Official Space is Awesome Thread

[bscinstnct]

Planet Bigger Than Jupiter Found Orbiting Young Star

 

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/161594/20160528/planet-bigger-than-jupiter-found-orbiting-young-star.htm

[bscinstnct]

Carbon planets around special stars could have hosted life

 

 

"As long as a habitable planet is warmed by its host star, life will likely persist on it," Loeb said in an email to FoxNews.com, as to whether or not life could still exist on any of these carbon planets, if it ever began there in the first place. "These old stars have a lifetime that is comparable to the age of the Universe, and we see them shining today even though they formed early on in cosmic history. Stars with a higher mass are shorter lived and life around them was likely extinguished after their death. We do not see those old massive stars around."

[MMB1500]

Light Pollution: Milky Way no longer visible to one third of humanity.

 

https://www.theguard...light-pollution

 

This is a great image of part of it though:

 

http://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1242a/

[bscinstnct]

Here’s What Space Actually Looks Like to the Human Eye

 

http://www.wired.com/2016/03/heres-space-actually-looks-like-human-eye/#slide-13

[Argonne69]

Gravity. The very early universe was composed of mostly hydrogen atoms, with a few helium atoms sprinkled in. At this point the universe was a dark, dark place, as the first stars had yet to exist. The hydrogen was so dilute that there was approximately 1 atom every few meters. To put that in scale, if the hydrogen atom was the size of a ping pong ball, the nearest atom would be half way to the moon.

 

However, gravity began its slow, steady work of pulling the hydrogen atoms into clumps, until approximately 100 million years after the Big Bang, when the first dense ball of gas began fusing hydrogen, and the first star was born.

 

[NP04]

It is awesome!! I took this photo a few weeks ago, along with golf, taking photos of the universe is a huge passion :) It's crazy just sitting under the stars, we're so small in this enormous universe.

 

You can see more of my star photos on my facebook page - www.facebook.com/distantpixels

 

 

[crich88848]

It is awesome!! I took this photo a few weeks ago, along with golf, taking photos of the universe is a huge passion :) It's crazy just sitting under the stars, we're so small in this enormous universe.

 

You can see more of my star photos on my facebook page - www.facebook.com/distantpixels

 

 

 

Where was this taken? Was that visible to the naked eye?

[bscinstnct]

This is how big stuff is

 

 

[hogans71]

This is how big stuff is

 

 

 

Bsc, you're freaking the s*** out of me... Damn, dude!

[driverwedge]

This is how big stuff is

 

 

[media=]

[/media]

 

That's one of my favorites.

[bscinstnct]

https://www.spacetelescope.org/news/heic1613/

 

Hubble captures vivid auroras in Jupiter’s atmosphere

[Michael C.]

https://www.spacetelescope.org/news/heic1613/

 

Hubble captures vivid auroras in Jupiter’s atmosphere

 

It's a smiley face. :)

[Argonne69]

Final photo taken by Juno before entering orbit around Jupiter. Galileo would be impressed.

 

[bscinstnct]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/06/health/black-hole-star-radio-telescope/index.html

 

 

Astronomers capture supermassive black hole as it eats passing star

[Argonne69]

After a decade of measuring the sky, astronomers with the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS), a program from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey III, produced a map showing the expansion of the universe. The full map spans 650 cubic billion light-years, which is roughly 1/4 of the sky. The image below is a small 1/20th slice of the map 6 billion light years wide, 4.5 billion light years high, and 500 million light years thick. Yellow dots represent nearby galaxies, and purple represent the furthest ones. The map contains 48,741 galaxies, or 3 percent of the 1.6 million mapped. Yes, galaxies, not stars. Wow.

 

[NV825]

Crazy, makes you wonder if another planet's inhabitants somewhere in the universe ruins beautiful days outside chasing a white ball too.

[Argonne69]

Crazy, makes you wonder if another planet's inhabitants somewhere in the universe ruins beautiful days outside chasing a white ball too.

 

Lol. Well, in that photo alone there are ~48,741,000,000,000 stars. That's 48.7 quadrillion. I'm guessing yes, although I'm fairly certain the ball is yellow in color.

 

Of course, the real question is whether those same aliens are hanging out on their own version of G***WRX.

[Argonne69]

Awesome photo of the moon passing in front of the Earth taken by the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR), located 1 million miles from the Earth. Hey, look, it's the "dark side" of the Moon.

 

 

If you like gif's, check out: http://img.huffingto...02f00143ed5.gif

 

DSCOVR is located at the L1 Lagrange point, a location in space where the gravitational pull from the Earth and Sun are equal. This basically allows the satellite to park in orbit. (http://www.space.com/30302-lagrange-points.html)

 

[crich88848]

Really good article here on possible explanation of why we haven't found other life yet. Summary, we may be either very early life forms on the cosmic calendar or we may be very late and all other life forms are already gone.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/08/03/a-new-reason-why-we-havent-found-alien-life-in-the-universe/

[Argonne69]

Really good article here on possible explanation of why we haven't found other life yet. Summary, we may be either very early life forms on the cosmic calendar or we may be very late and all other life forms are already gone.

 

https://www.washingt...n-the-universe/

 

I'm not convinced. Humans have only been able to transmit and receive EM-based signals for 100 years. There could easily be billions of advanced civilizations that are simply too far away to receive their transmissions (yet).

 

As for simple life, we've sent probes to a handful of planets in our Solar system. A bit premature to conclude that there's no life outside our system, no?

 

Frankly, we're pretty poor at grasping the size of out galaxy, and the universe as a whole.

[Argonne69]

Earth compared to a Solar eruption. My, my, we're a speck.

 

[crich88848]

Really good article here on possible explanation of why we haven't found other life yet. Summary, we may be either very early life forms on the cosmic calendar or we may be very late and all other life forms are already gone.

 

https://www.washingt...n-the-universe/

 

I'm not convinced. Humans have only been able to transmit and receive EM-based signals for 100 years. There could easily be billions of advanced civilizations that are simply too far away to receive their transmissions (yet).

 

As for simple life, we've sent probes to a handful of planets in our Solar system. A bit premature to conclude that there's no life outside our system, no?

 

Frankly, we're pretty poor at grasping the size of out galaxy, and the universe as a whole.

 

I agree. But the argument being made here is not that life does not exist outside our planet. Just that it may not exist yet or may have already existed and does not anymore. In science or better yet in physics, you never conclude anything. You make theories and then the science community tires to prove those theories wrong. If those theories are not proven wrong, they are then recognized, accepted and considered a legitimate possibility. But no one in the science community will ever say they are 100% accurate and fact. Hence the name theory.

[Argonne69]

Really good article here on possible explanation of why we haven't found other life yet. Summary, we may be either very early life forms on the cosmic calendar or we may be very late and all other life forms are already gone.

 

https://www.washingt...n-the-universe/

 

I'm not convinced. Humans have only been able to transmit and receive EM-based signals for 100 years. There could easily be billions of advanced civilizations that are simply too far away to receive their transmissions (yet).

 

As for simple life, we've sent probes to a handful of planets in our Solar system. A bit premature to conclude that there's no life outside our system, no?

 

Frankly, we're pretty poor at grasping the size of out galaxy, and the universe as a whole.

 

I agree. But the argument being made here is not that life does not exist outside our planet. Just that it may not exist yet or may have already existed and does not anymore. In science, you never conclude anything. You make theories and then the science community tires to prove those theories wrong. That is why they are called theories.

 

The problem is that it's an untestable theory. If life does currently exist out there, how do we prove it? If life did exist, but is now extinct, how do we prove it? I'm sure there are habitable planets that will one day support life, but don't at this time. How do we prove this?

 

With various size stars, the habitable zone is fairly broad. At some point our sun will become a red giant, and wipe out life on Earth. However, the habitable zone will simply shift, and life on Jupiter's moons will be more likely. With ~10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the visible universe, each likely having several planets, there are a lot of places that life can spring up. However, we haven't even begun to scratch the surface in exploring the worlds out there.

[crich88848]

Really good article here on possible explanation of why we haven't found other life yet. Summary, we may be either very early life forms on the cosmic calendar or we may be very late and all other life forms are already gone.

 

https://www.washingt...n-the-universe/

 

I'm not convinced. Humans have only been able to transmit and receive EM-based signals for 100 years. There could easily be billions of advanced civilizations that are simply too far away to receive their transmissions (yet).

 

As for simple life, we've sent probes to a handful of planets in our Solar system. A bit premature to conclude that there's no life outside our system, no?

 

Frankly, we're pretty poor at grasping the size of out galaxy, and the universe as a whole.

 

I agree. But the argument being made here is not that life does not exist outside our planet. Just that it may not exist yet or may have already existed and does not anymore. In science, you never conclude anything. You make theories and then the science community tires to prove those theories wrong. That is why they are called theories.

 

The problem is that it's an untestable theory. If life does currently exist out there, how do we prove it? If life did exist, but is now extinct, how do we prove it? I'm sure there are habitable planets that will one day support life, but don't at this time. How do we prove this?

 

With various size stars, the habitable zone is fairly broad. At some point our sun will become a red giant, and wipe out life on Earth. However, the habitable zone will simply shift, and life on Jupiter's moons will be more likely. With ~10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the visible universe, each likely having several planets, there are a lot of places that life can spring up. However, we haven't even begun to scratch the surface in exploring the worlds out there.

 

That's physics for you. The majority of physics theories are untestable. Just because something is untestable doesn't mean we should stop trying to find answers or develop theories that explain universe behaviors. If we stopped developing answers to questions we couldn't test or prove, we'd probably still be riding around in horse carriages.

[Argonne69]

That's physics for you. The majority of physics theories are untestable. Just because something is untestable doesn't mean we should stop trying to find answers or develop theories that explain universe behaviors. If we stopped developing answers to questions we couldn't test or prove, we'd probably still be riding around in horse carriages.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't be thinking about it, but to me it's not really physics. It's a thought experiment. By definition, science must be observable and testable, and they aren't proposing a way to test their ideas. There are certainly things that can't be tested using current technology, but one can still define an experiment, and wait decades for the technology to catch up. In this case I don't see it as a matter of technology catching up, as EM radiation can only travel so fast, so there could easily be life out there that we can't detect until we're long gone.

[crich88848]

That's physics for you. The majority of physics theories are untestable. Just because something is untestable doesn't mean we should stop trying to find answers or develop theories that explain universe behaviors. If we stopped developing answers to questions we couldn't test or prove, we'd probably still be riding around in horse carriages.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't be thinking about it, but to me it's not really physics. It's a thought experiment. By definition, science must be observable and testable, and they aren't proposing a way to test their ideas. There are certainly things that can't be tested using current technology, but one can still define an experiment, and wait decades for the technology to catch up. In this case I don't see it as a matter of technology catching up, as EM radiation can only travel so fast, so there could easily be life out there that we can't detect until we're long gone.

 

Finding life that may have existed previously is most definitely observable. We just have to find the evidence. Super String theory, parallel universes, multiple dimensions, warp holes, end of the universe theories, etc. All theories that currently are not observable or testable. Still science, still a theory, still physics.

[crich88848]

That's physics for you. The majority of physics theories are untestable. Just because something is untestable doesn't mean we should stop trying to find answers or develop theories that explain universe behaviors. If we stopped developing answers to questions we couldn't test or prove, we'd probably still be riding around in horse carriages.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't be thinking about it, but to me it's not really physics. It's a thought experiment. By definition, science must be observable and testable, and they aren't proposing a way to test their ideas. There are certainly things that can't be tested using current technology, but one can still define an experiment, and wait decades for the technology to catch up. In this case I don't see it as a matter of technology catching up, as EM radiation can only travel so fast, so there could easily be life out there that we can't detect until we're long gone.

 

Finding life that may have existed previously is most definitely observable. We just have to find the evidence. Super String theory, parallel universes, multiple dimensions, warp holes, end of the universe theories, etc. All theories that currently are not observable or testable. Still science, still a theory, still physics.

 

This is all besides the point now anyways. I think these types of theories are positive and conducive to furthering our knowledge. If we want answers, we must acknowledge all possibilities. We must think of the impossible in hopes of weeding out the reality. We may never know the answers to these questions. The probability of there being other life that has either existed, does exist or will exist is almost a certainty.

[i*windows]

watch this space www.eso.org for a massive announcement tomorrow/today

[NV825]

watch this space www.eso.org for a massive announcement tomorrow/today

 

Is this it? Pretty awesome find. Now if it were only a little closer.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/08/24/scientists-discover-earth-like-planet-orbiting-star-closest-our-sun/89258306/

[Argonne69]

This picture of a crescent-shaped Earth and Moon -- the first of its kind ever taken by a spacecraft -- was recorded Sept. 18, 1977, by Voyager 1 when it was 11.66 million kilometers (7.25 million miles) from Earth. - NASA / JPL