This gif blows my mind if true

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: johnjohn320
Was cool until they brought "Star Trek Physics" into it. Jesus Christ...

Star Trek references help put things in perspective for people who don't know astronomy. Everything's far out, but how far is it? Star Trek gives a reference that laymen(me) are familiar with.

Unless you never watched or gave a rats ass about Star Trek, then it just confuses me more.

I want FTL drives though dammit!

 

[Slew Foot]

Its all fake. Its a test Jesus made to test your faith.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

I have been thinking about this exact topic the past few nights. It really puts a dim perspective on everyday life when you realize how much is out there, and how we will never see or experience it.

Just take a good look out there. There is no absolute wall to space. There is no end. There can't be. That means that beyond those photo's, there an truly an infinite amount of planes/stars/galaxies behind it. There is everything and anything out there. Space just keeps going, and going, and going. In space there must be everything imaginable. To be honest, it makes me think about my own mortality. It makes me hope that when I die i could go anywhere and do anything. I want to know what's out there.

I got some time to spare though. lol.

 

[MrPickins]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: mugs
Pretty sure I remember reading that picture is not "real" - it's an artist's depiction. I don't think galaxies look like that even with the most powerful telescopes. I don't recall if it's an artist's depiction of what that GIF says it is (a very small section of the sky)

Edit: I'm referring to the Hubble "photograph"

It's called the Hubble Deep Field

Sure enough. I must have it confused with something else.

Probably the simulated image from the HST's replacement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Webb_Space_Telescope

 

[Newbian]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss
1900 Sol diameters is freaking gigantic!:shocked:

That's what she said.

 

[makken]

WTF, it's like the gif version of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcBV-cXVWFw

 

[FelixDeCat]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: johnjohn320
Was cool until they brought "Star Trek Physics" into it. Jesus Christ...

Star Trek references help put things in perspective for people who don't know astronomy. Everything's far out, but how far is it? Star Trek gives a reference that laymen(me) are familiar with.

Agreed. And one of the planets shown is Rigel, which if you remember the series they oft referred to "Rigel-7". I just wonder where the Delta quadrant is so we can locate the crew of Voyager.

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: johnjohn320
Was cool until they brought "Star Trek Physics" into it. Jesus Christ...

Star Trek references help put things in perspective for people who don't know astronomy. Everything's far out, but how far is it? Star Trek gives a reference that laymen(me) are familiar with.

Dark Helmet would get there in no time. He would just use Ludicrous Speed.

 

[summit]

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: mugs
Pretty sure I remember reading that picture is not "real" - it's an artist's depiction. I don't think galaxies look like that even with the most powerful telescopes. I don't recall if it's an artist's depiction of what that GIF says it is (a very small section of the sky)

Edit: I'm referring to the Hubble "photograph"

It's called the Hubble Deep Field

Sure enough. I must have it confused with something else.

Probably the simulated image from the HST's replacement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Webb_Space_Telescope

JWST is not launched yet. you fail.

 

[Born2bwire]

Originally posted by: Summit

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: mugs
Pretty sure I remember reading that picture is not "real" - it's an artist's depiction. I don't think galaxies look like that even with the most powerful telescopes. I don't recall if it's an artist's depiction of what that GIF says it is (a very small section of the sky)

Edit: I'm referring to the Hubble "photograph"

It's called the Hubble Deep Field

Sure enough. I must have it confused with something else.

Probably the simulated image from the HST's replacement:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Webb_Space_Telescope

JWST is not launched yet. you fail.

I think that's why he specified that it was a simulated image.

 

[I Saw OJ]

Space...pretty fucking amazing.

 

[Fenixgoon]

here's a short clip on it, in non-gif form. i just uploaded this to youtube, so it might be a few minutes before the video actually comes up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGPLcNIPipE

 

[Inspector Jihad]

my ego dwarfs all that shit.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: mugs
Pretty sure I remember reading that picture is not "real" - it's an artist's depiction. I don't think galaxies look like that even with the most powerful telescopes. I don't recall if it's an artist's depiction of what that GIF says it is (a very small section of the sky)

Edit: I'm referring to the Hubble "photograph"

I remember the galaxy photo being published in National Geographic as a Hubble-produced image, not an artist's rendition. well, that's what I remember...

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Its all fake. Its a test Jesus made to test your faith.

Exactly. The universe is only about 6000 years old, and all this speculation is against G*d and His Glory. You sinners are all going to H*ll! Repent!

 

[AstroManLuca]

The stars, on the other hand, are artists' renditions (other than the Eta Carinae nebula, which is a Hubble photograph of a nebula surrounding a very large star).

No telescope we have is nearly large enough to actually resolve a star as a disk. All we can do is observe their color (which tells us their temperature) and make educated guesses as to their size, based on parallax measurements or certain other factors. A lot of determining the size/distance of stars is in fact guesswork.

 

[CZroe]

September 3rd, 2003 != December 18th-28th, 1995.

 

[Fayd]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: mugs
Pretty sure I remember reading that picture is not "real" - it's an artist's depiction. I don't think galaxies look like that even with the most powerful telescopes. I don't recall if it's an artist's depiction of what that GIF says it is (a very small section of the sky)

Edit: I'm referring to the Hubble "photograph"

I remember the galaxy photo being published in National Geographic as a Hubble-produced image, not an artist's rendition. well, that's what I remember...

it's made from 3 different types of pictures (that capture 3 different bands on the EM spectrum) that are put together. it could be construed as artist's interpretation because it's the artist's choice of how he wants to mix the channels (thus, reinterpreting non-visible light as visible), because they dont realllly look like that out there. but they ARE shaped like that, and they ARE in that section of the sky.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: destrekor

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: johnjohn320
Was cool until they brought "Star Trek Physics" into it. Jesus Christ...

Star Trek references help put things in perspective for people who don't know astronomy. Everything's far out, but how far is it? Star Trek gives a reference that laymen(me) are familiar with.

Unless you never watched or gave a rats ass about Star Trek, then it just confuses me more.

I want FTL drives though dammit!

Yup, all we got are these crappy FML Drives.

 

[dennilfloss]

Originally posted by: AstroManLuca
The stars, on the other hand, are artists' renditions (other than the Eta Carinae nebula, which is a Hubble photograph of a nebula surrounding a very large star).

No telescope we have is nearly large enough to actually resolve a star as a disk. All we can do is observe their color (which tells us their temperature) and make educated guesses as to their size, based on parallax measurements or certain other factors. A lot of determining the size/distance of stars is in fact guesswork.

Actually, we have resolved a dozen or so stars as discs now, Betelgeuse for example.

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/Y...s-size/betelgeuse.html

 

[shortylickens]

Its amazing that a nerd could take something so incredibly cool and make it so incredibly stupid.

WAY TO GO, NERDS!!!!

 

[frostedflakes]

What I find really neat is that these observations are basically like looking into the past. Imagine if we could somehow intercept light waves that bounced off our planet thousands (or millions, billions, whatever) of years ago. We would be able to observe our own history.

 

[tcsenter]

I said this on a different thread, it actually depresses if not pisses me off a bit. I start out looking at those photos with all the marveling wonderous "Wows" and "OMGs" and "Holy Craps", and it always occurs to me, that I will die at least several hundred years before we have any meaningful space exploration. Provided we don't have another dark ages or global scale catastrophe that sets science back a few hundred years.

Its almost like a virgin losing his penis in some freak accident, then having to live the next 40 would-be sexually active years on a planet knowing there are millions of hot women out there. He can even see a lot of them and marvel at what it might be like, but will never know. But there is one big difference, he can hope. We may well be ~15 years away from successful penis transplants, growing one in a lab or something. But there is absolutely zero chance that we might gain radically new space exploration capabilities before my grand-children die of old age.

I'm not selfish, I don't want to know what is in the entire universe. I just want to take a spin around the most potentially fertile systems in own galaxy, or at least see a lot better images from rovers that have actually went there. It just ain't fair, damnit!

Oh well, I guess I'll have to take solace in having a penis. Things could always be worse, I suppose.

 

[IamBusby]

Originally posted by: Scholzpdx
I have been thinking about this exact topic the past few nights. It really puts a dim perspective on everyday life when you realize how much is out there, and how we will never see or experience it.

Just take a good look out there. There is no absolute wall to space. There is no end. There can't be. That means that beyond those photo's, there an truly an infinite amount of planes/stars/galaxies behind it. There is everything and anything out there. Space just keeps going, and going, and going. In space there must be everything imaginable. To be honest, it makes me think about my own mortality. It makes me hope that when I die i could go anywhere and do anything. I want to know what's out there.

I got some time to spare though. lol.

No matter how large the universe is it is finite.

As to there being a "Wall" at the end and your next question being "well what's on the other side?" If you were to keep travelling in a straight line it's theorised that you would would end up back where you started. I think this is where the Donut shaped universe theory comes from. Based on this you could also theorise that one of those points of light out there in space is actually our very own galaxy at an early age and the light has travelled in this straight line until it's reached us again.

 

[Synomenon]

Imagine how advanced a civilization must be on one of those galaxies that's 13 billion light years out (any of the ones mentioned as most distant) if that civilization began 13 billion years ago.