PureZC's Science and Astronomy Class
#31
Posted 21 April 2008 - 09:37 PM
#32
Posted 21 April 2008 - 09:58 PM
#33
Posted 23 April 2008 - 12:01 AM
#34
Posted 24 April 2008 - 04:51 PM
You know, I just really started to study astronomy in school, and I must say, I am very interested. We just learned up classifications, such as galaxies and such, what kinds of galaxies there are, about the stars, how black holes are made, etc. I have learned ALOT! It's really cool stuff to know.
WTH?? You actually learn something about astronomy in school?! Amazing!
#35
Posted 25 April 2008 - 08:57 AM
Well, here's proof.
Hubble celebrates it's 18th anniversary of its launch, by displaying 59 wonderful pictures of our universe.
If you take a look at the pictures, it shows the slow collision of 2 galaxies and gives us a good look at what transends a collision.
So, yes. Our galaxy is on a course for collision in a few billion years with Andromeda. Personally, I like the new name of our forthcoming merger, Milkomeda. Catchy.
#36
Posted 25 April 2008 - 01:07 PM
Anyway, I already heard about this, but didn't dig deeply into it. I did a quick search and brought up a JPEG of all 59 images.
http://imgsrc.hubble...rmats/print.jpg
I think some of these are among the best images Hubble has produced. My personal favorites, however, are the images of the Whirpool Galaxy (M51) and the Eta Carinae Nebula. Actually, I happened to be looking at the Whirpool through my telescope last night. M51 is a much more nearby example of colliding galaxies.
Also, I don't think it has yet been officially named "Milkomeda."
#38
Posted 26 April 2008 - 09:48 PM
#39
Posted 27 April 2008 - 08:56 AM
To put it in a less general perspective, which I am not sure whether it is correct as I do not know figures like this very well, the average star is like a marble in New York as seen from San Francisco. Or maybe it was a walnut... Anyway, you get the message. They're tiny.
So thus the expected amount of star collisions will be five or so. Chances are those will be when dense globular star clusters interact.
Galaxies are extremely diffuse, a fact which many do not seem to get.
#40 Guest_Sir_Johnamus (Guest)
Posted 27 April 2008 - 11:40 AM
Do any of you know of Zeno? He was a Greek scientist who proved wrong the scientific method.
He said that you cannot phisically move from point A to point B, and he proved it. To move from A to B, you have to go half that distance, and half that distance, and indefinately onward. Since you cannot do an infinate amount of things in a finate amount of time, you cannot move from A to B. Since we all do this everyday, this is obviously false. But he proved it with science. So it's true. Thus proves that Zeno single handedly proved the scientific method wrong.
What do you think on this topic?
#41
Posted 27 April 2008 - 03:19 PM
Off the top of my head, I'd say that nothing about the scientific method has been disproven, because Zeno did not use it to arrive at his conclusion (which, for this paradox and many others, is that motion is an illusion). Rather, had he used the scientific method, he would have seen his supposition to be false.
Interesting side note, though...How do we know there is any such thing as "half", once we get down to the sub-atomic level? Surely, if one believes in particles that are ultimately indivisible, one MUST believe that there is a level at which "half" has no meaning...
Sources:
http://en.wikipedia....ientific_method
http://en.wikipedia....eno's_paradoxes
#42
Posted 27 April 2008 - 04:16 PM
Star Scale
How big is the Universe?
The Universe - How Big Are You?
Interesting side note, though...How do we know there is any such thing as "half", once we get down to the sub-atomic level? Surely, if one believes in particles that are ultimately indivisible, one MUST believe that there is a level at which "half" has no meaning...
I'm not far enough in my physics learning to answer this question, but are atoms really indivisible in that way? What about in terms of energy?
#43
Posted 27 April 2008 - 04:24 PM
To help express Siguy's post, here are a few videos.
Star Scale
How big is the Universe?
The Universe - How Big Are You?
I'm not far enough in my physics learning to answer this question, but are atoms really indivisible in that way? What about in terms of energy?
Those videos do demonstrate size well enough, but not distance, as I was trying to explain. The third one, being just a bunch of clips put together, is rather inaccurate. For example, I do not think Earth is inside the Eagle Nebula...
#44
Posted 27 April 2008 - 07:18 PM
#45
Posted 27 April 2008 - 07:22 PM
I have learned a lot from this thread and I have proof for this theory now.
Do any of you know of Zeno? He was a Greek scientist who proved wrong the scientific method.
He said that you cannot phisically move from point A to point B, and he proved it. To move from A to B, you have to go half that distance, and half that distance, and indefinately onward. Since you cannot do an infinate amount of things in a finate amount of time, you cannot move from A to B. Since we all do this everyday, this is obviously false. But he proved it with science. So it's true. Thus proves that Zeno single handedly proved the scientific method wrong.
What do you think on this topic?
But once you get to the sub atomic level, wouldn't half loose it's meaning, and you would be there?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users