Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

syfy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 252 posts

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#211

Post by pathseeker »

withinboredom wrote: post #172
skissane wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with dates like that is they are pure best wishes. They might have funding for a demo in 2024 – although it isn't even clear they've got that yet, it sounds like they may just have funding to develop their proposal further. Even assuming the tech demo is successful, it sounds like they don't even yet have a detailed costed proposal for a 2034 launch, and no idea how likely that it will actually get funded…

> Politicians and bureaucrats want immediate results This makes me sad. The entire point of Government is to be an enterprise spanning multiple generations.

>This makes me sad. The entire point of Government is to be an enterprise spanning multiple generations.

Not in a democracy. The point of a government in a democracy is to serve the current will of the people. The government itself might last many generations, but its goals and motivations change with every election cycle.

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#212

Post by GlennS »

Swizec wrote: post #143
dumpsterdiver wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"space itself is expanding (into what? nobody knows)" I have a terrifying theory on this (granted, the Earth will be long gone). What if the universe is not actually expanding in the sense that it is being propelled by an initial explosion, but instead falling towards a much greater mass - the end of time so to speak, where all mass ends. Considering that gravity is a "weak force", the scale of such a mass makes me…

My high school physics professor had a great take on this: The universe is defined as “everything”. If we ever find anything outside the universe, we’ll call that the universe too.

The atom used to be defined as the smallest indivisible thing, but we didn't rename it when we learned that you could split them into smaller things.

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#214

Post by dumpsterdiver »

outworlder wrote: post #71
dumpsterdiver wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a question: Just over 20 years ago when the accepted view was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down, would you have backed that position with as much certainty as you are backing this one? That the universe is a mere 13.7 billion years old? We cannot prove the absence of light in a place that is already so far away that it's light will never reach us. Do you agree? We can prove what we can observ…

> Just over 20 years ago when the accepted view was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down Was it ever a mainstream view? I thought it was just a conjecture, leading to the 'big crush', and was disproven long ago, way more than 2 decades ago. > The entire premise of dating our universe is based on its observed rate of expansion Also there's the cosmic microwave background radiation. We have mapped it, an…

> We have a pretty good idea of what's going on based on the scientific method, not conjectures from single individuals.

Where do our theories come from, if not single individuals?

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#215

Post by dumpsterdiver »

outworlder wrote: post #71
dumpsterdiver wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a question: Just over 20 years ago when the accepted view was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down, would you have backed that position with as much certainty as you are backing this one? That the universe is a mere 13.7 billion years old? We cannot prove the absence of light in a place that is already so far away that it's light will never reach us. Do you agree? We can prove what we can observ…

> Just over 20 years ago when the accepted view was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down Was it ever a mainstream view? I thought it was just a conjecture, leading to the 'big crush', and was disproven long ago, way more than 2 decades ago. > The entire premise of dating our universe is based on its observed rate of expansion Also there's the cosmic microwave background radiation. We have mapped it, an…

> "Was it ever a mainstream view? I thought it was just a conjecture, leading to the 'big crush', and was disproven long ago, way more than 2 decades ago."

How would one disprove the ultimate fate of the universe?

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#216

Post by [deleted] »

outworlder wrote: post #71
dumpsterdiver wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a question: Just over 20 years ago when the accepted view was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down, would you have backed that position with as much certainty as you are backing this one? That the universe is a mere 13.7 billion years old? We cannot prove the absence of light in a place that is already so far away that it's light will never reach us. Do you agree? We can prove what we can observ…

> Just over 20 years ago when the accepted view was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down Was it ever a mainstream view? I thought it was just a conjecture, leading to the 'big crush', and was disproven long ago, way more than 2 decades ago. > The entire premise of dating our universe is based on its observed rate of expansion Also there's the cosmic microwave background radiation. We have mapped it, an…

[deleted]

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#217

Post by dumpsterdiver »

outworlder wrote: post #71
dumpsterdiver wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a question: Just over 20 years ago when the accepted view was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down, would you have backed that position with as much certainty as you are backing this one? That the universe is a mere 13.7 billion years old? We cannot prove the absence of light in a place that is already so far away that it's light will never reach us. Do you agree? We can prove what we can observ…

> Just over 20 years ago when the accepted view was that the expansion of the universe was slowing down Was it ever a mainstream view? I thought it was just a conjecture, leading to the 'big crush', and was disproven long ago, way more than 2 decades ago. > The entire premise of dating our universe is based on its observed rate of expansion Also there's the cosmic microwave background radiation. We have mapped it, an…

> "Unless the rate of expansion starts to slow down or we have indication that it will ever reverse, there's no big crunch. The rate of expansion is increasing"

What if it is increasing because it is falling towards a great mass on the other side of the universe? That would still count as a big crunch in my opinion.

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#218

Post by andy_ppp »

biotinker wrote: post #158
skykooler wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

25 kilometers per pixel is incredible resolution for something that far away!

That would be tremendous. Earth is 12700 km in diameter, so such an image would be a bit more than 500px across. Here is a picture of the Earth that is about 500px in diameter: https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3upZx2gxxLpW7MBbnKYQLH.jpg

Do we only get a ring or do we get the whole thing? If we only get a ring why is that? Is the thing we are bending light around in the way?

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#219

Post by andy_ppp »

pathseeker wrote: post #211
withinboredom wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Politicians and bureaucrats want immediate results This makes me sad. The entire point of Government is to be an enterprise spanning multiple generations.

>This makes me sad. The entire point of Government is to be an enterprise spanning multiple generations. Not in a democracy. The point of a government in a democracy is to serve the current will of the people. The government itself might last many generations, but its goals and motivations change with every election cycle.

The point of democracy is to create AI powered propaganda to tell the people how to vote and make the rich even richer?

Re: Why is there a normal galaxy sitting at the edge of the Universe?

#220

Post by interfixus »

tectonic wrote: post #2

Nice gravitational lens observation! We're hoping to use the same technique with the Sun to observe exoplanets by launching a fleet of small satellites to 547 AU (80 billion km / ~3 light days). The craft would sample the distorted Einstein ring around our Sun from that vantage point, then combine and reconstruct an image of the disk of an Earth-like exoplanet up to 100 light-years beyond, at a resolution of 25 kilom…

If that can be done, it means the light and the info is there. Meaning here. The lensing and the 550 AU are just ways to catch it. I should be highly surprised if we do not - long before 2064 - have optical and computational trickery to catch such resolution with snapshots from somewhere very close to home.
Post reply on HN