• Deepest galaxy cluster ever pictured by Hubble
    125 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Cureless;43467136]Anyone else get the feeling of being insignificant when you look at pictures like that and realize how grand the scale of the universe truly is?[/QUOTE] life is the most significant part of the universe
[QUOTE=hybrid_theory;43470985]life is the most significant part of the universe[/QUOTE] It is, really, from a cosmic evolution point of view, life is its ultimate evolution, and sentient life is even further down that line. One could argue that the only thing in the universe that matters (because it is the only thing that could make it even be at all[with no sentience is no observation, nothing]) is sentient life, like humans. It is a legitimate view, I feel.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43470717]No, that's not true. Consider if the universe is spherical.[/QUOTE] Yeah I was drunk when I posted that, ignore me
[QUOTE=archangel125;43466288]Wild. So because of the finite speed of light, we're watching the early universe unfold. Shouldn't it be possible with further study to get an idea of the general location of the big bang?[/QUOTE] Dude, the big bang was exactly at (0,0,0)
[QUOTE=Laserbeams;43466775]Why is everything blue? Shouldn't it be red due to redshift?[/QUOTE] Hubble could just be picking up red-shifted UV light from those galaxies (If the cluster is expanding away from us)
[QUOTE=Advancedrock;43470961]But only isn't that because of our small awareness of the universe as a whole? We can't see it all, but if we looked at the universe from the impossible perspective of: the entire universe, not just the visible universe, wouldn't we be able to find a center where [U][I][B]everything[/B][/I][/U] is moving away from. [editline]9th January 2014[/editline] Or does that not exist, if not then wtf? How could that be, the universe would have to be infinite literally, not just by means of expansion.[/QUOTE] everything moves away from everything else, there's an infinite number of points where the universe expanded from - every single point in space not kept on a leash by any of the 4 fundamental forces is expanding at 67.80km/s per 3,261,633.44 light years
[QUOTE=Eltro102;43477881]everything moves away from everything else, there's an infinite number of points where the universe expanded from - every single point in space not kept on a leash by any of the 4 fundamental forces is expanding at 67.80km/s per 3,261,633.44 light years[/QUOTE] How could this be? I'm sorry, but I don't understand how that can be.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43468279]That's not how the big bang works. It's not an explosion from a point. It's an expansion of distances at every point in space. There is no one place that it occurred. Pretty much all modern cosmology relies on the (true to a very good approximation) idea that, on large distance scales, no point of the universe looks different than any other point. That symmetry would be broken if we could find a privileged point where the big bang started.[/QUOTE] I haven't studied astronomy or physics and I'm pretty new to science apart from what I learned in class years ago, I don't know if this is irrelevant but how exactly can space be infinite(ly big?) if the early universe was "smaller than a pin head"? If the universe has expanded since the beginning wouldn't the universe have a set volume that continues to grow?
[QUOTE=Advancedrock;43470961]But only isn't that because of our small awareness of the universe as a whole? We can't see it all, but if we looked at the universe from the impossible perspective of: the entire universe, not just the visible universe, wouldn't we be able to find a center where [U][I][B]everything[/B][/I][/U] is moving away from. [editline]9th January 2014[/editline] Or does that not exist, if not then wtf? How could that be, the universe would have to be infinite literally, not just by means of expansion.[/QUOTE]Why did you disagree with his post, I would imagine he knows more about this than you do. [QUOTE=Advancedrock;43477956]How could this be? I'm sorry, but I don't understand how that can be.[/QUOTE]That's just how it is, it's hard to imagine yeah, but that's the reality of reality, nature doesn't need to conform to our ways of thinking or logic.
[QUOTE=Advancedrock;43477956]How could this be? I'm sorry, but I don't understand how that can be.[/QUOTE] imaging every single cell in your body doubles in volume from it's own centre where's the centre of expansion of your body?
[QUOTE=Advancedrock;43470961]But only isn't that because of our small awareness of the universe as a whole? We can't see it all, but if we looked at the universe from the impossible perspective of: the entire universe, not just the visible universe, wouldn't we be able to find a center where [U][I][B]everything[/B][/I][/U] is moving away from. [editline]9th January 2014[/editline] Or does that not exist, if not then wtf? How could that be, the universe would have to be infinite literally, not just by means of expansion.[/QUOTE] Just imagine if the universe was made up of perfectly aligned squares, now imagine every square expanding at the same time while remaining aligned, imagine the space in every square expanding - that's how I understand it. How does matter sustain through this expansion though?
The raisin bread analogy posted earlier does a good job of explaining it, I think. [QUOTE=areolop;43468199]Now that you put it in that way, I think my professor used the "raisins in bread analogy [img]http://www2.astro.psu.edu/users/niel/astro1/slideshows/class31/002-Raisin_bread.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478010]I haven't studied astronomy or physics and I'm pretty new to science apart from what I learned in class years ago, I don't know if this is irrelevant but how exactly can space be infinite(ly big?) if the early universe was "smaller than a pin head"? If the universe has expanded since the beginning wouldn't the universe have a set volume that continues to grow?[/QUOTE] The universe expansion of space doesn't actually contain information, so it can grow as fast as it wants. Even after it became infinite it can continue to expand by basically inflating distances between points over time. We can't really say for sure [I]when[/I] the universe became infinite. It could have been an instant after the big bang, it could have been some finite time ago, but our observations are consistent with it being infinite today. Also, it never would have to expand infinitely fast to become infinite. Look, for instance, at the function f(t) = tan(t) for t in [0,pi). Imagine this is the size of the universe at time t. It's size is finite at every time in that range, the expansion rate is finite at every point of time in there, but as soon as we reach pi seconds or whatever after the big bang, it's infinite. [editline]9th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478071]Just imagine if the universe was made up of perfectly aligned squares, now imagine every square expanding at the same time while remaining aligned, imagine the space in every square expanding - that's how I understand it. How does matter sustain through this expansion though?[/QUOTE] Matter sustains itself just fine, given that larger distances grow much more quickly from this expansion. An atom is not going to be affected by the expansion for a long, long time, but two distant galaxies will notice.
would an atom be affected ever? i thought that since the forces holding it together are strong enough to hold it together (like holding a dog on a lease whilst the ground below you expands), whereas the forces between galaxies are weak enough to be [editline]9th January 2014[/editline] unless the expansion is getting faster
[QUOTE=archangel125;43466288]Wild. So because of the finite speed of light, we're watching the early universe unfold. Shouldn't it be possible with further study to get an idea of the general location of the big bang?[/QUOTE] You are a fucking idiot. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - JohnnyMo1))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Eltro102;43478300]would an atom be affected ever? i thought that since the forces holding it together are strong enough to hold it together (like holding a dog on a lease whilst the ground below you expands), whereas the forces between galaxies are weak enough to be [editline]9th January 2014[/editline] unless the expansion is getting faster[/QUOTE] It is possible, the end-of-the-universe scenario called the Big Rip is when the universe expands faster and faster enough that the observable universe becomes smaller even than atoms, and everything is torn apart.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43478214]The universe expansion of space doesn't actually contain information, so it can grow as fast as it wants. Even after it became infinite it can continue to expand by basically inflating distances between points over time. We can't really say for sure [I]when[/I] the universe became infinite. It could have been an instant after the big bang, it could have been some finite time ago, but our observations are consistent with it being infinite today. Also, it never would have to expand infinitely fast to become infinite. Look, for instance, at the function f(t) = tan(t) for t in [0,pi). Imagine this is the size of the universe at time t. It's size is finite at every time in that range, the expansion rate is finite at every point of time in there, but as soon as we reach pi seconds or whatever after the big bang, it's infinite.[/QUOTE] You say the expansion of space doesn't actually contain information, does that mean matter and/or energy is not created with the expansion? Does this mean that if a fictional observer bound by no laws of physics travels a far enough distance in this infinitely big universe, in one direction, you would be able to travel past a point at where if you would continue travelling you would never encounter anything ever again but empty space? [editline]9th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43478354]It is possible, the end-of-the-universe scenario called the Big Rip is when the universe expands faster and faster enough that the observable universe becomes smaller even than atoms, and everything is torn apart.[/QUOTE] How can atoms be torn apart? Are they split into pieces or fluid energy or something? [editline]9th January 2014[/editline] Like I said I don't know anything really
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478380]You say the expansion of space doesn't actually contain information, does that mean matter and/or energy is not created with the expansion? Does this mean that if a fictional observer bound by no laws of physics travels a far enough distance in this infinitely big universe, in one direction, you would be able to go travel past a location point at where if you would continue travelling you would never encounter anything ever again but empty space?[/QUOTE] I'm not sure. [QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478380]How can atoms be torn apart? Are they split into pieces or fluid energy or something?[/QUOTE] In a hydrogen atom, for instance, the proton and electron would cease to be bound together, since they could no longer communicate in any way.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43478354]It is possible, the end-of-the-universe scenario called the Big Rip is when the universe expands faster and faster enough that the observable universe becomes smaller even than atoms, and everything is torn apart.[/QUOTE] So wait, could we be getting bigger and bigger this whole time?
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;43478435]So wait, could we be getting bigger and bigger this whole time?[/QUOTE] What do you mean?
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43478424]I'm not sure.[/quote] I would say "I hope we find out" but then I guess we probably won't be able to get observable data to really prove anything... but are there no current theories or wild guesses? [quote]In a hydrogen atom, for instance, the proton and electron would cease to be bound together, since they could no longer communicate in any way.[/QUOTE] What would happen to the proton and electron then? If space itself is expanding, and these particles exist in space will they not expand or be ripped apart too?
Remember, the universe is likely expanding faster than the speed of light and its within the laws of physics to do so
[QUOTE=Lazore;43466921]I love space. I'd fuck space[/QUOTE] If you define space as a synonym for universe, then technically when you fuck anyone you are fucking space.
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478463]I would say "I hope we find out" but then I guess we probably won't be able to get observable data to really prove anything... but are there no current theories or wild guesses?[/QUOTE] If there are, I don't really know anything about them. I know a decent bit about cosmology, but certainly not everything. It feel like it's likely matter is pretty evenly distributed throughout space, since all of space expanded at once, but that means there is likely an infinite amount of matter in the universe. I can't think of any theoretical problems with this off the top of my head, but there may be. [QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478463]What would happen to the proton and electron then? If space itself is expanding, and these particles exist in space will they not expand or be ripped apart too?[/QUOTE] I wouldn't think you could tear them apart any further, since elementary particles are pointlike as far as we know.
[QUOTE=Killer900;43478019]Why did you disagree with his post, I would imagine he knows more about this than you do. That's just how it is, it's hard to imagine yeah, but that's the reality of reality, nature doesn't need to conform to our ways of thinking or logic.[/QUOTE] But things need some sort of explanation, no? That's weird combined with my understanding of the big bang, I thought the universe expanded out of a massive expansion, hearing that apparently this is not really the case and there was no place it began just kinda doesn't work too well. Idk why?
[QUOTE=Advancedrock;43478514]But things need some sort of explanation, no? That's weird combined with my understanding of the big bang, I thought the universe expanded out of a massive expansion, hearing that apparently this is not really the case and there was no place it began just kinda doesn't work too well. Idk why?[/QUOTE] I think I was confused by your question before, but when I am talking about the universe, I mean the whole universe, not just the observable universe. There is no center. The expansion of space is not an outward explosion, it never was. It is an expansion of distances between points.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43478510]If there are, I don't really know anything about them. I know a decent bit about cosmology, but certainly not everything. It feel like it's likely matter is pretty evenly distributed throughout space, since all of space expanded at once, but that means there is likely an infinite amount of matter in the universe. I can't think of any theoretical problems with this off the top of my head, but there may be.[/quote] Even if it makes sense mathematically, I just have such a hard time grasping how there can be an infinite amount of matter if the universe was once finite. Not saying I don't believe it I just don't understand it. [quote]I wouldn't think you could tear them apart any further, since elementary particles are pointlike as far as we know.[/QUOTE] Pointlike? As in they occupy the lowest volume of space possible?
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478594]Even if it makes sense mathematically, I just have such a hard time grasping how there can be an infinite amount of matter if the universe was once finite. Not saying I don't believe it I just don't understand it.[/QUOTE] Like I said, I know a good amount of cosmology (doing some research on it currently) but big bang is not really my thing. I'm not sure. [QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478594]Pointlike? As in they occupy the lowest volume of space possible?[/QUOTE] Yes. Potentially no space. Theoretically an electron has no size and we haven't seen any experimental evidence otherwise. It is at the least very, very, very small.
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;43478618]Like I said, I know a good amount of cosmology (doing some research on it currently) but big bang is not really my thing. I'm not sure. Yes. Potentially no space. Theoretically an electron has no size and we haven't seen any experimental evidence otherwise. It is at the least very, very, very small.[/QUOTE] Is space itself pointlike aswell then?
[QUOTE=MrJazzy;43478726]Is space itself pointlike aswell then?[/QUOTE] We don't really have a theory that tells us what space is like at distances near or smaller than the Planck length. Some people think space is broken up into blocks of the smallest possible volume, but I don't think that has widespread acceptance or strong theoretical justification.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.