It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

SETI & Ufology , Why one & not the other?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
It has been mentioned before , I'm sure , yet we are still stuck with this dilemma.

Why do mainstream scientist's find themselves at home with , SETI , and find themselves at a loss with Ufology?

I contend it is because , Ufology requires one to familiarize themselves with multiple fields , whereas SETI only requires one main field of research , Radio astronomy.

Also , i'm not one to over look the fact that the negative of the UFO question , can not be proven, although I personally believe the positive of the UFO question can be proven absolute.

This is only an opinion thread , although links to support ideas that are not original will be appreciated.



[edit on 19-6-2005 by lost_shaman]




posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 01:25 AM
link   
i think its because the govt says "this is our official public project" so all the public rushes over to hang out *like a good public would*

and then they say ufology is nuts and wackos so the mainstream public believes in the total outright lies **Everyone knows there is wackos and nuts in every field of every knowledge**
and pointing at one person and judging a whole group by the actions of that one person is also very ignorant ^Deny^

and in 50years after the public can go to space on regular spaceflights and possibly even stay at a spacestation-hotel we will have floods of first hand reports of the ufos and such so then it will finally become accepted

i wish for disclosure but i dont think the jerks will ever give us that holy grail

im still laughing about how Congress 'allegedly' passed a law in early 1950s that said you would get Fined and Put in Jail for having "contact with aliens"
LOL
Can you believe that ???




posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 02:19 AM
link   
"Why do mainstream scientist's find themselves at home with , SETI , and find themselves at a loss with Ufology?" == lost

That is one of the best questions I've seen here in a long while.

I was hoping for some enlightenment from others, perhaps the SETI members here but I dont want to see this one lacking in replies.
Oh, just saw the response from muzzleflash. Now thats funny, and no, I dont believe that.

My first guess is that SETI deals with the question of "other intelligence" in a manner that fits in with the mainstream. Their
assumptions lead to a hypothesis which CAN be tested. Their methodical search is the "test".
With the UFOlogists, what are their assumptions which lead to a TESTABLE hypothesis? Do they even agree
on their assumptions? So far, all I have seen is "testimony". Not only is this "un-science", to coin a word, but
our legal system deals daily with the discrediting of testimony. About to go off topic, as that reminds me of
an excellent lesson on dealing with testimony. So I shall avoid the temptation to "tell a story".



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 03:51 AM
link   
So do you think ( just asking ) that by following the rules of Mainstream science we are going to miss some truths?



posted on Jun, 19 2005 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Yes this is a topic thats need to be brought up, I think we are not looking at the big picture i feel it is beginning to change though, science today is still widly base on Descartes/Carteasian way of thinking of breaking down things into smaller smaller parts to studie seperatly which leaves fragmented incomplete data, although it has yielded some of our best theroies and inventions its starting to show its age.

Thanks to the fairly new science of quantam mechanics all this is beginning to change for one of the first time in modern science we hit a brick wall with this way of thinking we had broken down matter to what we thought was it smallest parts to studie yet we found a strange world of probality chance, a network and lace of relationships not parts.The macroscopic world around us looks dead inert , modern phyiscs tells us that matter is contuniously changing dancing rythmicly.For the first time in science we didnt have the language to explain this.

So i say now we need a more holistic view with science looking at the big picture, most changes in physics tend to change the rest as of science as physcis is the foundation of science,its happening as we speak, an atom is no longer an independently existing unanalzable entity, it is in essence a set of relationships that reach outward to other things.This shift from objects to relationships has far reaching implications for science.The cruical feature of quantam theory is that the observer is not only necessary to observe the properties of an atomic phenomenon , but is necessary to even bring about these properties.

I think some things called paranormal may still have a place in science such as esp, ufos, ect there is so much were only beginning to discover personally i think history will look back on this time period we are just leaving and call it the " Stupid Ages" (Well i know that not totally true but mabye The Ignorant Ages
)


Merkz out..




[edit on 19-6-2005 by Merkeva]



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 02:59 AM
link   
So do you think ( just asking ) that by following the rules of Mainstream science we are going to miss some truths? == lost

There are many definitions of what is truth. Some even say truth is relative. What science says about truth is that you will
find it by eliminating all the falsehoods. (The path to truth avoids the false.) Can you suggest an alternative that sounds
equally successful ?

although it has yielded some of our best theroies and inventions its starting to show its age.==Merkeva
i think history will look back on this time period we are just leaving and call it the " Stupid Ages" == Merkeva

I hope you do not really believe that, Merkeva. Science has placed us in a truly Golden Age that far too many take for
granted. This is truly the Age of Miracles. I can talk to anyone in the world with a great chance of same day success.
Last century we would commute locally by horseback. Also, just last century, space exploration would be insanity.
Even the science fiction was limited to planet-side, or getting fired by cannon to the moon.
The internet as we are using it did not exist until it was commercialized, in 1992 I believe. When I think of "stupid ages",
personally that would be almost any time before now. Imagine going to the crapper before Jon Crapper invented it.
In the winter time to boot. A call of nature was an adverse adventure. I prefer the Golden Age to any prior age.



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 03:53 AM
link   
Great thread, by the way.

I think science finds it difficult to find a logical starting-point to the subject of Ufology, which is why it remains stillborn.

With SETI, science can start from the assumption drawn from two widely established facts:

1. The universe is large and populated by stars

2. Radio technology is a commonplace fact

Assumption: If there is even a reasonable probability that other life has independantly evolved, then it is also reasonable to assume that they too will at some point discover the principles of radio communication. Hence, even if unintentional, there may be stray radio signals drifting past Earth.

No matter what your personal view on extra-terrestrial life, no scientific body could ever claim you were being "unscientific" or "unprofessional" by using this as a startingpoint to your research. Hence, your career as a scientist would remain intact, and your chances of receiving funding for your project would also remain good.

The problem with Ufology is finding that "starting-point" that won't cause ridicule or proffesional suicide. The best starting point I can think of is:

Assumptions for the existence of Extraterrestrial craft close to Earth:

1. The universe is large and populated with stars, (hence there is a good chance of life)

2. Either it is possible to travel from one point to another, faster than light; or Extraterrestrial craft have taken thousands of years to get here, using conventional means.

It is very difficult to get funding for any project that first requires you accept that the known laws of physics are in error. It also is just not a sound starting point for research (if you are a professional scientist), so by default, science has to assume that if UFOs exist and are extraterrestrial, they have arrive here through conventional means only.

Faced with the following two probabilities:

1. If aliens exist would they spend copious amounts of resources to physically travel (below the speed of light) to Earth.

2. Or would they simply build a radio transmitter capable of communicating at the speed of light?

Any funding body would favour SETI over a Ufology reasearch project any day.

Unfortunately, the only sorts of Ufology projects likely to receive funding are those with base assumptions that do not contradict the known laws of nature, such as:

UFOs are not from space;
or
UFOs are naturally occuring;
or
UFOs are a potent popular myth;

I have a couple of scientist friends. One of them has a very scientific approach to the whole of his life: ie, he won't believe in anything that cannot be explained by our current laws of nature. The other is more willing to believe in the possibility of extraterrestrial craft, but would never entertain this open-mindedness in a professional manner. Besides, he's a geologist, so what would he do anyway?!

Perhaps there's some legitimate startingpoint to a Ufology Research Project that I haven't thought of. Can anyone think of one??



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 04:04 AM
link   


think history will look back on this time period we are just leaving and call it the " Stupid Ages"


I agree with you in principle but not totally. Every generation looks back at the last and thinks they were just silly. But then they turn around and make the exact same mistake of thinking we know 'almost everything' and in just a few more years we will know everything.

Silly, but human.

Most of this is driven by our need to feel we are in control, that we know what the Universe holds. For those things that Science has not yet confronted well there is always religion to fill in the gaps.

We will not escape this cycle anytime soon I am afraid. Sure this is a great age, but the next will be even more so, and the next, and the next...

I do admit that I see some hope in some of the current trends, starting with Chaos theory and quantum mechanics in general. So many things that have been consigned to the paranormal are being investigated from a new angle. I am a firm believer that human mythology and the need to put some kind, any kind of explaination on events has created all of the 'spooky' that is associated with the paranormal and UFOs as well.

There is nothing paranormal, just that which we do not as yet understand.



The cruical feature of quantam theory is that the observer is not only necessary to observe the properties of an atomic phenomenon , but is necessary to even bring about these properties.


I was taught this basic fact in high school some, ahem, 25 years ago. I knew then that it would lead to comprehension of things that mystics have known all along: we are a creator of Reality at the same time we live in it.

Taken quite a while to develop because it stood the 'Laws of Science' on it's head but it is a proveable fact and we have to deal with it. What it will eventually lead to is the understanding that there are no 'Laws' just 'Rules' that can, and are, broken when the conditions require them to be.


A.T
(-)


[edit on 6/20/05 by Alexander Tau]



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 12:22 PM
link   
I guess that I'm biased , in that I've had an encounter, with something.

But doesn't it bother anyone else that , SETI , other than possibly the WOW! signal has never found anything , yet they are embraced by the Mainstream Scientific community. On the other hand , there are millions of people like me , reporting very strange things right here on Earth, and no one in the Scientific community can explain this, or is willing to Study this.

In response to my question about truths, nightwing said, " What science says about truth is that you will find it by eliminating all the falsehoods. "

Doesn't Science tend to overlook evidence that we are being visited?

Thereby , embracing a potential falsehood.

[edit on 20-6-2005 by lost_shaman]



posted on Jun, 20 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   


Why do mainstream scientist's find themselves at home with , SETI , and find themselves at a loss with Ufology?


here's the simple, short answer...(well, short for me)

The EXISTENCE of extraterrestrial beings doesn't require hard-accepted rules of science to be broken. Science sees ET existence as a statistic probability, and a likely one.

However...

The idea of such beings VISITING Earth.....that requires technology that would bend the rules so commonly accepted by science. The Scientists hold that due to the vast distances involved, while they may exist, they aren't coming here.

*****************************************************

It's a position that I don't agree with, as the evidence seems to indicate that they are here, whether we've figured out how to travel such distances or not. An example is a bushman living in the middle of the Outback, never exposed to the outside world. He may not know of skyscrapers, etc. just miles away, but they exist and are there all the same.

Unlike most UFOlogists (self claim there), I do NOT think SETI is a waste of time. I'm all for ANYTHING to search and confirm their existence or not, be it SETI signals or a landing on the White House lawn. The nice thing about SETI, is that a signal can be detected and heard by ANYONE, and without censorship, if we actually find one, so the government would then be FORCED to come clean...


[edit on 20-6-2005 by Gazrok]



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 03:04 AM
link   
The problem with Ufology is finding that "starting-point" == mannanin

Great Insite. The guy or gal who can do that will launch into science in a big way.
I am not ignoring your question, lost shaman, just that I want to build a bit on mannanin's insite to maybe get some brainstorming going
in the direction of the mannanin insite.

Let's take a hint from Gazrok's post:
Science sees ET existence as a statistic probability.

That's the Drake equation. Lets do the math.


N= R(asterisk) x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc x L.

I shall follow Tyler Nordgren's example and keep it easy to work but excessively optimistic.

R (asterisk) = rate of star formation, rough estimate by 100 billion stars in galaxy divided by approx 10 billion years old = 10 per year.

fp = fraction with planets. Heck lets just say they ALL have planets. fp = 1

ne = habitable planets. Our best guess is that some systems aint safe for man nor beast. Wanna live next door to S. Doradus?
We shall deduct types O, B, and M plus the multiple star systems. That seems reasonable so if the system aint cooking life as
we know it, then we assume its habitable. So, rough estimate is ne = one out of every ten systems.

fl = fraction with life. Again going with what we know, our sun has 3 planets in what we think is a water - liquid zone. (Yeah,
Venus is a hot house but it could have been better we think.) Until we find life on Mars, fl = 1/3

fi = fraction with intelligence. Lets be kind to ourselves. They all do, so fl = 1

fc = that fraction of intelligent life that becomes advenced enough to communicate with. Again be kind to ourselves and say they
all do. fc = 1.

L = how long does an advanced civilization last. Now we got a problem. For us, L = about 75 years. Assuming that Marconi
could have built Arecibo in his lifetime. This little variable MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WORLD. Lets
say 1000 to keep the numbers easy.


N = number of intelligent (and communicative) civilizations as we speak. = 10 x 1 x 0.1 x 0.33 x 1 x 1 x 1000 = 333 communicative
civilizations in our Galaxy right NOW.

Sounds great huh? Now we have another problem. How big a space is that ?

Again, nice easy numbers. Galaxy volume approximation (giant cylinder) = Pi x( R)squared times height = 3.14 x (15000 parsec radius rounded way down) squared times 1000 parsecs
equals roughly 706 BILLION cubic parsecs, or about 2 billion cubic parsecs per civilization assuming evenly spread in the pie.

Make it a bubble of radius approximately 1000 parsecs. 1 parsec = 3.26 light years. Nearest likely civilization to us assuming OPTIMISTIC numbers is
3260 light years away. If L = 1000 years for us as well, we are unlikely to have a two way conversation with them because either
we or they will be already gone before recieving the answer.

But in spite of all that, SETI is looking for something tangibly measurable. How do UFOlogists get on board that train ?

(edit to correct format error)


[edit on 21-6-2005 by nightwing]



posted on Jun, 21 2005 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Why one and not the other? Scientists rely on their repuatation, credability and grants. They cannot risk all of this this by being public about Flying Saucers. Flying Saucers=Nutjob. This is why science & scientists generally will not adopt ufology officially.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing

Let's take a hint from Gazrok's post:
Science sees ET existence as a statistic probability.

That's the Drake equation. Lets do the math.



O.K. Lets do the math, then. Since nightwing obviously misinterpreted several values , N*, fp, ne, and fl.

First you need to define the Drake equation, N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL.

  • N* represents the number of stars in the Milky Way Galaxy

  • fp is the fraction of stars that have planets around them

  • ne is the number of planets per star that are capable of sustaining life

  • fl is the fraction of planets in ne where life evolves

  • fi is the fraction of fl where intelligent life evolves

  • fc is the fraction of fi that communicate

  • fL is fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations live


N* = 200 Billion Stars in the Milky Way Galaxy.

(Like you said nightwing our starting point here is very important.)

fp = 50% or .5 At current rates scientists looking for extra solar planets are find one planet for every two stars they look at, and this percentage is likely to increase as our technology to detect ESPs advances.

ne = 1 or 100% (Nightwing fp is value that you should use to separate the uninhabitable systems from habitable systems. So according to your logic you should have given fp the value of 0.1 instead of 1.)

fl = 1 or 100% if we think that life will evolve anywhere that the conditions are right. (Nightwing this time ne was the proper value for your estimation of 1/3)

fi = 0.2 or 20% Given that not all planets with life will produce intelligent life.

fc = 0.5 or 50% given that not all intelligent life is likely to communicate in a way that we would be able to detect.

fL = 1/1,000,000th or 10,000 years.

So in this case the value for N= 10,000 advanced civilizations in the Milky Way Galaxy.


A more accurate estimate of the Volume of the Galaxy , considering it is a flattened disk, you need to find the volume of a spheroid. Since that is much more complicated than I am willing to attempt, a quick guesstimate should suffice us for our purpose here.

One way to get a good guesstimate is to estimate that a flattened disk is roughly equal to the volume of sphere with a diameter roughly 1/3 that of a flattened disk. ROUGHLY!

So the diameter of the Milky Way is 100,000 light years.

So it would be Roughly the same volume as a sphere with a diameter of 33,000 light years.

Volume of a sphere is V = 4/3 . Pi . R cubed

In this case r = 16,500 light years.

Giving us a rough guesstimate of 18,800,000,000,000 or 18.8 trillion square Light years.

Divide 18.8 trillion by 10,000 advanced civilizations and we get 18.8 million square light years per civilization.

Now using the same equation we used to find the volume of a sphere , we reverse the math to determine the average distance between any two civilizations assuming they are spread equally throughout the galaxy.

Giving us a rough radius of the volume surrounding any civilization as 765.77 light years.

Multiplied by two gives us the rough distance between any two civilizations as 1531.54 light years. Or roughly 469.8 parsecs between any two advanced civilizations calculated to exist at any given time in the Galaxy.

Edit: Notice that some of the numbers I used in my calculation of the Drake Equation were smaller and more realistic than the numbers used by nightwing , and yet my calculation was 30 times higher than his. Showing how sensitive a calculation like this can be.

Also my estimation of the volume of the Galaxy was more than eight hundred percent larger than the size of nightwings calculation , but my calculation of the distance between two civilizations is still only 47% of the distance nightwing calculated.

[edit on 15-9-2005 by lost_shaman]



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Yep, pretty damn far....


Now, on the surface, SETI would almost seem like a definite, right? I mean, people think, "Well gee, if there are aliens up there, then how could we miss a signal by now?" Again, on the surface, this seems like a valid question. But, one thing to keep in mind is....just how long is a civilization around? Just how long are they using means of communication we'd detect?

Here's an illustration....

Earth - We've been broadcasting for a little over 100 years or so, and only actively searching for a portion of that.

Alien Planet A - Had an advanced civilization 1000 years ago, and transmitted for 5000 years before they died out. But, they're 40,000,000 light years away, which means their first signal, from 6000 years ago, is just barely on it's way to us.

Alien Planet B - Has an advanced civilization that is still thriving and started broadcasts 20,000 years ago. But, they're even further away, 100,000,000 light years for example... Again, the signal is on the way.

Alien Planet C - Had an advanced civilization 500,000 years ago, and was 50,000 light years away. Their transmissions reached us, but nobody was around yet to hear them.

Now you see the difficulty SETI faces. They are looking for a particular needle in a pile of needles. It's a challenge, and I hope they succeed one day. UFOlogists are quick to say, "why bother, they're here!". Well, SETI provides a way that we, the people, can PROVE they are out there, when that proof is finally found. I'm all for that.



posted on Sep, 15 2005 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Lets not get to carried away with the zeros Gaz, the Milky Way only has a diameter of 100,000 light years.

The Andromeda Galaxy is 2.9 million light years away.

So I think if we ever find or hear from anything ever it will be in the Milky Way Galaxy.

Edit: ( Just for the sake of perspective, if you held a model of the Milky Way Galaxy in your hand that was 5 inches in diameter , the Andromeda Galaxy would be over 12 feet away from you. And 100 million light years on this scale would equal a distance of over 83 feet. 1 inch = 20,000 light years.)




[edit on 15-9-2005 by lost_shaman]



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by thepostman
Why one and not the other? Scientists rely on their repuatation, credability and grants. They cannot risk all of this this by being public about Flying Saucers. Flying Saucers=Nutjob. This is why science & scientists generally will not adopt ufology officially.


I guess that's true, but have you ever wondered why that is true?

Lets see what Dr. Robert Low of the infamous Condon Committee had to say about this three months before UFO study officially began in a memo to University Officials.


Dr. Robert Low to university officials on August 9, 1966

Our study would be conducted almost exclusively by nonbelievers who,

although they couldn't possibly prove a negative result could, and probably

would, add an impressive body of evidence that there is no reality to the

observations. The trick would be, I think, to describe the project so that,

to the public, it would appear a totally objective study but to the scientific

community would present the image of a group of nonbelievers trying their

best to be objective, but having almost zero expectation of finding a

saucer. One way to do this would be to stress investigation, not of physical

phenomena, but rather of the people who do the observing - the

psychology and sociology of persons and groups who report seeing UFOs.

If the emphasis were put here, rather than on examination of the old

question of the physical reality of the saucer, I think the scientific

community would quickly get the message... I'm inclined to feel at this

early stage that, if we set up the thing right and take pains to get proper

people involved and have success in presenting the image we want to

present to the scientific community, we could carry the job off to our

benefit.



So it would seem that " Nut Job " attitude towards Ufology , was set up by design.

Dr. Low was right! As long as the attention is focused away from the question of the Physical reality of the phenomena and directed towards some subtle and as of yet undescribed psychological factors of the population , then the UFO question is no longer a question for physical scientists. It becomes a question for Psychologists and Sociologists.

A psychologist can't tell you if person truly saw what they report seeing , but Psychologists will tell you that the majority of people who report UFOs are being truthful and are completely sane. Contrary to popular belief.


Everyone who reads this should also be aware that the Condon Committee, often referred to as the Condon Report, effectively ended the USAF Project Blue Book.



[edit on 16-9-2005 by lost_shaman]



posted on Sep, 16 2005 @ 11:47 AM
link   


Lets not get to carried away with the zeros Gaz, the Milky Way only has a diameter of 100,000 light years.


Merely an arbitrary figure, used as an illustration...



posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 03:00 AM
link   
"Edit: Notice that some of the numbers I used in my calculation of the Drake Equation were smaller and more realistic than the
numbers used by nightwing , and yet my calculation was 30 times higher than his. Showing how sensitive a calculation like this can be." == lost shaman

And a fairly credible effort. But with any probability effort, you attempt a specific goal. Your goal was not the same as mine.
Plus I question your value for N since you did not show your work. I get a much higher value using the numbers you stated.
But again your goal was different. You are calculating a probability for civilizations on 200 billion stars without regard for
overlapping time frames. By selecting and defining certain variables with overlap considered, the assumptions are different
and so is the final number. Neither of our answers are right or wrong, but they are for different starting conditions. The reason
I chose to use a Star formation rate, and changed fl to L, plus other considered alterations was to take into account the
need for overlap. Ergo, how many of the possible civilizations that may exist on 200 billion stars overlap the existance of the others.
BTW, volumes are cubic, not square light years, and there is a simpler way to ballpark the answer. Once you have the cubic
value, picture a cube of that volume containing a sphere whose diameter is equal to the side value for the cube. Take the
cube root of the volume and you have a slightly smaller approximation of the diameter.



posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 05:47 AM
link   


With the UFOlogists, what are their assumptions which lead to a TESTABLE hypothesis?




SETI. Assumption: If there is even a reasonable probability that other life has independantly evolved, then it is also reasonable to assume that they too will at some point discover the principles of radio communication. Hence, even if unintentional, there may be stray radio signals drifting past Earth.


The above quotes are from 2 diferent users here.
Just to enlight my question.
Doesnt that put SETI and Ufologist in the same train ?
If Ufologist make their assumptions based on theories about subjects they dont know SETI does the same; they have no idea if any external life have ever used radio technology so they are assuming that by them selves (unless they know something we dont).

I have another question.
How long a radio wave can travel ?
I mean, it travels eternely without dissipating ?

In my opinion SETI is a waste of time/money.
All those professional could search something more concrete based on fact/events that happen daily on Earth instead of siting there and wait to catch something.
The problem is maybe if they search closer they could find something.
Maybe thats why govt. allow SETI to search that way, because they know they will get nothing.

Anyway, another great thread from lost_shaman.



posted on Sep, 20 2005 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by nightwing

And a fairly credible effort. But with any probability effort, you attempt a specific goal. Your goal was not the same as mine.


My only goal was to use more realistic numbers in my equation.

What did you say your goal was ?




Neither of our answers are right or wrong, but they are for different starting conditions. The reason
I chose to use a Star formation rate, and changed fl to L, plus other considered alterations was to take into account the
need for overlap. Ergo, how many of the possible civilizations that may exist on 200 billion stars overlap the existance of the others.


Can I remind you that your equation started with 100 Billion, not 200 billion that I used or that is commonly accepted. So your overlap rate is going to be dramatically affected if you recalculate that number with 200 Billion stars.

I think you didn't need to change the equation to get the overlap , as it is already factored in by the Equation. The ( * ) is the Star formation rate, it was present in my equation too.

fL in my equation is the same as your L it is just expressed as the fraction of a planets life that the civilization exists. I choose 10,000 years to keep things realistic , not arbitrarily simple.



BTW, volumes are cubic, not square light years, and there is a simpler way to ballpark the answer. Once you have the cubic
value, picture a cube of that volume containing a sphere whose diameter is equal to the side value for the cube. Take the
cube root of the volume and you have a slightly smaller approximation of the diameter.


I stand by my guesstimate. By taking the known diameter of the Milky Way dividing by three , I assumed that a flattened disk is roughly the same volume as a sphere with 1/3 the diameter. ( In reality as diameter increases and height is lessened volume increases, so there is no easy way to calculate exact volume without exact measurements. By using the geometry of a sphere it simply made things easier .)

By solving for the volume of the sphere I got the rough cubic volume of the milky Way Galaxy.

Did I say square Light Years ? Because I solved for Cubic Light Years , My Bad.


[edit on 20-9-2005 by lost_shaman]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join