A Tiny Galaxy is Born

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by michael on Friday December 20, 2002 @02:08AM from the baby-shower dept.

phlack writes "New images from the Hubble Telescope show a new galaxy (only 68 million light years away) is in the stages of being formed, despite its neighbors (such as us) having already existed for billions of years. This can give astronomers new insight into the sgates of galaxy formation. Information can be found at the hubble telescope site, as well as ScienceDaily."

36 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Light.... by Cyno01 · 2002-12-20 02:21 · Score: 5, Funny

(only 68 million light years away) is in the stages of being formed
Uh, this galaxy was new 68 million years ago, its probably formed by now, /.: old news, stuff that mattered.

--
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
1. Re:Light.... by cperciva · 2002-12-20 04:25 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Given that galaxies take hundreds of millions of years to form -- the article describes this one as about 100 million years old and still in the early stages of formation -- I doubt that the galaxy has formed yet.
  
  --
  Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
2. Re:Light.... by Simon+Field · 2002-12-20 06:27 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Wouldn't that be "matter getting stuffed"?
  Actually, the point of the story is that this is "new". Most of the galaxies we see are billions of years old. To see one forming only 68 million years ago is unusual.
  Of course, the galaxy was discovered 20 years ago, so even that "news" is "olds".
  My favorite quote from the article is this one: "the young system sits in a region of comparatively empty space known as a void".
  Well, yes...
  
  --
  Free book: Science Toys You Can Make
3. Re:Light.... by Spuffin · 2002-12-20 08:35 · Score: 2
  
  You have a point, albeit a small one. :) It doesn't really matter if it has formed now or what, what does matter is that the light is finally reaching us, therefor showing us it is being formed. We can continue to watch this stream of light and see it being formed as well as learning how it formed EVEN THOUGH (as you said) it has probably already been formed. It's not like we were planning to send out a probe to watch it develop.
4. Re:Light.... by chaidawg · 2002-12-21 05:00 · Score: 2
  
  Interesting thought, and a prevalent one. However, I don't believe it is accurate. According to Feynman in his lecture on space and time, now is a relative term. Since, in Einstein's theories, nothing can travel faster than light, the now of the universe is what we can view now. Therefore the galaxy is forming now. Perhaps someone with a better grasp can clarify, but I believe that is the basic position.
5. Re:Light.... by Planesdragon · 2002-12-21 09:29 · Score: 2
  
  Therefore the galaxy is forming now. Perhaps someone with a better grasp can clarify, but I believe that is the basic position.
  
  Sounds like limiting "the universe" to "the subjective universe." Or in other worde: sure, from a standpoint of how-much-plank-time-has-passed-since -the-time-of-creation that galaxy formed 68 million years ago--but as far as WE care, it's just forming now, since it took 68 million years for the effects of its creation to get here.
  
  OUR now is limited to what we can percieve--and it's a rather complex perspective, really. However, the "real now" keeps on going at the same rate everywhere as it does here--but the further you get away, the longer possible causality takes to sync between you and us.
6. Re:Light.... by NewbieProgrammerMan · 2002-12-23 09:25 · Score: 1
  
  Of course, the galaxy was discovered 20 years ago, so even that "news" is "olds".
  
  You speak as if that were a valid reason for it to not get posted on /. :)
  
  --
  [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
Darn... by Koos+Baster · 2002-12-20 03:12 · Score: 2, Funny

You discovered my little terra-forming experiment...

...'Guess I'll have to make it even tinier, next time...

--
God is the only form of extraterrestrial life that we could ever possibly communicate with -- SETI is a joke, people
1. Re:Darn... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-20 03:46 · Score: 0
  
  God is the only form of extraterrestrial life that we could ever possibly communicate with -- SETI is a joke, people
  
  No, organized religion and anything that relies on 'forgiveness' from an 'all-powerful' invisible 'man' who 'lives' in the sky is a joke. The bible is the world's oldest work of fiction. There's no proof (other than the bible, if you can call that proof) that anyone named Jesus lived. Nowhere in any written history of the time will you find mention of this person.
  
  The sooner you realize you've been following the church like some blind, babbling cow, the sooner you'll achieve true enlightenment.
2. Re:Darn... by Koos+Baster · 2002-12-20 04:10 · Score: 0, Offtopic
  
  It seems you got it, but you didn't get it. Ie., You're completely right and have sound arguments to support your opinion. My banner was intended ironically, but in a sense, it shows that the SETI is based on belief, rather than science just as well as any religion.
  
  Personally, I belief it's far more likely SETI will yield proof of ETI than worshipping any divine being, but it's good to realize that my belief is just belief, not science.
3. Re:Darn... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-20 04:23 · Score: 0
  
  There is no god. Ron 1:1.
4. Re:Darn... by program21 · 2002-12-20 04:54 · Score: 2
  
  And there are a great number of holes in the creationist theory too. Neither is perfect, and it's doubtful either will ever be 'proven' or 'disproven'.
  
  --
  This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
5. Re:Darn... by noitalever · 2002-12-20 11:01 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  You mean, like an anonymous coward?
  
  By the way, there is so much evidence that Jesus Christ lived, no sane person even disputes it anymore... It's everywhere...
  
  Yes, as a matter of fact, it IS slaughter your karma day, thanks for asking!
YEah by Unknown+Poltroon · 2002-12-20 03:34 · Score: 1, Offtopic

but is it on orions belt?

"Here kitty kitty kitty"

--
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
Stages of galaxy formation. by taphu · 2002-12-20 03:39 · Score: 4, Funny

This can give astronomers new insight into the sgates of galaxy formation.

Right, all we have to do is monitor it for a few hundred million years and we'll have the whole story!! :)
1. Re:Stages of galaxy formation. by neurostar · 2002-12-20 12:41 · Score: 2
  
  Right, all we have to do is monitor it for a few hundred million years and we'll have the whole story!! :)
  
  Wait! You're forgetting the DMCA. Those scientists better stop researching that galaxy. After all, it's illegal to reverse engineer galaxy-formation.
  
  :)
2. Re:Stages of galaxy formation. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-20 22:08 · Score: 0
  
  This can give astronomers new insight into the sgates of galaxy formation.
  
  Right, all we have to do is monitor it for a few hundred million years and we'll have the whole story!! :)
  
  Why not just use the stargate and go there now?
  
  Yes, I know sgates was mispelled in the article.
3. Re:Stages of galaxy formation. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-22 16:26 · Score: 0
  
  That movie was too much. I had to turn it off when those dolts said that any point in space needed 6 coordinates to describe its position.
  
  Everyone knows it's 3. 3 Cartesian, 3 radial, or 3 cylindrical. Take your pick.
4. Re:Stages of galaxy formation. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-22 20:46 · Score: 0
  
  They changed that in the series.
  
  The 6 glyphs are really ID numbers for the stargates.
  
  BTW don't you need 4 points to describe a location.
  
  X,Y,Z and time
5. Re:Stages of galaxy formation. by Idarubicin · 2002-12-23 17:35 · Score: 2
  
  Right, all we have to do is monitor it for a few hundred million years and we'll have the whole story!! :)
  You think you're kidding, but why is this such a bad idea? Why shouldn't we be making an effort to plan extremely long term research projects? Maybe millions of years is a bit extreme, but how about centuries? Or even decades? What can we get started on?
  Humanity doesn't shy away from engineering projects that will require decades or even longer. We have run informal experiments on these timescales, as well.
  Why not plan for the future? Leave a legacy of science to future generations. Even if the original purpose of an experiment is superceded, the data collected can be valuable in ways we can't imagine. Let tomorrow's data miners unlock the secrets of the universe, instead of just developing new techniques to sell me crap.
  
  --
  ~Idarubicin
Not alone, by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-20 04:54 · Score: 0

But you need to get out of Oregon. There is no god, it's a security blanket for humankind, while we grow up. Some kids don't need security blankets, so don't drag your evolution/god crap into an otherwise interesting post.

Besides, anyone who suggests buying a $130 telescope has nothing to add to an article on astronomy.
1. Re:Not alone, by noitalever · 2002-12-20 11:14 · Score: 0, Offtopic
  
  Wow, coward, I'm impressed that you follow me so closely.
  Btw,the article you are referring to was in reference to a kaleidoscope, but you probably can't spell that word.
  
  Nice try on the burn, though.
  
  Merry CHRISTmas
a little guy by Tablizer · 2002-12-20 05:35 · Score: 1

Oh, it's sooooo cute!

--
Table-ized A.I.
Okay, repeat after me... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-20 05:40 · Score: 2, Informative

Creationism is NOT a THEORY. In order for it to be a theory, it must be first hypothesized, then tested through experiments. However, since it is based on faith and untestable preconditions, this is not possible!

WAKE UP!!!

If you think I'm wrong, post the name of an actual archeologist who follows this "theory"'s guidelines for performing his/her job. And post an Amazon link to a book detailing the legitimate alternative nomenclature to the flora and fauna that don't refer to their genus and species, because, after all they aren't related..

"In creationism, species are described as "fixed" in the sense that they are believed not to change their form, or appearance, through time."
- PBS.org

Why is it that people forget that religion is the source of revelations such as the earth is FLAT, and the center of the universe?

The only good that believing in gods ever did for us, was to give extra time to some otherwise intelligent people by allowing them to be priests instead of getting real jobs. At least they're not full time politicians.
1. Re:Okay, repeat after me... by taphu · 2002-12-20 10:02 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Why is it that people forget that religion is the source of revelations such as the earth is FLAT, and the center of the universe?
  
  Actually, given a suitably warped geometric framework, the earth is flat. Also, the rest of the universe can be considered to move around a stationary earth with the same mathematical validity as any other point in the universe. :)
2. Re:Okay, repeat after me... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-20 12:25 · Score: 0
  
  If you would bother to look in the dictionary you would realize that the word theory can be synonymous with conjecture. So how about losing the attitude. Not everyone who believes in a creator is a fucking moron laughing in the face of science you know.
  
  FWIW, I seriously doubt we're incapable of proving that God exists scientifically -- we simply don't have the means to test -- yet.
3. Re:Okay, repeat after me... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-21 02:27 · Score: 0
  
  Flat only the surface. Care to apply that framework to a solid sphere instead of hollow?
  
  as any other point in the universe
  good point. You were saying?
4. Re:Okay, repeat after me... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-22 16:21 · Score: 0
  
  please use your faith in creationism to describe:
  
  Why do men have nipples?
  
  Why does virtually every species on the planet exhibit bilateral symmetry and analogous structure?
  
  Why is there a fossil record at all (whether you beleive in evolution or not)?
  
  Are all the non-european descended civilizations that don't worship Jesus and his Dad going to hell (and have been since the europeans were cave men wondering how to make fire)?
SETI doesn't try to communicate. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-20 05:47 · Score: 0

They detect. And gods are just pretend, but some people need them because life is really hard.
mods, get a sense of humor:p by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-20 12:20 · Score: 0

filteeeeeeeeeer
Words are more than entries in dictionaries by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-21 02:23 · Score: 0

Nice try, but you have to consider the word in context to have a clue what your speaking about. Theory, in this case, is used to compare natural selection, a scientific theory, with something which is not a scientific theory. It's loaded. I'll lose the attitude if you get a fucking clue. And BTW, creator and god are not the same thing either, as long as we're splitting hairs.
Sources please. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-12-21 02:30 · Score: 0

I'm pretty sane myself, but JC only exists in bumper sticker land to me.
This is good because... by feidaykin · 2002-12-23 05:58 · Score: 1

...astronomers honestly don't know how galaxies form! They have many ideas, of course, but it remains one of the least understood things about modern astronomy. A scientist on space.com said that since we can see galaxies at different stages of evolution, it's sort of like being able to see frogs and tadpoles, and then having to figure out how the rest works on your own... ;)

--
"To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking