Slashdot Mirror


Orion Nebula Gets New Milepost Marker, Now Closer

twilight30 writes "Discovery News is reporting that 'One of the most famous and scrutinized heavenly objects is 10 to 20 percent closer than we thought, say two teams of radio astronomers who have made some of the most precise cosmic distance measurements ever, with a telescope nearly as big as Earth. The Orion Nebula is the closest major stellar nursery to Earth, so it has been heavily studied to learn about the lives of stars. Its distance from Earth, however, has long been a matter of uncertainty, with an estimate made about 25 years ago in need of revision.'"

93 comments

  1. "a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    That's nothing. They needed a computer nearly the size of Jupiter to process the data.

    1. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by opus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The VLBA was aimed at one of the few radio-wave emitting stars in Orion, which was viewed twice in a single a year. The almost 200-million-mile width of Earth's orbit around the sun allowed the VLBA to serve as one eye, then again as the other eye six months later.

      Wouldn't that be a telescope 200-million-miles wide, using the same poetic license that led them to say they used a telescope as big as the earth.

    2. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by mstahl · · Score: 1, Funny

      Maybe we'll get a better answer than "42" this time then!

    3. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Saying that the telescope was "nearly as big as Earth" is dead wrong. The effective aperture of the telescope, for this purpose, is twice the radius of the orbit of Earth around the sun, or almost 200 million miles. Gotta love those science reporters...

    4. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by Nimey · · Score: 1

      How many Ping-Pong balls & how many Libraries of Congress, please.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    5. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by Propaganda13 · · Score: 1

      The answer was fine (I still like the base 13 idea even if Douglas didn't), but the Ultimate Question Of Life, the Universe, and Everything could be a little more Ultimate.

    6. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by SnoopJeDi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not to mention if you consider that the awful comparison seems to suggest Gravitational Lensing.

    7. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by glavenoid · · Score: 4, Informative
      Wrong again. The 2 points, ~200 million miles apart were used as points in a measure of parallax. The virtual aperture of the VLBA scope is ~5000 miles diameter, which isn't *quite* "nearly as big as earth". Still a pretty big aperture, even though it's not a complete circular area, the resolution provided is apparently sufficient to measure the stellar (nebular?) parallax wrt M42.

      What I find more interesting in this article is the close relationship alluded to between the trapezium and the nebula...

      --
      I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
    8. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by nschubach · · Score: 1

      Pfft.. they measure things here in America on Football fields, Empire State Buildings and Statues of Liberty.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    9. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by Gigaflynn · · Score: 1

      43?

      --
      "Neo, follow the white rabbit"
      "Can i eat the white rabbit?"
      "No, there is no spoon to eat it with"
    10. Re:"a telescope nearly as big as Earth" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought we measured things in Hersey Bars?

  2. ..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by syrinje · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder what they mounted it on! And yes, I did not RTFA - this is /., you insensitive clod

    --
    See that long UID - that's what you get for lurking too long
    1. Re:..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The apparatus is mostly mounted on the North American continental plate. See: VLBA

      To get a telescope much larger, I guess we'll have to start doing space-based interferometry.

    2. Re:..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's an interferometer. It's not one telescope the size of earth but many smaller telescopes each collecting samples along a line with a length of about the diameter of Earth. The samples can be processed to give a picture with the resolution of a telescope the diameter of Earth (but it still only captures a small amount of em waves).

    3. Re:..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by jnik · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, we've been doing it for a decade.

    4. Re:..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by ribman · · Score: 1

      Well that's very clever sonny, but it's telescopes all the way down.

    5. Re:..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by fellip_nectar · · Score: 1

      /usr/local ?

      --
      Worst. Signature. Ever.
    6. Re:..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by RogerWilco · · Score: 1

      We've been doing radio-interferometry already quite a bit longer, I work at the WSRT, which became operational in 1970.
      http://www.astron.nl/p/WSRT2.htm

      From http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~cwalker/talks/aaas_2001/tsld007.htm, it looks like VLBI is already 40 years old.
              * 1967 First VLBI
                          o Jan: U. Florida - 1 kHz on Jupiter bursts
                          o Apr: Canadian group 448 MHz, 1 MHz bw
                          o May: NRAO-Cornell 610 MHz, 360 kHz bw
                          o June: MIT-NRAO-Cornell OH masers

              * 1968 Jan. First multi-station observations
                          o Already global - includes Onsala, Sweden

              * 1969 Oct. First US/USSR observations

      --
      RogerWilco the Adventurous Janitor
    7. Re:..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by jnik · · Score: 1

      Um, I was replying to a comment on having to "start" doing space VLBI and specifically linked the WP topic on space VLBI. I've done the NRAO "boot camp" and published work from VLA data; I'm aware of the history of radio interferometry.

    8. Re:..with a telescope _AS BIG AS the EARTH" ? by daeley · · Score: 1

      Stupid machine. Oh, wait a minute -- this isn't the Interferometer, it's the Telescope Exaggerator!

      Mm-hi.

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
  3. question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    In the 6 months between measurements, the nebula didn't stay still (more precisely, our solar system is known to be rotating counter planar approximately 3 degrees). I assume they've accounted for the red/blue doppler shift, but if the Orion Nebula is undergoing rapid beta expansion, the measurements would be invalid. I don't know of any way to correct for this phenomenon...

    1. Re:question: by The_Mystic_For_Real · · Score: 5, Funny
      Or maybe the nebula is just moving 20% closer every six months!

      Fortunately it will get caught in Xeno's paradox.

      --

      _____

      Thank you.

    2. Re:question: by Mahjub+Sa'aden · · Score: 2, Funny

      Very good question. I can only reply by pointing to the scalar polarisation effect negating the red/blue doppler shift you mention. Couple that with Newtonian dynamics in question, and you have a very good correction mechanism along the theta axis. Not to mention that the wibble-wobble isn't nearly as unstable as once thought.

      Wow, I'm full of shit.

      --
      What is is all that is. Isn't that obvious?
    3. Re:question: by siddesu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the sun travels around the galactic center at about 20km/s. even assuming than sun and orion nebula travel away from each other at this speed, for 6 months they'd have moved away at about 6 billion km. this is about 0.00068 light years. since the distance is estimated at 1250+ l.y. give or take 50-60, the error due to the relative movement of the two objects seems accounted for.

    4. Re:question: by servognome · · Score: 4, Funny

      but if the Orion Nebula is undergoing rapid beta expansion, the measurements would be invalid. I don't know of any way to correct for this phenomenon...
      Release it and figure it out in Service Pack 1.
      --
      D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
    5. Re:question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      How could they not have realized that we've actually travelled in "Hypertime" and all their measurements from 25 years are all vaild ?
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/10/10/scitime110.xml

    6. Re:question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      You just don't get it! All they're doing now is using Excel 2007 to calculate the distance. No wonder they're seeing this anomaly!

    7. Re:question: by budgenator · · Score: 1

      FTA they measure the paralax six months apart, comparing to know pulsars to get the results; so while a layman I don't think doppler enters into the observations.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    8. Re:question: by christurkel · · Score: 1

      If we reverse the tachyon field and reorient the warp field along a negative subspace axis, your still full of shit.

      --

      CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
    9. Re:question: by Mahjub+Sa'aden · · Score: 2, Funny

      Apparently that manoeuvre also eliminates apostrophes. Who knew.

      --
      What is is all that is. Isn't that obvious?
    10. Re:question: by Belacgod · · Score: 1
      In Soviet Russia, shit fills you!

      Wait...In Soviet Russia, you fill shit!

      Ahh hell, I for one welcome our Orionian overlords a bit sooner.

    11. Re:question: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And spelling.

    12. Re:question: by SEWilco · · Score: 1

      Or maybe the nebula is just moving 20% closer every six months!

      Don't be silly. It says 20% closer since 25 years ago. So it will be here in 100 years, as in 25 years it's traveled one-fifth of the way, so it only has four more fifths to travel.
      Dibs on the Trapezium.

    13. Re:question: by barakn · · Score: 1

      What a load of crap. The study didn't use doppler shift to measure the distance, it used parallax. Beta expansion is a made-up term (in terms of astronomy), and the "counter planar" rotation is also imaginary. But the biggest clue was that Anonymous Coward was supplying the information.

      --
      "I'm so moist I'm sticking to the leather." -Kermit the Frog on The Late Late Show
    14. Re:question: by DeadChobi · · Score: 1

      Not if we take the limit as the number of lengths approaches infinity. Screw you, Xeno! I know calculus!

      --
      SRSLY.
    15. Re:question: by WeeLad · · Score: 1
      I think I've heard this before, but it rhymed just a bit more


      "Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving
      And revolving at nine hundred miles an hour,
      That's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it's reckoned,
      A sun that is the source of all our power...."

      --
      Seriously, Don't take anything I say seriously.
    16. Re:question: by DeadChobi · · Score: 1

      I'd think Beta expansion refers to a term in one of the Lorentz transformations for Special Relativity. Still, I don't know what the hell he's talking about so you're probably right.

      --
      SRSLY.
    17. Re:question: by ImprovGuy · · Score: 1

      Probably a typo, but the Sun has a circular orbit velocity of ~220 km/s, not 20.

      http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1986MNRAS.221.1023K

      I'm writing my astrophysics thesis right now, so I have all kinds of literature references at my fingertips! Anyone want to know how to calculate the cross section of a neutralino and a sulphur atom? Hey, where did everyone go?

    18. Re:question: by siddesu · · Score: 1

      typo in my ole physics book. that makes the max distance 0.068 l.y., still well within the margin of error even accounting for the large beta expansion and the wobbling due to galactic core protuberances.

    19. Re:question: by rebelcan · · Score: 1

      Screw you, Xeno! I know calculus!

      I'm tempted to use that as my new sig, but where would I put my current one?

      --
      God is dead -- Nietzsche
      Nietzsche is dead -- God
      Zombie Nietzsche lives! -- Zombie Nietzsche
  4. Three Dimensional Object by ks*nut · · Score: 1

    Aren't they measuring the distance to stars within a three-dimensional object? I would guess that they could pick two stars that appear close together along our line of sight and come up with wildly different distances. Now perhaps if they measured the distance to one of the Trapezium stars (a very bright formation thought to lie at the "heart" of the nebula) they could come up with some meaningful measurement of distance. Just thought of something else. Let's find a really large repository for data and create a three-dimensional map of the nebula. Don't try to shove this single star data down my throat!

    1. Re:Three Dimensional Object by CaptainPatent · · Score: 2, Informative

      Aren't they measuring the distance to stars within a three-dimensional object? I would guess that they could pick two stars that appear close together along our line of sight and come up with wildly different distances. Now perhaps if they measured the distance to one of the Trapezium stars (a very bright formation thought to lie at the "heart" of the nebula) they could come up with some meaningful measurement of distance. Just thought of something else. Let's find a really large repository for data and create a three-dimensional map of the nebula. Don't try to shove this single star data down my throat! It is true that the nebula is three dimensional, but it is nowhere near 1/10th the distance from earth to the orion nebula. The margin of error associated with the "front" of the nebula with the "back" or "center" of the nebula is a fraction of a fraction of a percent. (and I purposely used relative terms to demonstrate where error can lie)

      Additionally, they did not use line of sight. They were using radio telescopes making them able to "see" the star at the center of the nebula without necessarily having a true line-of-sight.
      --
      Well, back to rejecting software patent applications.
    2. Re:Three Dimensional Object by nschubach · · Score: 1

      But if you have two points of Earth in it's rotation and one point of star you should be able to triangulate the distance. So tracking one star should be enough to give you a guess. I assume they picked multiple stars to get an average for all bodies in question. I actually would have been interested to run the photos (or radio information as is the case) and the progression information from about every month for the six month rotation through a program to compare stars movement and form an average on more than a couple stars.

      Actually, is anyone recording star positions and comparing them on a regular basis? I don't mean single bodies like this, but having Hubble and/or other telescopes capture images at increments and store the point information. What would be interesting to me would be to build up a sort of 3D image of the visible solar system around us using that data.

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  5. Re:You thieving bastard! by Mahjub+Sa'aden · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well, frankly, I just made a bunch of stuff up.

    Unlike String Theory, a rigorously testable... oh wait.

    --
    What is is all that is. Isn't that obvious?
  6. summary by evwah · · Score: 2, Funny

    how the summary should have gone: /summary
    the orion nebula is ___ light years away /end summary

    end of story :P

    1. Re:summary by Tuoqui · · Score: 1

      But then there would be no room for any 'in soviet russia' jokes or similar.

      --
      09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
      +2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
  7. Expanding Universe... by CODiNE · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let's just wait a little longer and we won't have to reprint all those textbooks.

    --
    Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    1. Re:Expanding Universe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Distances between galaxies increase due to universe expansion. However, the relative distance between objects within galaxies does not increase due to universe expansion.

    2. Re:Expanding Universe... by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      How I wish you hadn't replied AC.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
  8. Next Apolcalyptic Movie by mrbluze · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Impacted" Plot: In the year 2050 the Earth almost crashes into the Orion Nebula, only to be rescued from destruction by two nerdy radio astronomers from Parkes Observatory in the middle of nowhere in Australia, who, whilst trying to find a cure for constipation from eating too much McDongles(TM) Impact McBurglettes, find that by injecting massive amounts of First Fleet Enema into the Nebula they can cut a path through the Nebula. The romantic part of the movie is where the local district nurse shows up and a tense love triangle is set up between herself and the astronomers.. etc..etc

    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
  9. Obligatory... by jjblazer · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Objects in this telescope appear closer than they are.

    1. Re:Obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeesh, I was going to make that joke. Glad I didn't, as you got mod'd down. Harsh audience this morning...

  10. Closer than we thought... by LordP · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Measured incorrectly, or has the Orion Nebula just been sneaking closing over the last 25 years?

    --
    Nothing is so smiple that it can't be screwed up.
    1. Re:Closer than we thought... by jamesh · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hmmm... 10 to 20 percent closer in 25 years... (gets out calculator)... that means that it will be here in 125 to 250 years!!!

      I for one welcome our invading Orion Nebula overlords.

    2. Re:Closer than we thought... by davburns · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bower and his colleagues came up with a distance of 1,270 light-years, give or take 76 light-years. That compares with the previous estimate of 1,565 light-years, give or take 266.

      There's still overlap in the uncertainties of the measurements. So it wasn't incorrectly measured, just measured with a 17% error margin. The only ones who are incorrect are the people who quote the estimate without including the uncertainty.

    3. Re:Closer than we thought... by Mushdot · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's like that scene in The Holy Grail, where the Knight is running toward the castle and not getting any closer.

      Then all of a sudden, 'ahaaaa!' he appears at the gate and stabs the guards.

    4. Re:Closer than we thought... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the "young earth" people are indeed correct after all. They just need to include a one billion percent error margin.

    5. Re:Closer than we thought... by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      you may a point, but I'm not entirely sure.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  11. Telescope warning by autophile · · Score: 4, Funny

    Warning: Objects in telescope are closer than they appear.

    --Rob

    --
    Towards the Singularity.
    1. Re:Telescope warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is truer than you mgiht think

  12. That's easy... by SteveFoerster · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...four elephants standing on the back of a turtle.

    --
    Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
  13. Translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    >One of the most famous and scrutinized heavenly objects is 10 to 20 percent closer than we thought

    In other words, Natalie Portman moved from Boston to New York.

  14. Invasion?... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...or the metric system? Hmmmm....

  15. Stellar parallax? by langelgjm · · Score: 1

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this basically measuring stellar parallax, but instead of using visible light and optical telescopes against a background of stars, they are using radio waves and radio telescopes against a background of quasars?

    --
    "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    1. Re:Stellar parallax? by glavenoid · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yep. That's exactly what it is. Not exactly revolutionary, but interesting nonetheless...

      --
      I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
  16. Objects in mirror are closer than they appear! by kcbanner · · Score: 1

    It *was* nearly the size of Earth after all!

    --
    Obligatory blog plug: http://www.caseybanner.ca/
  17. And in 20 years ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And in 20 years ... another team of "scientists" will claim that prior updates to the distance were incorrect due to mis calibration of the tools used. The nursery is really 10-20% further away. They should have know their tools were off, when they couldn't reduce the error to below 1%.

    Anyone needing 10% error is simply guessing.

  18. OH MY GOD!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IT'S OUT TO GET US!!!!

    Everyone run away and hide!! The nebula will be here in a few trillion years!!! We're all going to die!!! (by then)!

    Run for your lives!!!!

  19. Oops! Touched a nerve, obviously. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The results are always amusing when pseudo-scientists get mod points.

  20. splitting hairs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More like 2 decades in practice, and of course the necessary techniques were mostly hashed out on paper decades earlier.

    There was a show on PBS in 1991 called "The Astronomers" (see here). It's a bit dated now (as we should hope!), but one episode documents a team of astronomers coordinating VLBI around 1989-90 using stacks of videocassettes and the postal service. IIRC it was an early use of VLBI, but not necessarily the first. It worked just fine even though it was a bit slower than we now communicate.

  21. Lens-shaped? by NonCow · · Score: 1

    Isn't the galaxy *lens*-shaped ... ;)
    Humour Disclaimer - yes, no medium change, therefore a refractive index ratio of 1 ... unless you count stars as being "like atoms" in that they are *relatively* small "solid" object with large spaces in between them, suspended in a "space". Then therefore we *do* have a medium change and a ratio of refractive indices: light passes from an area of space populated by N stars / lightyear^3 to an area of space with M stars / lightyear^3 where N << M, and the N populated area is lens shaped, therefore visual distortion!
    [cough]ull$hit! :)
    ANonCow
    ---
    Sir Bedevere: ...and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped.
    King Arthur: This new learning amazes me, Sir Bedevere. Explain again how sheep's bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes.

  22. The Nebula is Flat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and I will not hear another word.

  23. MOD PARENT UP by glavenoid · · Score: 1

    Sheesh.. Doesn't anyone here understand the Messier catalogue?? If 42 has ever had a more apropos moment in recent /. convo, I'll eat my M104 with salsa...

    --
    I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP by mstahl · · Score: 1

      No one gets it :(

  24. Oh My GOD! by grumling · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's coming right at us!

    Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue...

    -Steve McCroskey

    --
    "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
  25. Wow! by sunspot42 · · Score: 1

    The Galactica is closer to Earth than we thought!

  26. Combine the measurements for increased accuracy by SirBruce · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The old measurement was 1,565 +/- 266 LY.

    Bower's new measurement is 1,270 +/- 76 LY.

    Assuming both error bars are correct, then by combining the two measurements we get between 1,299 LY and 1,346 LY.

    Reid's new measurement is 1,350 +/- 23 LY.

    So combining again, we can conclude the Orion Nebula is between 1,327 and 1,346 LY away, or 1,336.5 LY +/- 9.5 LY.

    1. Re:Combine the measurements for increased accuracy by moosesocks · · Score: 1

      You can't combine statistics like that.

      We have no idea of the accuracy of either measurement (specifically because we don't actually know how far away it is).

      What we do know is that the new measurement is more precise. It's probably also safe to assume that the new one's at least slightly more accurate.

      The troubling bit is that the median of the new measurement is considerably lower than the original, and lies outside of the error bars of the original estimate. This suggests that there's a good chance that one of the estimates is fundamentally flawed.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    2. Re:Combine the measurements for increased accuracy by AaronParsons · · Score: 1

      That's not how you combine numbers with error bars. First, you do weighted average based on how small the error bars are: 1/(1/266+1/76+1/23) * (1565/266 + 1270/76 + 1350/23) = 1346 LY And then to find the error, you take the square root of the sum of the squares of all the errors in the final number that are introduced by the errors in the initial numbers: sqrt(1/(1/266+1/76+1/23) * ( (266/266)^2 + (76/76)^2 + (23/23)^2 ) = +- 7 light years.

    3. Re:Combine the measurements for increased accuracy by cdpage · · Score: 1

      Based on the Potential Old Measurement and Bowers measurement, 1565 + 266 = 1299 1270 + 76 = 1346 Rieds new new is 1350 +/- 23 seems like they were not far off in the first place.

    4. Re:Combine the measurements for increased accuracy by HarvardAce · · Score: 1

      Based on the Potential Old Measurement and Bowers measurement, 1565 + 266 = 1299 Are you a programmer for Excel 2007?
      --
      Note to self: Stop putting jokes in my insightful comments so I can get something other than +1 Funny!
    5. Re:Combine the measurements for increased accuracy by cdpage · · Score: 1

      I must be working for M$... still have yet to see a paycheck though. 1,831

    6. Re:Combine the measurements for increased accuracy by strikethree · · Score: 1

      "So combining again, we can conclude the Orion Nebula is between 1,327 and 1,346 LY away, or 1,336.5 LY +/- 9.5 LY."

      Since your numbers are not scientific, you should just round to 1337 LY. :P

      strike

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  27. Why is this insightful ? by aepervius · · Score: 1

    At best it should be only funny.

    Orion nebula distance : 1500 light years. 10% of this : 150 light years. IF you suppose that it is getting closer by that distance, then it means roughly 5+ light years for every years for 25 years. Nothing goes at a speed of 5+ light years per year. At best all physical stuff can only goes at near c (1 light year per year ;)...) with photon going at exactly c in vacuum. And we would remark the relativistic effect, at those speed with such an enormous mass... (is that even possible?)

    So no, we are pretty sure the orion nebula has not been sneaking closer (sic) behind our back for such distance difference.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  28. nah, not true by someone1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This won't save your ass when the distance is only 1mm :)

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  29. Re:You thieving bastard! by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 1

    You think that's bad - it was the combination to my luggage!

    --
    Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  30. SP by tonyreadsnews · · Score: 1

    NED: Oh, no it's coming right for us. Jimbo: Quick Ned, the rocket launcher.

  31. Telescope as big as... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...two teams of radio astronomers who have made some of the most precise cosmic distance measurements ever, with a telescope nearly as big as Earth. I thought the death star was as big as the moon.