Universal thinking

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Gepox

Guest
<p>To the one's who concider themself as "i know more then average" people here... and for the majority aswell :)</p><p>Where should i start? ahaa yes here i go...</p><p>As we look up in sky at nights or in some telescope to see the entire universe infront of our eyes.. is it possible for the astronomers worldwide&nbsp;to think wrong on what they see out there... Gonna explain abit perhaps for those who wonder what i'm on about... </p><p>First of all... the so called "Galaxies" that we see in trillions and trillions&nbsp;places in the universe.. how can they be sure it is containing each over 250 million stars? (estimated guess)</p><p>Things that i don't understand is why astronomer's haven't noticed a bit difference from actually planet system forming on early stage to galaxie thinking stage (as they say it is) with numerous stars in it.</p><p>To me .. i see the only "logical answer" to this galaxie here and galaxie there thing.. as i'm not sure if im the only one thinking like this when i see the universe up there... or even on the following picture of M104.</p><p>Here let me explain further... there's an excellent picture taken from hubble telescope on </p><p>http://www.astronet.ru/db/xware/msg/1226598/M104b_peris2048.jpg.html</p><p>We see the picture as a " galaxie" the only thing that it can be says the astronomers...</p><p>I&nbsp;don't belive in that cause if we look at our own solar system, our earth... 4.5 billion years ago.. our solar system would look similiar as the picture as we see there.</p><p>Now if it were a galaxie in which the astronomers says it is.. with millions of stars in it... it would not be like this at all.</p><p>Look at the picture again... and look for the small "dark dust tale like" fragments floating in a "spiral" around the light source... remember this is a picture taken from hubble some years ago and that M104 .. "a snappshot in time" if you like... all the "dark dust tale like" fragments that is floating around the light source is actually.. and cant be other thing then "materials" for unborn planets, that will "clump" together under the heavy compression the gravity will have and will eventually end up circling planets around it's light source.. much like our solor system.. but billions of years to come... to be as present time for us right now.</p><p>Now if we would take our solar system in which we say lays within Milkyway galaxie... wouldn't we be seeing a BIG HUGE light source in the middle? or somewhere?... we dont do we?... so where is our milkyway galaxie center point of light? so how can astronomers say that our solar system lays in the outskirt of milkyway?</p><p>No i think astronomers thinking wrong here... if we would be thinking that every light source we discover or seen yet is a galaxie with millions and millions stars in it, we would be lying to ourself, since if we take our own solar system point of view we would see the same start of our own as we see on that picture... a solar system is being born.</p><p>Now i dont know if the astronomers around the globe or in here&nbsp;have thought about this ... of course it's just me and my thinking of how the universe is layed out here. could be fun with your point of view of this one Thanks :)</p>
 
S

Saiph

Guest
<p>Welcome to the board!&nbsp; And you ask some good questions, though I'd like to point out one thing.&nbsp; Your post is a bit hard to follow.&nbsp; As the common reason is often a language barrier I'll ask if english is your native language?&nbsp; I'll give an example for you:&nbsp; </p><p>"why astronomer's haven't noticed a bit difference from actually planet system forming on early stage to galaxie thinking stage (as they say it is) with numerous stars in it."</p><p>At first, I barely know what you're saying here, mainly because of some odd sentence structure but also because of the "galaxy thinking stage"....doesn't make any sense.</p><p><br />But I'll reply based on the gist of your entire post:&nbsp; Are astronomers sure galaxies are millions of stars and not planetary systems?</p><p>And I answer a definitive, absolute YES! </p><p>Astronomers first thought galaxies, well many galaxies, were actually nebulae of some sort.&nbsp; Later spectroscopy became a standard tool in astronomy, where the light is split via a prism (or similar device) into a full rainbow of colors.&nbsp; By examining the spectra of a star, we can actually determine what elements make up a star based on a pattern of lines in the spectra.&nbsp; When we examine the spectra of a galaxy we see not a single star, or a single star with the spectra of a surrounding dust/gas cloud, but a countless multitude of spectra all superimposed upon eachother.&nbsp; This is some of the strongest evidence that galaxies are made of countless stars.</p><p>Another indicator is the distance to these objects have been determined in a variety of ways.&nbsp; Each point out that even the nearest galaxy is over a million light years away.&nbsp; If that was a single star system with a planetary formation disk present...the light and size would be insane.</p><p>A third point:&nbsp; We've actually found and imaged stars with planetary disks.&nbsp; And while they share a superficial resemblance to spiral galaxies, we can tell the difference between them.&nbsp; </p><p>Point four:&nbsp; The gas and dust in the picture of M104 does follow dynamics very similar to planet formation, but on a much grander scale.&nbsp; They actually form stars and star clusters, and it's around the individual stars that smaller clouds form planets. </p><p>As for your question about our being able to see the bright center light source in our galaxy, you're right we can't.&nbsp; First, I want to point out that the bright core light is because of a high concentration or cluster of stars, not any single light source. &nbsp; We can't see ours directly, unfortunately, because we are in the disk of our galaxy.&nbsp; Look at your picture of M104, and look at the dark bands of gas and dust. Notice how they obscure and blot out light, and that's why we see them?&nbsp; More as an absence or silhouet than as a source of light itself.&nbsp; The milky way is also full of dust, but we don't have the luxury of being able to see "over' it to the core, as we can in the picture of M104.&nbsp; Instead we have to look THROUGH the gas and dust...and in the visible light we can't see all the way to the core.&nbsp; It blocks out the visible light, just like fog does here on earth.</p><p>However, with infrared, ultraviolet, and radio waves we can examine the core of the milky way, and it's quite bright in those wavelengths.&nbsp; It's actually quite bright in the visible region too, it's just all filtered out before it reaches us here near the edge of our galaxy. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
G

Gepox

Guest
<p>Thanks for a quick answer :)</p><p>No english ain't my native language... but you answered my question on "Are astronomers sure galaxies are millions of stars and not planetary systems?" even though it wasn't rightly typed... never the less i'm pleased with the answer i got from you.. many thanks :) now i dont have to wonder if the stars i see up in the sky are planets or galaxies :)</p>
 
S

Saiph

Guest
<p>well, without a telescope everything you see with the naked eye is a star (or one of a few large/close nebulae). With one exception, the Andromeda galaxy, which you can pick out as a smudge in the constellation of andromeda.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>btw, &nbsp;you're english wasn't that bad, just a bit oddly phrased. &nbsp;So keep that in mind if fellow posters don't quite interpret your posts right.&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector.  Goes "bing" when there's stuff.  It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually.  I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
D

DrRocket

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Thanks for a quick answer :)No english ain't my native language... but you answered my question on "Are astronomers sure galaxies are millions of stars and not planetary systems?" even though it wasn't rightly typed... never the less i'm pleased with the answer i got from you.. many thanks :) now i dont have to wonder if the stars i see up in the sky are planets or galaxies :) <br />Posted by Gepox</DIV></p><p>I think Saiph answered your question rather completely.&nbsp; Here is the Hubble deep field image, and all of the lights in this picture are galaxies.&nbsp; This picture represents a tiny segment of the sky, so you can see that there are a LOT of galaxies out there.</p><p><img src="http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/1996/01/images/a/formats/small_web.jpg" alt="Hubble Deep Field Image Unveils Myriad Galaxies Back to the Beginning of Time" /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
N

nimbus

Guest
Gepox, if you're translating from french, I can help out if you have particular difficulty with some sentences or words. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
J

jim48

Guest
<strong>Stay with us, Gepox. You do ask good questions but play hell with spelling/grammar/vocabulary. Welcome to this interesting web site! Lots of smart folks out here--myself excluded--and we tackle all kinds of fascinating subjects. As for the outer space stuff, as in <em>deep, deep, deep</em> space, my memories of that are quite fuzzy. Literally. I had to leave Krypton in a hurry. Spent a couple of years Out There before I&nbsp; Got Here. Long story. If you ever see any glowing green rocks please toss them<br /><img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/15/10/af57958c-4911-436d-aaad-9c34c331bf52.Medium.jpg" alt="" /><br />&nbsp;into the nearest sewer. Thanks!</strong> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
3

3488

Guest
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'><font color="#ff0000">I think Saiph answered your question rather completely.&nbsp; Here is the Hubble deep field image, and all of the lights in this picture are galaxies.&nbsp; This picture represents a tiny segment of the sky, so you can see that there are a LOT of galaxies out there. <br /> Posted by DrRocket</font></DIV></p><p><strong><font size="2" color="#000000">Absolutely DrRocket. </font></strong></p><p>&nbsp;Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'><font color="#ff0000">Thanks for a quick answer :)No english ain't my native language... but you answered my question on "Are astronomers sure galaxies are millions of stars and not planetary systems?" even though it wasn't rightly typed... never the less i'm pleased with the answer i got from you.. many thanks :) now i dont have to wonder if the stars i see up in the sky are planets or galaxies :) <br /> Posted by Gepox</font></DIV></p><p><strong><font size="2" color="#000000">Welcome to SDC Gepox, </font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2" color="#000000">Very intelligent question in English that really was very good, considering it is not your native language.</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2" color="#000000">Please accept Nimbus's offer if you feel so inclined. It's not an insult, far from it, Nimbus would not bother if he thought you were not worth the effort. It's a compliment.&nbsp;</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2" color="#000000">I really do not have anything of value to add. Saiph & DrRocket have said everything.</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2" color="#000000"> Cosmology is not my strong point, my strengths appear to lie in planetary science, planetary exploration & volcanic geology, though I know a little bit about this.&nbsp;</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2" color="#000000">Also the Hubble field South to complement the Hubble Deep Field that DrRocket posted. DrRocket's image was taken off a tiny portion of sky within Ursa Major & the one I have posted was more or less 180 degrees away in Tucana. </font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2" color="#000000">This backs up what DrRocket said, that the number of galaxies is well, truly enormous.</font></strong></p><p><font size="4">Hubble Deep Field South.</font><br /> <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/7/4/07311916-3eef-4d4e-a4d0-41ead35ea71c.Medium.jpg" alt="" /></p><p><strong><font size="2"><br />Also look at this Gepox, </font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">The Mice / NGC 4676, in the constellation of Coma Berenices. These two galaxies are in the process of merging (some not too unlike the situation in about 2.4 Billion years time when Andromeda & the Milky Way merge)&nbsp;</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">However, I'm not really focussing on The Mice themselves in this image, rather the background. There are once again a huge number of galaxies.</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">You'll see in many cases, above images I post in the threads, there is usually a link. That either goes to a full size / full resolution image or to a related article.</font></strong></p><p><font size="4">The Mice / NGC 4676. </font><br /> <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/4/2/94626e09-620d-4587-82dd-e48e955d4898.Medium.jpg" alt="" /></p><p><br /><font size="2"><strong>Andrew Brown.&nbsp;</strong></font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>
 
3

3488

Guest
<p>
<font color="#ff0000">Stay with us, Gepox. You do ask good questions but play hell with spelling/grammar/vocabulary. Welcome to this interesting web site! Lots of smart folks out here--myself excluded--and we tackle all kinds of fascinating subjects. As for the outer space stuff, as in deep, deep, deep space, my memories of that are quite fuzzy. Literally. I had to leave Krypton in a hurry. Spent a couple of years Out There before I&nbsp; Got Here. Long story. If you ever see any glowing green rocks please toss them&nbsp;into the nearest sewer. Thanks! <br /> Posted by jim48[</font>/QUOTE]</p><p><strong><font size="2">****** MODERATOR HAT ON ******</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">jim48,</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">Your constant references to you being Superman is very annoying & also very Off Topic. </font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">It's OK within the Science Fiction threads as long as it is On Topic. </font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">Certainly does not belong in ANY of the other threads. </font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">Can you please stay on topic.</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">****** MODERATOR HAT OFF ******</font></strong></p><p><strong><font size="2">Andrew Brown.&nbsp;</font></strong></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080">"I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before".</font> <em><strong><font color="#000000">Linda Morabito </font></strong><font color="#800000">on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.</font></em></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://www.launchphotography.com/</font><br /><br /><font size="1" color="#000080">http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearth</font></p><p><font size="1" color="#000080">http://web.me.com/meridianijournal</font></p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts