This is awesome

[Beldaran]

The Universe's Baby Pictures (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/11feb_map.htm)

[VashdeStampedo!]

I get a pick of the day email from NASA (or I used to), a lot of them are pretty cool.

[Paradox]

it's a bit old to be a baby picture :laughing:
that first pic is sort of inaccurate though. because the farther you go away from a source of light, it takes longer to reach you. so some of the data from stars/galaxies way out there might be reaching us at the same moment light from somewhere nearby could.

[mikeron]

Some prof. from CalTech gave a lecture here on using weather balloons with microwave sensors in Antarctica to make that type of "light map". He said there are lots of random variables, but it's still pretty damned accurate.

Paradox: The method uses background microwave radiation, so that problem doesn't present itself as explicitly.

[Jimmy the Saint]

I do have a big interest in physics however i've had a bit too much to drink tonight so i'm not confident in what i say!


I don't truly understand why what Paradox was wrong?

I mean microwaves travel at the exact same speed that light does?

Now unless you’re talking about red shift , then apparently this makes a difference i.e. the red shift is so great that the light is actually shifted to microwave levels!

However I think at one point I was taught that the speed of light was a constant in ANY inertial reference frame!!!

Right so this is all so far is conforming to the point!

(So now I get a lot wrong?) just say the universe was dispersing at a uniform rate causing red shift. great i think everything fits.

However I’ve herd several theories saying that the universe underwent a rapid period of expansion and perhaps even the universe’s expansion is still accelerating !!!!

Where does this factor in??
According to their calculations the universe is a few billion years younger than I thought it was i.e I reckoned from what I read it is approx 15 billion years old.

Mind you the age of the universe as changed a lot , I just wonder what model of the universe did they calculate to get this time?

As is obvious I like this type of topic , so if you want to debate it with me either start a thread or pm me .

[Maverik X]

In the begining, there was nothing, which exploded.
-Terry Pratchet

Very interesting. The point I like was the dark energy and the fact that the universe may actually still be expanding. Ahem. *Stands on soap box*

Dark energy, which a short while ago was not generally accepted, is a sort of anti-gravity. Basically, in areas where there is no gravity, which pulls things toward it, there is dark energy, which repels gravity and solid masses that generate gravity, if generate is the right word. Anyway, as a result of this, the universe may still be expanding, and may not ever stop. This goes against the generally accepted theory that the universe will eventually collapse in on itself, i.e. the big crunch. However, if the universe expands indefinately, it will eventually tear itself apart.

*Gets off his soap box*

Feel free to point out the noob's flaws and, if nessicary, insult his intelligence.

[Jimmy the Saint]

I could be wroung as I don’t know Ensiteins work of by heart but I think I heard:

That Einstine first came up with this and called it something like the cosmological constant . howeverever he did this for all the wrong reasons! In fact he called it “ the biggist mistake in his life!” As he used it to keep his religious views in check and when it turned out to look like rubbish he drooped it and made that comment , however the programme I seen said this was Ironic as now it looks like this “Dark energy “ does the same thing!


This I don’t understand at all?

I mean the “Dark Matter” that I think accounts for most matter in the universe but is pretty much completely unobservable I think I can understand. I.E. it is either a weird form of matter that isn’t readily observable , it is a form of matter we understand but so widely dispersed you’ cant’ observe it (for instance , just say the entire universe was bathed in a light hydrogen cloud (where like meteor’s the gravity causes it it orbit.)) Or the matter is locked up in black holes where it still has a gravitational output but by nature gives little indication it is their. (there is evidence that the centre of most galaxies contains a supermasive black hole or the like)

But this Dark Energy that aids the acceleration of the universe because it supposedly has anti-gravity properties bothers me!

What I wonder (and would love to be true as it fits my thinking but I know its probably not true) is perhaps this Dark Energy is in fact anti-matter?

Something that has bothered me was this , if the big bang model is true then why do we live in a surrounding that is pretty much entirely matter! We know that anti-matter exists (we’ve created it) so if a universe was created uniformly (which our surroundings in a way point towards! [I heard that no matter what direction you look the universe looks pretty much the same]) Also this creates bigger problems , as in their would be no stars etc.. But to keep it simple , if their was uniform and equal amounts of matter , anti matter this would suggest that they would simply annihilate each other and no universe (and no conversation!). However just say that it wasn’t entirely uniform but instead created “pockets” of matter and anti matter and just say that these pockets then turned to individual galaxies now also just say that a property on an matter anti matter interaction was that their gravitational fields repelled each other (although I’m not familiar of the properties of anti matter I do think I read that basically their electrons and protons are the inverse of matters electrons and protons so its not a huge stretch of the imagination to suggest that their gravitational fields would repel each other). Now just say that these individual galaxies where evenly distributed throughout the universe.

This for my own limited brain solves a lot of problems for me!
You solve the problem of why there is so much matter in the universe. (their wouldn’t be because ½ of it would be anti matter)
You also solve the , why is the universe still supposedly accelerating apart ?

[TheGeepster]

Many of you will think me stupid and unscientific, but I propose the alternative to all this.

"God made it."

Intriguing thread though. I love hearing discussions on Relativity Theory and Astrophysics.

[Maverik X]

See, now, if we use that form of thinking, all our problems would be solved.

Why does this happen? "Because God made it happen"

Why is this here? "Because God put it there"

But, you see, that's no fun. As an athiest, I feel I must point this out.

[Axel]

until you can prove god exists its not a plausible hypothosis.

I believe that by Dark Energy you mean anti-particles. for every one of the base particles (graviton, photon, quark, etc.) there is a corresponding anti-particle (anti-graviton) when a particle and an anti-particle meet they negate each other releasing large amounts of energy. (that's how ships in Star Trek run) however energy can also break down into particles and anti-particles. (-1 + 1 = 0, therefore at any time 0 may replace 1 + -1 and vice versa)
further anti-particles react in the opposite way their counterparts do. gravitons repel anti-matter, and anti-gravitons repel matter.

[Myth]

oo not bad, kinda inaccurate tho =/

and the fact i'd rather know about the moments leading to the Big Bang :D
ill show this my geology teacher tomorrow thx Beldaran

[Beldaran]

I like how NASA releases scientific research and all of us (who are totally less educated than NASA scientists) are criticizing it for being innacurate or wrong.

[TheGeepster]

Just pointing out the alternative, that's all. Sometimes I feel like popular science (particularly biology and psychology) start off with a mind closed to the spiritual realm of things. Can I prove God to someone like that? No. It requires faith. Besides, any hypothesis is feasible until proven otherwise. But as I said, I enjoy listening to this sort of debate, because the ideas are highly thought-provoking, so I shall not interject any more of this into it.

The explanation of anti-matter as I have heard it is that it is particles identicle in almost every way, except it's the mirror image. If you could find a universe consisting entirely of anti-matter, and somehow view it through a portal, it would appear to be indistinguishable of our own. So I think Dark Matter is something entirely different. Something heavy enough to draw in all radiation perhaps.