Home General Chat
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Very random, pointless space question

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Browsing the web to waste some time, i saw this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-11580789

It says that the tiny dot shown is the furthest galaxy ever viewed, and as such is the oldest, due to the distance it is away from us means it takes the light emitting from it longer to get to us, in this instance light emitting from it has taken 13 billion years to arrive at Earth.


So to my thought, to surmise, the closer the galaxy appears in the image, the newer it is - that much i can get my head around.
But since it's fact that the universe is still expanding, galaxies still moving around, what is to stop the same galaxy appearing twice in the same image, once as a relatively close, large object that they conclude is from say 5 billion years ago, but then also as a smaller, much fainter image that is say from 10 billion years ago.

But the thoughts there now and can't get rid!

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If the galaxy moved that much, they'd be able to track it. The light source would still be reaching us and showing us what it looked like back then, even as it moves, because the light source is still the same. So its still the one light source.

    Plus they'd also have other information on the galaxy.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    In order for that to happen the galaxy would have to be moving towards us (which despite things "generally" moving apart can happen) faster than the speed of light (which is theoretically possible, only travelling AT the speed of light is impossible)

    The interesting thing is the two versions we would see of this galaxy, one getting closer to us would be getting older (or, in your description, a newer view of it), and one moving away from us getting younger ("going back in time", or in your description, getting an older view of it)

    I bet you wish you just had your original thouht now...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I've never been able to get my head around this space stuff :eek2:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Big Gay wrote: »

    I bet you wish you just had your original thouht now...

    Haha, to be honest i wish i had looked at porn instead of the BBC site in the first place!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This is the kind of thing that keeps me awake at night.

    What I have never understood is, we are told the universe is still expanding well what is it expanding into? And how big is that ?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mr Orange wrote: »
    Haha, to be honest i wish i had looked at porn instead of the BBC site in the first place!

    haha.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Louisek wrote: »
    what is [the universe] expanding into?

    It isn't. It's just expanding.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Big Gay wrote: »
    It isn't. It's just expanding.

    Ok but what was there before the universe expanded ?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Louisek wrote: »
    Ok but what was there before the universe expanded ?

    Marshmellow
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mr Orange wrote: »
    Marshmellow

    Ohhh now i understand :thumb:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Louisek wrote: »
    Ok but what was there before the universe expanded ?

    There wasn't
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    you seed, time, like space, only exists within the universe.

    The bible puts it quite well, if you edit out the superstitious bits:

    "In the beginning [...] there was light"

    On the other hand, there are those who think that the big bang may have been preceeded by a big crunch, in which case you could consider that a "time before time" and hence in some ways could be seen as "a before"
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Big Gay wrote: »
    you seed, time, like space, only exists within the universe.

    The bible puts it quite well, if you edit out the superstitious bits:

    "In the beginning [...] there was light"

    On the other hand, there are those who think that the big bang may have been preceeded by a big crunch, in which case you could consider that a "time before time" and hence in some ways could be seen as "a before"

    At least "a time before time" makes some sense i can get my head around that, but its mind boggling that something can be created from nothing its just like thinking of the biggest possible number there is no end to it and no real answer
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If you can get your head around "a time before time" you're doing better than I can
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I understand that, okay understand is the wrong word, i'm completely aware of that as being the closest we have to an explanation so far, but to think that we can account for so much, and so far back, and in most peoples views it all came about due to a big bang in a fraction of a second, but a fraction of a second before that, there was nothing, its incomprehensible really.


    Another random thought - As a young child, did you develop an opinion, thought, concept etc... that you later found out to be quite a profound thing, i'll explain.

    I've always had this thing, where, well i'll put it in to a scenario; Say i've just took some exams, and i get a letter through the door with the results, until i open that envelope i could either have passed them or failed them, and perhaps this stems from some sort of OCD, but i always imagine that in the moments leading up to me realising that the envelope is there, my behaviour determines the out come, if i say slap my brother around the back of the head on the way down stairs, walk in to the living room and see the envelope, then the outcome is less likely to be a positive one.

    It was only after several years of thinking about this, that the outcome of something isn't a reality until you "open the envelope" and make it fact, that i discovered that, isn't this the basis for quantum physics? that both scenarios are true but one only becomes a reality when observed? - i guess the only difference is i some how believed my behaviour to have an impact on the outcome.

    Just seems bizarre that i would random develop this idea as a 7/8 year old without ever having heard of quantum physics


    Think i must be in a random mood tonight, i sound like i've been smoking weed all night or something.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    erm... no, it's not like that - I can see where you're coming from, but that result has been observed by many things before it's even put into the envelope, so the waveform is already collapsed.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I get that the universe is expanding, but just because an object is the furthest away from us, does that make it the oldest, what makes us think that we're at the centre... does that make sense or is it my pain meds making me stupid, wouldn't be the first time, lol
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The further away from us it is the further back in time we're seeing it, so it's oldest as in the oldest photograph of something (which shows that thing at it's youngest)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Big Gay wrote: »
    The further away from us it is the further back in time we're seeing it, so it's oldest as in the oldest photograph of something (which shows that thing at it's youngest)

    Okey dokey, it's definately the morphine making me stupid, dint understand a word of that, lol... Thanks any BG..
    Think I should try get some sleep while it's working.
    :chin:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mr Orange wrote: »
    the outcome of something isn't a reality until you "open the envelope" and make it fact, that i discovered that, isn't this the basis for quantum physics? that both scenarios are true but one only becomes a reality when observed?
    This is true on a quantum level, with things at the level of particle physics. At these scales, the probability that, say, an electron would take a different path to the one expected, is relatively high. So the additional energy input of for example being hit by a photon of light as you examine the electron's path, might be enough to decide its fate.

    However, as you look at progressively larger scales, the probability of anything other than what we'd expect is extremely small. But this is besides the fact that the results had already been determined before you even opened the envelope. It does however explain why your envelope didn't just spontaneously materialise in the room by borrowing energy from the universe ;)
  • Options
    Dr PirateDr Pirate Posts: 8,303 Legendary Poster
    Did someone mention... Science?!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    TJT6768 wrote: »
    I get that the universe is expanding, but just because an object is the furthest away from us, does that make it the oldest, what makes us think that we're at the centre... does that make sense or is it my pain meds making me stupid, wouldn't be the first time, lol
    We don't think we're at the centre. But everything we observe makes us the centre of our observations.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    God knows why but some of the stuff in hete reminds me of schrodingers cat. Heh dunno why. But brilliant thread.:
Sign In or Register to comment.