Film, Media & TV4 mins ago
Journey to the edge of the universe
I watched the above named documentary a couple of nights ago. Absolutely mind blowing stuff.
If you didn't, it's a journey to the edge of the universe in one shot - obviously computer generated - we get taken from planet to planet, star to star, black hole to black hole etc., until we can go no futher.
Other than what we DO know (the planets surrounding us in our galaxy etc.), was the rest of it factually accurate? Have scientists found a way to see outside the milky way? Do we know for sure what the galaxies hundreds of thousands lightyears away look like?
This is a link to the National Geographic webpage for the documentary
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/ journey-to-the-edge-of-the-universe-3023/Overv iew77#tab-Overview
You can travel yourself by going to the 'Go to the edge' tab.
The documentary is still available on Sky Anytime for those of you who have Sky+ and are interested.
If you didn't, it's a journey to the edge of the universe in one shot - obviously computer generated - we get taken from planet to planet, star to star, black hole to black hole etc., until we can go no futher.
Other than what we DO know (the planets surrounding us in our galaxy etc.), was the rest of it factually accurate? Have scientists found a way to see outside the milky way? Do we know for sure what the galaxies hundreds of thousands lightyears away look like?
This is a link to the National Geographic webpage for the documentary
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/ journey-to-the-edge-of-the-universe-3023/Overv iew77#tab-Overview
You can travel yourself by going to the 'Go to the edge' tab.
The documentary is still available on Sky Anytime for those of you who have Sky+ and are interested.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Lakitu. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Obviously the detailed contents of far away galaxies are just speculation but mostly we are well capable of creating a fairly accurate facsimile of the universe through Computer graphics. This is due to several factors, accurate measuring of distances for example, and of course hubble, have you seen the "deep field" picture? There is also the gravitational lense effect which can fill in the gaps. Then of course there is mass spectroscopy which tells us the elements present and from that we can extrapolate all sorts of other data. So overall I'd say it was probably quite close to reality. Note also this is National Geographic who are noted for very thorough research in scientific subjects.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
The Universe has no "edge" and it is impossible to locate its centre. You can see the Andromeda galaxy easily with the naked eye. It is beyond our Milky Way galaxy at a distance of approximately 2 million light years.
Using spectroscopy, it is possible to analyse the composition of stars and planets. Each element has its own unique set of spectral light lines, much like a fingerprint is unique.
Using spectroscopy, it is possible to analyse the composition of stars and planets. Each element has its own unique set of spectral light lines, much like a fingerprint is unique.
One problem that's usually ignored in such productions, (entertaining as they are) is the fact that the Universe (the`real' Universe,big U) is estimated to be 13.8 billions of years old. Since the speed of light (300,000 meters per second) is fixed everywhere and our galaxy is estimated to be only a million years or so younger than the universe (little u, or mathematical model derived from some physical theory) the light from the "edge" of the Universe (no "edge" actually exists) can never reach us.
Although Einstein's theory of relativity is certainly true, it doesn't apply to the "fabric of space" itself. Two or more galaxies can be moving away from each other at a combined speed greater than c. Space, itself, between two points is stretching faster than light speed, so we can never "see" the other point.
Although Einstein's theory of relativity is certainly true, it doesn't apply to the "fabric of space" itself. Two or more galaxies can be moving away from each other at a combined speed greater than c. Space, itself, between two points is stretching faster than light speed, so we can never "see" the other point.
-- answer removed --
Although I recognize toungue in cheekiness for what it is, I would respond that there is no "dark"... only an absence of light. We can measure the intensity of light but we don't measure the instensity of dark, hence, the speed of dark is definable by great scientists such as George Carlin as seen in his essay:
"For years, it has been believed that electric bulbs emit light, but recent studies have proved otherwise. Electric bulbs don't emit light; they suck dark. Thus, we call these bulbs "Dark Suckers."
The basis of the Dark Sucker Theory is that electric bulbs suck dark. For example, take the Dark Sucker in the room you are in. There is much less dark right next to it than there is elsewhere. The larger the Dark Sucker, the greater its capacity to suck dark. Dark Suckers atop parking lot utility poles have a much greater capacity to suck dark than the ones in a household lamp.
As with all things, Dark Suckers don't last forever. Once they are full of dark, they can no longer suck. This is proven by the visible dark spot on a full Dark Sucker.
Candles are primitive Dark Suckers. A new candle has a white wick. You will note that after the first use, the wick turns black, representing all the dark that has been sucked into it.
Contd.
"For years, it has been believed that electric bulbs emit light, but recent studies have proved otherwise. Electric bulbs don't emit light; they suck dark. Thus, we call these bulbs "Dark Suckers."
The basis of the Dark Sucker Theory is that electric bulbs suck dark. For example, take the Dark Sucker in the room you are in. There is much less dark right next to it than there is elsewhere. The larger the Dark Sucker, the greater its capacity to suck dark. Dark Suckers atop parking lot utility poles have a much greater capacity to suck dark than the ones in a household lamp.
As with all things, Dark Suckers don't last forever. Once they are full of dark, they can no longer suck. This is proven by the visible dark spot on a full Dark Sucker.
Candles are primitive Dark Suckers. A new candle has a white wick. You will note that after the first use, the wick turns black, representing all the dark that has been sucked into it.
Contd.
Contd.
"Furthermore, if you put a pencil next to the wick of an operating candle, it will turn black. This is because it got in the way of the dark flowing into the candle.
One of the disadvantages of these primitive Dark Suckers is their limited range. But with the advent of Dark Storage Units [sometimes referred- to as "ever readies" since they are always available for immediate use], we now have portable Dark Suckers.
In these, the bulbs can't handle all the dark by themselves and must be aided by the Dark Storage Unit[s]. When the Dark Storage Unit[s] is/are full, it/they must be emptied and replaced before the portable Dark Sucker can operate again.
The Dark Sucker Theory and the existence of dark suckers further proves that dark has mass and is heavier than light: Dark has mass. When dark goes into a Dark Sucker, friction from the mass generates heat. Thus, it is not prudent to touch an operating Dark Sucker.
Candles present a special problem as the mass must travel into a solid wick instead of through clear glass. This generates a great amount of heat and therefore it is very unwise to touch an operating candle."
"Furthermore, if you put a pencil next to the wick of an operating candle, it will turn black. This is because it got in the way of the dark flowing into the candle.
One of the disadvantages of these primitive Dark Suckers is their limited range. But with the advent of Dark Storage Units [sometimes referred- to as "ever readies" since they are always available for immediate use], we now have portable Dark Suckers.
In these, the bulbs can't handle all the dark by themselves and must be aided by the Dark Storage Unit[s]. When the Dark Storage Unit[s] is/are full, it/they must be emptied and replaced before the portable Dark Sucker can operate again.
The Dark Sucker Theory and the existence of dark suckers further proves that dark has mass and is heavier than light: Dark has mass. When dark goes into a Dark Sucker, friction from the mass generates heat. Thus, it is not prudent to touch an operating Dark Sucker.
Candles present a special problem as the mass must travel into a solid wick instead of through clear glass. This generates a great amount of heat and therefore it is very unwise to touch an operating candle."
Of course R1Geezer is correct. Since 1983 the meter has been defined by international agreement as the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299,792,458 of a second. This makes the speed of light exactly 299,792.458 km/s.. being American the rascally k is easily overlooked... thanks!
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV4 mins ago
I Wonder How Far Advanced Flight...
Science6 mins ago
Starmer & Lammy A Marriage Made In...
News9 mins ago
ChatterBank21 mins ago
ChatterBank42 mins ago