past it
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
Helmer, of course you can say anything is relative to anything - after Einstein, it is open day for this kind of thing. Just say the Universe spins around the pen in you pocket - who cares? But, in the real world, we have to accept some models are philosophy, and some can be tested and proven true or false - until the next modification.

We still live today by Newton, unless we are getting involved in speeds closer to the speed of light. Newton is good enough for most people most of the time.

So what if your pen is the centre of the Universe? How is that going to affect the man in the street?

But, good question, keep on participating.

Cat :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helmer
Mar 5, 2021
23
6
15
If the object is falling through a vacuum, it isn't necessarily relative to anything else. In your question, am not sure if you are referring to a vacuum which is an enclosed space where there is no object and pressure is zero or are you referring to space in general as a vacuum?
'An object that falls through a vacuum is subjected to only one external force, the gravitational force, expressed as the weight of the object. An object that is moving only because of the action of gravity is said to be free falling and its motion is described by Newton's second law of motion. '

If it is the vacuum of space you are asking about : 'There is essentially zero friction in space to slow down moving objects. ' Objects will continue to move in a constant speed indefinitely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe
Jan 4, 2020
12
8
515
the iss is the very most important object humanity has put into and built on to in space so far, it's not just a space station where the worlds naught can go to train and experiment with things to try and understand more and space and its effects etc, the iss is the first step of helping our species colonies the galaxy and further on into the future of our existence but that's a very long way off yet but from a tiny seed a huge oak forest will given enough time, my question is do u think artificial intelligence is governing this universe and as everything seems to be pointing towards a digital presence within everything
 
Mar 5, 2021
23
6
15
To me, there is a grand intelligence that has created the seeds and conditions for the oak forest to flourish. Artificial intelligence is only one aspect of the grand intelligence. The rules that create artificial intelligence are also partially used to create life. Though there is more spontaneous action in life than artificial intelligence could handle. Quantum theory states that we can know only partial information such as the direction but not the speed or visa versa. Artificial intelligence would have to be programmed to include spontaneous actions and all possible futures that are unknown. The grand intelligence has all the unknowns included.

Don't think (& I could be wrong) that artificial intelligence could do the following: A vacuum can lead flashes of light where virtual particles can become real photons. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/something-from-nothing-vacuum-can-yield-flashes-of-light/
 

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
Postulating a "grand intelligence that created . . . . . . " is getting somewhat outside the scope of a science forum, not to mention being totally imaginary in itself.

Note that this applies to fundamental particles "
Quote
Quantum physics explains that there are limits to how precisely one can know the properties of the most basic units of matter—for instance, one can never absolutely know a particle's position and momentum at the same time.
Quote


Cat :)
 
Mar 5, 2021
23
6
15
What was quoted is the main reason why I feel that there is something greater that has created and continues to create everything. It is not limited to knowing only a portion of what is going on. A forest couldn't be created by knowing only a limited amount and there are no 2 forests alike. Something had to create 'spontaneous' and the possible futures resulting from it.

This is outside the scope of science as we know it for now.
 

Jzz

May 10, 2021
4
0
10
Chelsea Gohd, thank you for contributing your time to further the knowledge of science and the space we live in. My question is this: We live in a Universe that is mostly empty space. For instance atoms consist of 99.9999999999% empty space. Yet we cannot walk through walls, whose atoms also occupy 9.9999999999% empty space. The reason for this is the electrostatic interactions that take place between the atoms of our bodies and those of the wall. The simple act of picking up a pencil, involves trillions of electrons being displaced. We live in a world and a Universe where electrical interactions are constantly taking place. This being so, how can one attribute the distinctive radio signals being received from space as originating with the Big Bang? The signals that have been attributed to the CMBR are in the range of Hydrogen spectra or the infrared range, from near infrared to far infrared. For instance if one takes the highest mean frequency of the CMBR it is about 282 GHz which gives a wavelength of about 1,000,000 nm, which is right in the middle of the Hydrogen spectra frequency.
If one thinks about it, it is an absolutely absurd notion to imagine that in a Universe governed by electrical interactions that the unimaginably massive hydrogen clouds that occupy interstellar space generate no radio signals. Further in order for the CMBR scenario to be valid the radiation would have to be constantly moving. This is not the case. The scenario that is put forward is that of electromagnetic radiation that is more or less hanging motionless in space.
To sum up my argument: I hold that the CMBR is not representative of cosmic microwave background radiation at all, and instead state that it represents a picture of the Universe as it exists today. The CMBR dioes not show a picture of the early Universe but rather represents the distribution of the super massive intergalactic clouds as they exist in the Universe today. What are your views please?
 

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
"How old is cosmic microwave background?

13.7 billion years ago

The CMB radiation was emitted 13.7 billion years ago, only a few hundred thousand years after the Big Bang, long before stars or galaxies ever existed."


!Cosmic microwave background - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Cosmic_microwave_b...


The cosmic microwave background (CMB, CMBR), in Big Bang cosmology, is electromagnetic radiation which is a remnant from an early stage of the universe, ...
Cosmic background radiation · ‎Discovery · ‎List of cosmic microwave..."

Are you saying all this is wrong, and you are right?

Cat :)
 
Jul 30, 2021
42
28
60
Postulating a "grand intelligence that created . . . . . . " is getting somewhat outside the scope of a science forum, not to mention being totally imaginary in itself.

Note that this applies to fundamental particles "
Quote
Quantum physics explains that there are limits to how precisely one can know the properties of the most basic units of matter—for instance, one can never absolutely know a particle's position and momentum at the same time.
Quote


Cat :)
Thank you! so much interesting information and ingenious thoughts!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe

Jzz

May 10, 2021
4
0
10
Are you saying all this is wrong, and you are right?
Merely to quote present day understanding does not mean that you are correct. I think the present day view is wrong. Therefore, that is in fact precisely what I am saying. I find it incredible that these unbelievably massive Hydrogen clouds are absolutely passive and at rest. Remember that every star in the Universe, all of our Galaxies and solar systems, planets and everything else, have formed out of such massive hydrogen clouds. How is it that these massive clouds of hydrogen are absolutely passive today, now in the present: when even picking up a pencil displaces trillions of electrons? To say that the CMBR is an unimaginably weak signal is also not true. There was a time when even very basic radios picked up this signal as a background screech of what was then thought to be static. So it is not a weak signal by any means. I stand by my contention that what we took to be the CMBR, is in fact electromagnetic radiation from the massive clouds of Hydrogen that are everywhere in the Universe and that these signals did not originate 13.7 billion years in the past but are being radiated now in the present. .
Further, I am a strong believer in the Big Bang even without the CMBR, the Hubble constant seems to be proof of the Big Bang.; I don't think the CMBR is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jzz

May 10, 2021
4
0
10
Hydrogen clouds are not "passive and at rest". They become concentrated by gravity and evolve into stars and planets.

Cat :
Do you mean to say that they can do all that without radiating energy. Even a cursory movement of the atoms in a cloud of hydrogen should generate electromagnetic radiation.
 

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail

High-Energy Particles and Radiation in Star-Forming Regions ...
https://link.springer.com › article



by AM Bykov · 2020 · Cited by 16 — Non-thermal particles and high-energy radiation can play a role in the dynamical processes in star-forming regions and provide an important ...



Stellar Radiation - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
https://www.sciencedirect.com › topics › stellar-radiation



The emission of stellar radiation depends on their surface temperature and also on ... Protons remain trapped in the magnetic field and thus lose energy ...

Cat :)
 

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
Seems you can make your own CMB and test it

"Astronomers detect the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) as an extra noise equivalent to a black body radiating at a temperature of 2.73 K. They do this with an instrument called a microwave radiometer. A radiometer is a radio telescope whose response is calibrated with known temperature sources. A professional apparatus utilizes the temperature of liquid helium to calibrate the temperature scale and also to cool the electronics for quiet operation. I have found that one can obtain a reasonable level of performance with inexpensive electronics operating at 10 GHz at ambient temperature and a calibration configuration using liquid nitrogen at 77K."

(PDF) An Amateur Instrument for the Detection of the Cosmic Microwave Background (researchgate.net)


Cat :)
 
Jun 24, 2020
8
2
515
Helmer, of course you can say anything is relative to anything - after Einstein, it is open day for this kind of thing. Just say the Universe spins around the pen in you pocket - who cares? But, in the real world, we have to accept some models are philosophy, and some can be tested and proven true or false - until the next modification.

We still live today by Newton, unless we are getting involved in speeds closer to the speed of light. Newton is good enough for most people most of the time.

So what if your pen is the centre of the Universe? How is that going to affect the man in the street?

But, good question, keep on participating.

Cat :)
Does this mean we cannot know the "true" speed of an object, only the relative speed to other objects? E.g. the speed of which an asteroid is moving in relation to earth?

Or do / can we measure speed in relation to a fixed stationary point in space?
 

Catastrophe

The devil is in the detail
You can measure speed relative to something, but there are no fixed points in space. Near a star, that is as fixed as you get for the time being. We measure everything from our Sun. If you are way out in the depths of nowhere, I suppose you might 3D triangulate from "fixed" stars. Any star out there, you could probably consider fixed.

But where would you be going to need to know your speed?

Cat :)
 

Jzz

May 10, 2021
4
0
10
Seems you can make your own CMB and test it
So what does the radiation from the Universe look like today. If one speculates on what the present (todays) radiation from the Universe would look like. It is surprisingly similar to what the CMBR is: it is quite homogeneous for obvious reasons and it is a fairly strong signal.
 
Jun 24, 2020
8
2
515
You can measure speed relative to something, but there are no fixed points in space. Near a star, that is as fixed as you get for the time being. We measure everything from our Sun. If you are way out in the depths of nowhere, I suppose you might 3D triangulate from "fixed" stars. Any star out there, you could probably consider fixed.

But where would you be going to need to know your speed?

Cat :)
I guess I'm just trying to wrap my head around the whole concept of speed, as well as the limitations imposed on it by physics as we know it.

One of the things that really confuses me, is that we say we cannot travel at the speed of light, but at the same time speed seems to only matter in relations to other objects.
If so, void of other objects, speed doesn't exist?

Makes my brain both hurt and tickle - I'm sure I'm just not understanding the full picture, which is why I'm asking 😅
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts