....Which Is Greater, The Number Of Sand Grains On Earth Or Stars In The Sky?
the way the question is phrased can have an impact on the answer... "Stars in the Sky"
allows for only the Stars
seen in the canopy above our heads, by unaided natural eyesight, and must exclude all lights-in-the-sky which are not
Stars (i.e. moons, comets, space rocks, satellites, nebula, Galaxies, etc.)
Our own Galaxy has let's say, 500 Billion Stars, and we 'see' a sliver of the Milky Way which appears as a stream of milk (but composed of stars)
which appears as a diagonal band tilted like a
= (reverse slash) in our night sky...
we are 'seeing' only
a partial segment of the denser Galactic plane of Stars.
So -- we only observe about, perhaps 3/4 of the Star population of our home Galaxy, in every night sky above every point on Earth where people travel
Remember all those points of light outside
the Milky Way are other Galaxies, yes composed of stars, but those points-of-light only number maybe
3,000 as seen by a Shepherd tending the flock some 2,000 years ago
so...................... the seabeds, the beaches, the soil under our feet, deserts worldwide, ALL is/was 'sand' and that volume of sand might fill up
a huge cubic box that is 100 miles X 100 miles X 100 miles...
You figure out if that box has more grains-of-sand than the 500 billion Stars in our Galaxy
My money is on the Sand grains outnumbering the Stars by more than 50-to-1
edit on th31151413498424032017 by St Udio because: (no reason given)
edit on th31151413507624042017 by St Udio because: (no
edit on th31151413512624052017 by St Udio because: (no reason given)
did you know... a reverse slash will not show up in your post but lets see if a forward slash will... here goes --> / /
let's see the result
edit on th31151413534724092017 by St Udio because: (no reason given)
nope a reverse slash is blank space....
edit on th31151413543024102017 by St Udio because: (no reason given)