Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Universe Beige, not Turquoise

Posted by michael on from the housepainters-relieved dept.

ChazeFroy writes: "The universe is actually beige, not turquoise. Researchers at John Hopkins University initially reported it was turquoise, but the software they used contained a flaw that implemented a non-standard white index to arrive at the mint chocolate chip green color." The other color was much nicer than this beige.

3 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Hmm...the universe and my underwear... by monkeydo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Funny how you didn't click all the links.

    From Glazebrook's page:

    "We admit the color of the Universe was something of a gimmick, to try and make our story on spectra more accessible. Nevertheless it is an actual calculable thing so we believe it is important to get it right."
    And:
    "Of course, our real motive for calculating the cosmic spectrum was really a lot more than producing these pretty color pictures. The color is interesting but in fact the cosmic spectrum is rich in detail and tells us a lot more about the history of star formation in the Universe. You may have noticed above that the cosmic spectrum contains dark lines and bright bands, these correspond to the characteristic emission and absorption of different elements."

    So this actually reveals something about the makeup and history of the universe. Viola, science!

    --
    Si vis pacem, para bellum
    The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
  2. But this color isn't visible from Earth by EricLivingston · · Score: 5, Informative
    On the scientists' home page for this study, they talk about how they "de-redshifted" all the 200,000 colors before mixing them into the equation. I suppose this was to figure out what the color of each galaxy would be if you were parked nearby at zero relative velocity.

    However, this isn't what you see from earth at all. Originally I thought they had simulated what would happen if you could "funnel" all the starlight on a dark night visible from Earth (or even outside our atmosphere) and created one beam from it. They've sort of done this, but in their model they've stopped the expansion of the universe and "corrected" the light to make it appear as if the universe is static and all those galaxies are not actually moving away from us.

    So, I'm not sure what to make of this color - it's not one you'd ever actually see: it's not "real" in the sense you could measure it somewhere.

    --
    Please Rate my comment (and help support Fre
  3. So this is what it takes by beigeboy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hi this is Glazebrook here (honest!)

    I am a regular slashdot reader for my sins. Finally an incentive to actually sign up.

    I am amused to see the story got on the front pages this time, sorry that I had to be wrong to achieve this feat!

    hope you all read the web page and about the science of starlight (and color!)

    http://www.pha.jhu.edu/~kgb/cosspec/

    and it's much more complicated than 'averaging 3 numbers'. The color is a volume-averaged - deredshifted (otherwise it would not be very meaningful) sum of all starlight. Those of you with www skills will be able to track down the origin of the erroneous software I will not deprecate it here.

    Karl

    p.s. the color suggestions are poring in, my favorite so far is 'cosmic latte'