Slashdot Mirror
The Universe Has 20 Times More Galaxies Than We Thought (gizmodo.com)
A new study by a team of international astronomers has produced some astounding results: they concluded that the universe contains at least two trillion galaxies -- as much as 20 times more than previously thought. The study adds that 90 percent of all galaxies are hidden from us. This hidden portion can't be seen even with our most powerful telescopes. Gizmodo adds: Consequently, this means we also have to update the number of stars in the observable universe, which now numbers around 700 sextillion (that's a 7 with 23 zeros behind it, or 700 thousand billion billion). And that's just within the observable universe. Because the cosmos emerged some 13.8 billion years ago, we're only able to observe objects up to a certain distance from Earth. Anything outside this "Hubble Bubble" is invisible to us because the light from these distant objects simply haven't had enough time to reach us. It's difficult -- if not impossible -- to know how many galaxies reside outside this cosmological blind spot.
How much more probable is Alien life now?
The Universe Has 20 Times More Galaxies Than We Thought
20 times more than YOU thought, perhaps, but not me. I hadn't thought.
Does this change then the need for dark matter? or it doesn't matter? xD
Not sure why they have the digression into the non-observable universe. The 90% refers to the observable universe only.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
So, how does this affect the Drake Equation? Even if we assume a very, very low percentage of extraterrestrial life and even a lower percentage of *intelligent* extraterrestrial life, we're still looking at "billions and billions" (sorry Carl) of potential intelligent species out there, we just can't seem to contact them though due to the vast distances involved.
Too bad really. Until we can come up with some way of cheating physics, we are stuck in this solar system for the foreseeable future.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Does this imply that the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light? Wouldn't that be a contradiction of the speed of light being the fastest speed you can travel at? Can someone who read the article shed some light on this? :)
So if there's now 20x as many galaxies as before, does this also imply that there's 20x as much observable baryonic matter? Moreover, since regular matter has been previously estimated to be less than 5% of the universe, what does this mean for the ratio of matter to dark matter, given that a naive recalculation would put regular matter close to 100%?
Even if we could travel at the speed of light, we probably couldn't even catch/contact many of those near the edge of detection, yet still visible.
Due to accelerating expansion, they would be moving too fast to catch by the time we got close.
Thus, they are effectively shut off from us such that we perhaps should consider them just shadows of the past, fossils, rather than tangible things. If they launch ET or messages from ET, they better do it soon, or should have already done it, if they want us to see.
Note they are NOT traveling faster than the speed of light from our perspective. From our perspective they are slowing to a crawl, nearly frozen. Thus, no violation of the speed of light is happening (relatively speaking). That's why their "light" is shifted to the infrared spectrum: their "waves" are slowed down for us, wiggling real slow. From "Gods'" perspective perhaps we can say some are or will be rushing away from us faster than light, but us muggles don't get to see it.
Table-ized A.I.
Worse, this could mean there are millions MORE trumps out there. Tread carefully...
Table-ized A.I.
So I had to click around awhile, but here's the actual paper:
http://www.spacetelescope.org/...
For some of us, it makes a huge difference if we're reading the actual paper, or trying to understand the watered-down version on a click-bait site.
That has blown my mind.
What about dark matter ? Does anyone know how that figures into this ?
It doesn't.
Dark matter is used to explain the rotation rates of galaxies (there isn't enough visible matter to account for those rates.)
This study says we have more galaxies than we thought, not more stars within them than we thought.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
It's kind of pointless to guess at what is outside of the observable universe. Saying that it is composed of marshmallow fluff is not really any more absurd as saying it is full of ordinary galaxies or it is pure vacuum.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
It's bigger than it looks.
The current scientific view is that the big bang exploded the universe out far faster than the speed of light. They think it got to the size we see within a trillionth of a second.
Work Safe Porn
Every time I read news like this I feel like I've just entered the Total Perspective Vortex http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/w.... For those that don't know (shame!), this invention, originally created by Trin Tragula as a way to get back at his wife (who was always telling him to get a "sense of proportion"), is now used as a torture and (in effect) killing device on the planet Frogstar B. The prospective victim of the TPV is placed within a small chamber wherein is displayed a model of the entire universe - together with a microscopic dot bearing the legend "you are here". The sense of perspective thereby conveyed destroys the victim's mind; it was stated that the TPV is the only known means of crushing a man's soul.
Well, the observable universe increases continually, and will do so either forever or for some great amount of time in the future. So we are forever shrinking the volume of potential marshmallow fluff, moment by moment!
It's criminals, it's rapists.
I'm going to build a wall to keep it out. And make Astronomers pay for it.
--
Donny Fartpants.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Yet. Three hundred years ago, most of the mundane tech we use on a daily basis would have been considered to be impossible. FTL travel might be impossible via acceleration, but there are many ways to skin a cat. I think that if we don't accidental wipe ourselves out, we will eventually work out some way to travel between stars.
And there is alien life out there. The trick is just finding it.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
If there is much more mass beyond the observable universe won't that help explain why the observable universe is expanding faster than it should (based on the mass of the observable universe)?
To clarify, because the summary makes a mess of it, the twenty times more galaxies they are talking about are within the observable universe.
The stuff about galaxies we can never see because they're outside the OU was just a bit of colour at the end of the article.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Since every single explanation of relativity I keep seeing, describes it in a way in which there are elements that do not work given the original phenomenon, I don't know what is possible with acceleration. They keep describing motion relative to the speed of light in such a way that fails to conserve the fact that for the object moving, they aren't moving relative to the speed of light, for one thing.
Maybe the same way you get any acceleration at all while from your perspective remaining in a fixed position relative to the speed of light, but all explanations of the concepts I have seen botch the job.
Visible matter was only 4% of the Cosmos... so 20x more galaxies means baryonic matter now makes up 80% of the Cosmos ? I know the math is not precise... but what was wrong with the assumptions that were made about the total mass of the Cosmos... (Matter, Dark Matter, Dark Energy)
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
Probably only the ones that have their sources of energy exploding... oh wait, there's a lot of suns exploding, so it seems most Galaxies were made by Samsung...
Let's elect Trump to become president of our galaxy. And tell him his shiny new office is at Saggitarius A*.
Because they appeared so far away that we cannot spot them (or discern them from the rest of the galaxy they are part of). And it's a good thing this is so, because if earth was near any region where new stars form, earth would most likely not be inhabitable by life-forms such as ours.
Now, do you know of a really good explanation of relativity that does not introduce elements that fail to work given the initial phenomenon.
He'd only complain that his election to president of the Universe has been stolen by Hillary prancing around in devils' horns and a tail, Paul Ryan (as if he had the wit or the balls), and the New York Times. He's a monument to his own ego, sort of a geometrically expanding pile of reflexive referencing bullshit.
It is not a dogma, it is the most likely answer compatible with the law of physics as we know them. ...) and new observations (gravitational waves, neutrinos, ...) will allow us to go further.
How they got to this number is actually fascinating. How we combined methods to get further and further measurements, which, given the speed of light, allow us to tell the age of what we are seeing. How we observed the movement of things and derived equations which allowed us to go back in time and find the singularity which corresponds to the beginning of the universe. How we backed our research using independent observations.
We don't know everything yet, in fact we don't know the real beginning of the universe, 13.8 billion year is actually the age of the universe that can be described by the current laws of physics. Maybe better theories (string theory, LQG,
Or maybe the 13.8 billion number is just completely wrong. It is unlikely considering the pile of evidence but who knows. That scientific results could be wrong is part of what makes science science.
God put those extra galaxies there to fool unbelievers. /s
HAHHH AHHAH H AHHAHAHA A HH AHAHHAHA HA AHAH HAHAH A
Dear sweet Mitra, there's still idiots who bring up the electric universe theory? HAHAHHAHHAHHHAHHHHA AHAH AHHA AHHA HA AHAHAHA HAH HA. No, i'm not laughing WITH you.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
so only time will tell.
Why didn't we see a few new stars, or a few billion new stars, appear last night?
You didn't look up?
The link below is a 'star nursery' in the Carina Nebula.
http://www.space.com/images/i/...
Astronomers have catalogued many "star nurseries". It's a certainty that there are many, many more beyond our ability to detect if this study has things basically correct.
This shows and labels a newborn star in the Horsehead Nebula.
http://amazingspace.org/news/a...
Just because you don't see bright flashes in the sky every night doesn't mean no stars are being born, they're just usually too incredibly-far away. As another poster who replied pointed out, be thankful they *are* so far away that you don't notice stars being born.
Depending on how close the new star was and when it was born relative to our Earth and Solar system's formation, it could have conceivably prevented the formation of the Solar system as we know it, never mind Earth likely becoming a radiation-blasted, barren, and airless rock if Earth did form first.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
The electric universe theory, while more a fringe acid trip than an actual theory, occasionally rears it's misguided head-in-the-sand self from the few people stuck in the 1990's who think their genius was overlooked by all, and if only academia would ignore those other "loser" guys like Einstein, Hubble, well hell, basically ANY actual astronomer or physicist, then they'd rightly get their due.
These guys sum it up pretty well: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/E...
Lets hit the high points of how the EU people solve all their problems:
Einstein's postulates are wrong.[8]
General Relativity (GR) is wrong.[9]
The universe is not expanding.[10]
The electric force travels faster than the speed of light with near infinite velocity.[8]
Gravity has two poles like a bar magnet; dipole gravity.[11]
A plenum of neutrinos forms an all-pervasive aether.[8]
Planets give birth to comets.[12]
Stars do not shine because of internal nuclear fusion caused by gravitational collapse. Rather, they are anodes for galactic discharge currents.[13]
Impact craters on Venus, Mars and the Moon are not caused by impacts, but by electrical discharges.[14] The same applies to the Valles Marineris (a massive canyon on Mars) and the Grand Canyon on Earth.[15]
The Sun is negatively charged, and the solar wind is positively charged -- the two systems forming a giant capacitor (this is James McCanney's particular erroneous belief.)[citation needed]
EU proponents from the Thunderbolts Project claim to have predicted the natures of Pluto and Comet 67P more accurately than NASA or ESA.[16][17]
Science work fairly simply. If you come up with an idea, and can test to show your idea has some validity, other people will look at it as well. When Hannes Alfvén couldn't find the radio emissions that his idea said MUST BE THERE.... that pretty much was cased closed, except for the few who,for some reason, had become so invested in it that they couldn't except that it was flat out wrong.
The downside you ask? Believing total bullshit instead of looking at reality. EU predicts things we've confirmed don't exist, and requires things we actually have confirmed to not exist. The downside... it's just fucking wrong.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Isaac Asimov has a great response to that old canard.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
The Universe Has 20 Times More Galaxies Than We Thought
Just when I finished my bucket list.
I'm not looking to support "Steady State", but if the dimensions of the Universe are not what we thought is the "flat, infinite" model of the Universe back on the table for discussion? Without dark matter and dark energy (a pair of modern Cosmological Constants), does a larger Universe account for the apparent universal expansion we've recently observed?
How they got to this number is actually fascinating.
The amount of data you can obfuscate by the innocent displacement of a decimal point is fascinating.
Assuming of course the speed of light proves a constant and not a variable across the galaxy.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
The problem is not that there are likely other forms of life out there, it is that they are so far away, and faster than light travel is impossible except at the sub-atomic level. Certainly not for complex biological life. They and we will be extinct before we can even exchange messages let alone travel to see each other. It is probably better that way anyway: if life on earth has taught us anything, there can be only one dominant life form at a time so they or us would be wiped out in the ensuing conflict.
"Consequently, this means we also have to update the number of stars in the observable universe"
If these stars are not observable, why do we have to update the number of observable stars?
History has taught us that the if it can be dreamed of then it can be made possible. We will find a way to travel extremely long distances in space.
Untrue. I can dream of a time machine that lets me go back and kill Hitler's grandmother. That doesn't mean it's possible.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Then why the tell did Samsung just issue a profit warning?
This line fascinates me
"Because the cosmos emerged some 13.8 billion years ago, we're only able to observe objects up to a certain distance from Earth. Anything outside this "Hubble Bubble" is invisible to us because the light from these distant objects simply haven't had enough time to reach us."
The light has been traveling for 13.8 billion years and it still hasn't reached us. That is amazing.
Can we say now that the GO board game has less moves than the atoms of the universe?
Get my e-mail after a captcha test in: http://tinymailt
So, if the Universe has 20 times as many galaxies, and so, presumably, 20 times as much normal matter, then the estimate that the Universe is only 4% normal matter jumps to 80% normal matter, and a *lot* less dark matter, right?
And did a billion new stars (or even one) appear in that star nursery last night? Did that newborn star in the Horsehead Nebula appear last night?
"They appeared at night, it just wasn't *last* night."
No, last night billions of stars were born in other places where we didn't happen to be looking at especially hard, or where it's so far away we can barely detect galaxies and so was buried in the noise here.
Concerning the lack of bright flashes in the sky, if 700 sextillion *observable* stars are in the night sky, then, on average, a billion new *observable* stars have appeared every night over the course of 14 billion years.
You're taking the "observable" part of "observable universe" too literally. Just because some event occurs within the current boundaries of what's referred to as the "observable universe" does not mean it is even detectable, easily or otherwise. We are steadily discovering new major events like colliding galaxies and pulsars within the "observable universe" that have been going on for longer than humans have existed, so how could we possibly be capable of observing all or even most of the comparatively minor and relatively nearly invisible distant events like star formation?
You start with too many assumptions, the most glaring being regarding the relative size of the universe compared to our ability to observe distant events of relatively small magnitude.
"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it is. I mean you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space."
- HHGTTG
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Are you simply a fucking idiot?
If your theory, when tested, does not show evidence for what your theory says MUST be there... you're theory is fucked up. If that same theory says 5 or 10 things CANNOT happen if the theory is correct, and all of those things are ACTUALLY OBSERVED TO HAPPEN..... you're theory is fucked up. If both of those happen, you're theory is FUCKING WRONG, and anyone who still ascribes to it is no longer dealing with science, they're dealing with DOGMA.
Obfuscating and trying to shift the attention to something else when YOU'RE FUCKING WRONG only says you know your theory is bullshit, but for some reason you still want to "believe" in it.
I accept that actual physicists and cosmologists know a he of a lot more than i do, and when EVERY CREDIBLE SCIENTIST IN THE FIELD says something is pseudo-science bullshit, i am much more inclined to accept their opinion... one based on actual knowledge.. than some random idiot on the internet who bought into theory that's been proven wrong, but can't seem to let it go.
You'd be a lot better off in life if you didn't get sucked into fringe crap, and if you were a little less gullible.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
You can learn to understand Special Relativity, which apparently you haven't yet. General Relativity is far more difficult. The foundation of SR is that physical laws are the same in all inertial reference frames, which means that everything is stationary relative to itself.
To give you a start, an inertial reference frame is one that doesn't have a perceptible force acting on it. All laws of physics are the same in every such frame, no matter how it's moving relative to you, according to SR. To derive a lot of useful things, the only physical law you need is that the speed of light in a vacuum is always the same. You will find that you need to drop any ideas of absolute space and absolute time, and realize that "at the same time" doesn't have a real definition for two events that are in different places.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Dark matter has been observed through gravitational lensing, and it's pretty definite it's there.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I don't know why i bother, as you obviously don't have a living brain cell in your head.
There is currently no testing or experimentation capable to show evidence of dark matter because of the lack of sensitivity of our instrumentation, just like it took 100 years to develop instrumentation sensitive enough to confirm Einstein's gravitational waves. On the other hand.... that piece of shit EU "theory" you have latched onto like a hooker sucking dick HAS been tested through experimentation.... and has been found to not be able to predict a fucking thing correctly.
If you're too fucking stupid to understand that, you probably just need to do the human population a favor and go kill yourself.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
No we do not have to update the number of stars in the Universe, and no they did not "discover the Universe has 20 times as many galaxies as we thought".
This discovery is actually detecting young, numerous galaxies that we believed were there but could not see. In fact, it is simply confirming the accuracy of the existing Lambda-CDM model.
When galaxies first formed there were very numerous small galaxies that merged into fewer more massive galaxies that we can easily see (since they are brighter and closer, being more recent in time). We knew those ancient small galaxies were out there, waiting to be detected. A nice discovery, but no new revelation is involved at all.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
"...and the Grand Canyon on Earth" Interesting, I hadn't heard that one. A few months ago I was in the Skocjan cave in Slovenia, see pics here: https://travelslovenia.org/sko.... While most caves in limestone are formed by carbonic acid dissolving the rock, and doubtless this one started that way, it looked pretty clear to me that the canyon you see in those pictures was carved by running water in the same way the much larger Grand Canyon was. Do these AU people think the electric discharges went underground?
Its INFINITE, not 20 times :)
Casteism
everything is stationary relative to itself.
Can't argue with that!