I would love to see this edited into some viewscreen images on the NCC-1701[-D] bridge.
Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
41–50 of 62 posts
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody can tell you without pulling numbers out of thin air. That's the point. The only thing that can be said is that the probability of intelligent life arising is greater than 0, which follows from our own existence. Beyond that, any claims about the likelihood of intelligent life are just 20th and 21st century versions of "there must be a God because the universe couldn't have arisen by chance."
Strictly speaking our own existence doesn't even tell us the probability is greater than zero. For an event to have probability zero doesn't imply it can't occur. If a number is chosen from a uniform distribution on the reals between zero and one, whatever the result is the probability of that exact result occurring was zero.
> For an event to have probability zero doesn't imply it can't occur.
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#43Question: why are pictures taken from the space station showing really dark space ? The pictures of the mosaic have many stars and I guess the milkyway can be observed from earth too. So why all that black on the photos taken from space ? An issue with contrast ?
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#44Question: What would it look like to be living on an electron, whizzing around a proton, inside a molecule, inside a living being?
Depends on what _you_ are made of. If you're small enough to live on what is a point particle in our universe, then your concept of "looks like" will be different than ours. For one thing, your interaction with photons will be different than ours.
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Strictly speaking our own existence doesn't even tell us the probability is greater than zero. For an event to have probability zero doesn't imply it can't occur. If a number is chosen from a uniform distribution on the reals between zero and one, whatever the result is the probability of that exact result occurring was zero.
> For an event to have probability zero doesn't imply it can't occur. The distinction in meaningless. We exist, ergo intelligent life can develop in this universe.
It is correct, if you split 100% across infinitely many possible outcomes, each outcome will have probability zero, still one of the possible outcomes will occur.
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For an event to have probability zero doesn't imply it can't occur. The distinction in meaningless. We exist, ergo intelligent life can develop in this universe.
It is correct, if you split 100% across infinitely many possible outcomes, each outcome will have probability zero, still one of the possible outcomes will occur.
Doesn't this require a continuum? I don't think you get there with a measure on a countable set. That would make this an unphysical argument, IMO.
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#47Question: why are pictures taken from the space station showing really dark space ? The pictures of the mosaic have many stars and I guess the milkyway can be observed from earth too. So why all that black on the photos taken from space ? An issue with contrast ?
"Exposure time over 1500 hours between 2009 - 2021"
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is correct, if you split 100% across infinitely many possible outcomes, each outcome will have probability zero, still one of the possible outcomes will occur.
Doesn't this require a continuum? I don't think you get there with a measure on a countable set. That would make this an unphysical argument, IMO.
Yes, it requires uncountability. It could be that physics is ultimately best modelled with countable sets, but that hasn't been established and our current best physical theories are certainly full of uncountability.
The distinction between "surely" and "almost surely" [1] is "just" a curiosity about probability theory though, albeit a rather fundamental one, and I only brought it up as such. It's interesting to think about, and if you do so it quickly brings you up against deep philosophical questions about what probability means.
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#49This is stunning work. Bravo! I feel so small and insignificant right now. And that's not a bad thing.
I always look at the "Pale Blue Dot" image shot by Voyager if I ever have a need to feel insignificant. Never fails me!
Complete with Carl Sagan's magestic description:
Re: Grand mosaic of the Milky Way is now larger than ever
#50Question: why are pictures taken from the space station showing really dark space ? The pictures of the mosaic have many stars and I guess the milkyway can be observed from earth too. So why all that black on the photos taken from space ? An issue with contrast ?
IANAAstrophotographer, but I'd say it's indeed a contrast issue (dynamic range of cameras). Most ISS photos are taken on the day side and have Earth in view; the brightness of reflected light is so great it prevents cameras from recording stars. A quick googling for photos taken from ISS at night reveals that they do feature stars in them.