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.

 

Sharpest Image Yet of Massive Galaxy Collision

page: 3
39
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
Could you imagine being on a planet in a system in one of those galaxies?

Your race develops the technology to observe the heavens closer and you realize that a star and all it's planets is going to intersect with your system?

You calculate out the time before impact?

Terrifying!



Actually that imagination doesn't seem so far-fetched. Our galaxy, according to stargazers, is in the middle of some long-term colliding and we are more or less in one of the crossings. All that's left is finding that rogue star of yours and start the countdown.





Thousands of stars stripped from the nearby Sagittarius dwarf galaxy are streaming through our vicinity of the Milky Way galaxy, according to a new view of the local universe constructed by a team of astronomers from the University of Virginia and the University of Massachusetts…. Read more






This movie, shows the distribution of stars in the shredded Sagittarius dwarf galaxy as revealed by the observations reported here. The image is based on the best model match to the map of 2MASS M-giant stars. The thin flat blue spiral represents the disk of our Milky Way galaxy (the shape and size of this disk is not derived as part of this work). The yellow dot represents the position of the Sun. Sagittarius debris can be seen extending from the dense 'core' of the Sagittarius dwarf, wrapping around the galaxy, and descending through the Sun's position.




[edit on 7/8/10 by D.Wolf]




posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ciphor

To answer your question, yes. My 2nd cousin has downs, I see her every year at Christmas. I didn't "call people retarded" I implied that it is possible muzzle is "semi-retarded". Meaning learning handicapped but functional enough to drive rent an apartment etc. I stand by my assumption, as he has said nothing to prove otherwise that I can see.

I strongly disagree with your opinion. Respect is earned and proven. Everyone is given a basic amount of respect at the start. You can do things to lose respect such as but not limited too; Posting your ideas as facts and using your ideas to argue facts. Quoting people saying things they never said. Speaking of astrophysics like toy cars. etc. I could go on but you get the point ya?

And please. Never never never never never never never ask again that I explain physics to someone who has obviously never picked up a physics book. I would have to ask in return you take a man rock climbing who awoke from a 15 year coma.
Both have the same chances of a successful mission.

Again, and sad you don't understand this, truly truly sad. The universe expansion has been OBSERVED. It is no longer theory. What can we do to pound that into some heads here? Do you even keep up with modern science or just spit out garbage when you have the chance? Forgive me for being a "know it all"

Let's start a new discussion in your terms ok? Let's talk about how the earth is flat. Even though we have observed it is definitely round. Lets give open forum discussion to the ideas of it being flat. Can we do that too? For the sake of "real science" as you call it, of course. ^_~


I cannot believe you are this self-absorbed and arrogant. I really can't. It's ridiculous! Really, there is no point in me further saying anything to you, because my views of humanity and our relationships with one another differ far too much for me to have a meaningful conversation with the likes of you. I will, however, give you the courtesy of briefly explaining what that view is. I am inclined to believe that all humans are equal and equally deserving of the same amount of inherent respect. That respect either dwindles or increases over time. I think we maybe agree there. However, you completely disrespect everyone here with no reason. You even call someone retarded (you changed it to "semi-retarded" [there's no such thing]).

On topic, I personally believe the universe is expanding, as it has been observed. I don't agree with muzzle, but you don't see me spewing insults and arrogance all over the place like a porn star at the "climax" of his film (gross, huh?). So he has a differing opinion. Please, just stop with the condescending attitude. It causes arguments like these to just completely derail the thread. Can you do that, please? Have respect.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ciphor
reply to post by OrphenFire
 


holy irony, wait a second, hahahahahahaha! Did I just get crap about calling someone "semi-retarded", and a rant about "respect" from someone named OrphenFire? YES I DID! Everyone deserves respect but Orphans? They deserve to be burned!


Hey OrphenFire, how does hypocrisy taste? Is it good?




[edit on 7-8-2010 by Ciphor]


Ooops, didn't see that post. LoL... now you must be the one trolling.


Firstly, I have been completely respectful in my posts, unlike you. Secondly, my name is not OrphanFire lol... It's Orphen. It means something else, but it doesn't matter. And anyway, what did that post even mean??



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ciphor

Meaning learning handicapped but functional enough to drive rent an apartment etc. I stand by my assumption, as he has said nothing to prove otherwise that I can see.




You directly insulted a member of this site without provocation, it doesn't matter how you dress it up, what you did wasn't just against A.T.S terms and conditions, it was also just outright disrespectful and you owe Muzzleflash an apology, same with ''RestinginPieces'' for his/her very arrogant, belittling post.


For the thread, those pictures are truly magnificent, the universe amazes me, the sheer power of it and it's beauty. Those colours though, are they artificial or are those natural colours?

Hope I don't get called ''semi-retarded'' for not knowing.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
That's the point, I have a long background in physics. I have an entire library on it. I was in it in school for years, I got awards for my hard work.

Just because I reject a lot of the theories on cosmology that you believe in, doesn't give you any justification to rant about how stupid I am. I passed the classes in it, but I reject their conclusions.

There is tons of holes in these theories, and anyone willing to question them will find them.

Simple example:

The observable matter of the Universe is also spread isotropically, meaning that no direction of observation seems different from any other; each region of the sky has roughly the same content.


en.wikipedia.org...

This means our galaxy is at the center of the universe, if every observable direction of the sky has roughly the same content. Mull over that one for awhile. (It's an optical illusion IMO because our telescopes cannot sense light from ultra-distant galaxies which we do not know about yet).

And have you ever considered that the only reason you "Observe" expansion is because better telescopes allow you to see further? And every time new technology comes out, you can see further; as more sensitive optics and other sensors allow even fainter light to be captured.

Another example of this progressive technology.
"Mt. Graham telescope sees better, farther thanks to UA mirror lab"
www.kold.com...

Just because you observe something, does not mean you understand it's implications or what it really means in the bigger picture. It merely means you "saw something from a relative perspective".

When I watch David Blane, I "Observe" all kinds of crazy 'magic' stuff, but I am aware it is all Optical Illusions. Get it?

Is a mirage really water on the ground? Or merely an optical illusion? Observation is a tricky thing. Because as you get closer to the mirage, it disappears.

Just because something "appears" a certain way, does not make it so. It just means relativity produces counter-intuitive perspectives.

Also, old science ideas tend to get proven wrong when new information comes out, and this is a pattern that has been established in many aspects of science not just physics.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by D.Wolf
 




Seriously. That animation, proven or empirical at this point, has to hold some salt, no? I mean, it looks quite strikingly like what the Mayans had prophesied. The "ouroboros" Snake eating it's own tale. Nordics for that matter as well, etc, etc..

It would at least be plausible that what they had envisioned was the transforming of UNIverse into (splitting into perhaps?) the , UNIfied OMNIVERSE. Concluding that we end up in a New Home Galaxy, with seemingly new Laws of life. With the snake eating it's own tail, a cycle; representation of greater unity, transformation and the reference of it consuming it's own tail not only completing just that, but speaking of resonance (sound, music - therapy [Im sure there are people may have the concepts of quantum physics or vedic rishis 'all is sound'] model in mind maybe?) devours that "ills" once put forth. Like creating a mirror-image 'cure' so to speak, merely by either altering or fundamentally changing 'sound/time/space/astrology/physics/UNDERSTANDING as we "see" it today. also known as..




Alchemy

In alchemy, the Ouroboros is a sigil. Swiss psychologist Carl Jung saw the Ouroboros as an archetype and the basic mandala of alchemy. Jung also defined the relationship of the Ouroboros to alchemy:[6] The alchemists, who in their own way knew more about the nature of the individuation process than we moderns do, expressed this paradox through the symbol of the Ouroboros, the snake that eats its own tail. The Ouroboros has been said to have a meaning of infinity or wholeness. In the age-old image of the Ouroboros lies the thought of devouring oneself and turning oneself into a circulatory process, for it was clear to the more astute alchemists that the prima materia of the art was man himself. The Ouroboros is a dramatic symbol for the integration and assimilation of the opposite, i.e. of the shadow. This 'feed-back' process is at the same time a symbol of immortality, since it is said of the Ouroboros that he slays himself and brings himself to life, fertilizes himself and gives birth to himself. He symbolizes the One, who proceeds from the clash of opposites, and he therefore constitutes the secret of the prima materia which [...] unquestionably stems from man's unconscious.



- - - - - - On a personal and even more curious note. (Merely asking, nothing meant by it) Is there anybody that still has not heard of (rediscovered) Alchemy? Not saying anyone "100%" understands it, but at least have heard of it right? - - - - - -

[edit on 7-8-2010 by tauschen]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
And I will clarify what I said earlier to be more specific for the nitpickers lol. I apologize for being over-generalized in my earlier posts when mentioning red-shift.

Ok we can agree that close objects can show other shifts, such as the nearby galaxy showing a blue shift.

But, if everything beyond a few million light years distant shows varying degrees of red shift; this means clearly that we are at the center of the Universe (which is almost certainly incorrect).

I highly doubt we are at the center of the Universe *Considering* that the Big Bang theory was true.

So than why is everything beyond a specific distance moving away from us? This is a clear indicator of us being at the central point, as everything races away from our point.


and sufficiently distant light sources (generally more than a few million light years away) show redshift corresponding to the rate of increase of their distance from Earth.

en.wikipedia.org...

Think of the spherical shape of our planet and it's multiple viewpoints of the sky. So no matter which way I look, I see red shift.

This means one of two things.
1) Everything is moving away from Earth (thus we are the center of the Universe)
OR
2) That we are misinterpreting what red-shift really means in the realm of ultra-distant cosmological objects.

I do agree that redshift/blueshift theory applies just fine to technology here on Earth, but when it comes to deep space, I am inclined to question it and think there is a mechanism at play here that we do not understand yet.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:50 PM
link   

(you changed it to "semi-retarded" [there's no such thing]).


I didn't change it. I always said semi-retarded.


there's no such thing


Retardation is a term used to express a far lower then average IQ.
Semi-retardation simply implies the IQ is not low enough for full blown retardation but this person exhibits signs of a significantly lower then normal IQ

Here, try reading things before you go on rants. It will spare you the time of having to explain your inaccuracies later.

en.wikipedia.org...

Profound mental retardation Below 20
Severe mental retardation 20–34
Moderate mental retardation 35–49
Mild mental retardation 50–69
Borderline intellectual functioning 70–84

I would put him at 70-84. Borderline intellectual functioning.

Your continuing to prove your lack of education is not helping your battle buddy.


OrphanFire lol... It's Orphen. It means something else, but it doesn't matter. And anyway, what did that post even mean??


What does "Orphen" mean. Because google tries to correct the word to "Orphan". And I was unable to find a dictionary meaning to the word. I couldn't even find it in urban dictionary. I assumed you misspelled it because the ATS filter would not allow the proper spelling. But I must be wrong. What does OrphenFire mean?


So he has a differing opinion.


I'm down for "opinions" however he did not state his beliefs as an "opinion". He stated them as though they are fact.


Originally posted by muzzleflash
You say I know nothing about "gravity" but then you try to claim that everything in the whole universe was in one small point and somehow this "gravity" reversed and caused everything to expand outwards.

What a load of crap that is. Gravity would have caused that small ultra-condensed point of matter to collapse on itself and create a mega-black hole.


Let me be clear in case I was lacking in my explanation.

I have ZERO respect for individuals that spread miss-information on topics they have no education in. This is a horrible practice and moves forward only in teaching others ignorance.

Now he is trying to claim he has a library of books on physics and went to school, majoring in the subject? I don't know what he meant honestly.
Miss-information is garbage. Deny ignorance, don't embrace it.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 





You say I know nothing about "gravity" but then you try to claim that everything in the whole universe was in one small point and somehow this "gravity" reversed and caused everything to expand outwards. What a load of crap that is. Gravity would have caused that small ultra-condensed point of matter to collapse on itself and create a mega-black hole.


But gravity was not the only force acting on matter. The force of cosmic inflation was much stronger during this epoch, thus no black hole could have formed.

en.wikipedia.org...




The observable matter of the Universe is also spread isotropically, meaning that no direction of observation seems different from any other; each region of the sky has roughly the same content

This means our galaxy is at the center of the universe, if every observable direction of the sky has roughly the same content. Mull over that one for awhile. (It's an optical illusion IMO because our telescopes cannot sense light from ultra-distant galaxies which we do not know about yet).


I dont see why an isotropic universe would imply that we are at the center. It simply means that the universe has no center or other anisotropies.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
And I will clarify what I said earlier to be more specific for the nitpickers lol. I apologize for being over-generalized in my earlier posts when mentioning red-shift.

Ok we can agree that close objects can show other shifts, such as the nearby galaxy showing a blue shift.

But, if everything beyond a few million light years distant shows varying degrees of red shift; this means clearly that we are at the center of the Universe (which is almost certainly incorrect).

I highly doubt we are at the center of the Universe *Considering* that the Big Bang theory was true.

So than why is everything beyond a specific distance moving away from us? This is a clear indicator of us being at the central point, as everything races away from our point.


and sufficiently distant light sources (generally more than a few million light years away) show redshift corresponding to the rate of increase of their distance from Earth.

en.wikipedia.org...

Think of the spherical shape of our planet and it's multiple viewpoints of the sky. So no matter which way I look, I see red shift.

This means one of two things.
1) Everything is moving away from Earth (thus we are the center of the Universe)
OR
2) That we are misinterpreting what red-shift really means in the realm of ultra-distant cosmological objects.

I do agree that redshift/blueshift theory applies just fine to technology here on Earth, but when it comes to deep space, I am inclined to question it and think there is a mechanism at play here that we do not understand yet.



I am not sure you understand the core of big bang theory - metric expansion of space. There is no center of the expansion. Read these links:

www.astro.ucla.edu...

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Maslo
 


He is one of those people that hears something or reads a web page, and draws conclusions in his own mind with bits and pieces of information he has gathered. He then uses those conclusions to debate. This is why his posts come off sounding so incoherent and lacking in some of the most basic and fundamental known facts about something as complex as astrophysics. He is trying to simplify something that simply cannot be simplified to the level his IQ requires to understand it.

My frustration with this board has maxed out. Seems like every day we trade a fellow intellectual for another gullible self educated troll.

DENY IGNORANCE, what ever happened to our code of conduct here? When did we start letting ignorance be the guide to our discussions?

Our discussions, rather then helping further gain knowledge on subjects, turn into an education center for those to lazy to read up on things themselves. This is the source of my frustration. How are we to engage in enlightening conversation on the board when we are constantly battling ignorance in a back and forth? I'm just sick of it.


[edit on 7-8-2010 by Ciphor]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by hippomchippo
 



I could not agree more with you!

This seems to happening more and more lately on ATS (?).


SnF to you op



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   
It's sad that such a cool topic can be ruined by certain posters. If you have a differing opinion, explain it nicely. Is it really that difficult to do? It's amazing how arrogant people can be. Sometimes you need to just accept the fact that we know so very little about this universe, and all the Youtube videos and links in the world isn't going to change that.

Anyways, I love learning new things about science and astronomy. Thanks to OP for posting.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hawkwind.

Originally posted by Ciphor

Meaning learning handicapped but functional enough to drive rent an apartment etc. I stand by my assumption, as he has said nothing to prove otherwise that I can see.




You directly insulted a member of this site without provocation, it doesn't matter how you dress it up, what you did wasn't just against A.T.S terms and conditions, it was also just outright disrespectful and you owe Muzzleflash an apology, same with ''RestinginPieces'' for his/her very arrogant, belittling post.


For the thread, those pictures are truly magnificent, the universe amazes me, the sheer power of it and it's beauty. Those colours though, are they artificial or are those natural colours?

Hope I don't get called ''semi-retarded'' for not knowing.


I didn't assess him as being semi-retarded because he didn't know something. I called him semi-retarded for talking about his view of astrophysics as though it was fact, which can in turn miss-lead other individuals who are still learning and may be reading the topic to learn more. If you don't know what you're talking about you should ask, as you have done here. Do you see me being rude to you at all? No. You have done nothing wrong and nothing offensive.

Questions are great! I apologize to you if my comments towards him offended you. My intent was only to offend the offender. I will not apologize to him however.

To answer your question those brilliant colors are artificial and not at the same time. They are what we believe the true colors to be, enhanced, to make the image appear as it would if you were standing right outside the galaxies. If you've ever seen the raw data they use to form these crisp images you would be shocked at the amount of work that goes into them.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:00 PM
link   
There is most likely alot of life dieing right there! ALOT!



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo

But gravity was not the only force acting on matter. The force of cosmic inflation was much stronger during this epoch, thus no black hole could have formed.

en.wikipedia.org...



This is why I am simply baffled.

This is just like invoking "magic" to explain something.

Cosmic inflation and Inflatons are just theories, just like my own theories, there is no proof of them.

Inflatons are not proven though, it is just a guess.

So I do not see why everyone believes blindly in this unproven and invisible force that is not observable anymore?

Can you prove Inflatons exist? No? Ok, well that means we are 50-50 than.

Like I said, this is just invoking "magic" to explain something that is highly questionable.

How come gravity didn't work normally? Magic. *AKA Inflatons*

I honestly believe that it's all conjecture and the original premise is wrong.

The simplest answer is usually the best, and so I am going with "it probably didn't happen that way".
Rather than having to invoke magic "cosmic inflation" forces and create new particles that are totally unproven like Inflatons. Which to me is overly complex and silly.


[edit on 7-8-2010 by muzzleflash]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Ciphor
 


Sorry I thought you said the word "retarded" first without the added "semi". My mistake (and bad memory). Nevertheless, there is still no such thing. You're either retarded, or you aren't. The levels of retardation still fall into the category: mentally retarded. "Semi-retardation" would imply that the retardation only impairs certain aspects of mental functioning. In that case, it fails to be "semi-retardation" and becomes something different, depending on the specific function that is impaired. Autism, for example. Or schizophrenia. They are not "semi-retarded", because that term is pointless when a much more specific term exists to describe the mental affliction. I think what you meant was "mildly retarded". In that case, you fail, because muzzle is far from "mildly retarded", or anything remotely related to autism, schizophrenia, psychosis, etc.

About my screen name, it's something personal, has nothing to do with orphans, and will never be revealed in a public forum.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by BRITWARRIOR
There is most likely alot of life dieing right there! ALOT!


I don't know for sure.

It could be possible, and most likely inevitable on some scale, although more limited than we may imagine.

I think it was Carl Sagan who said in one of his great books, that when galaxies collide that most stars do not actually collide with each other because there is massive amounts of space between them.

So really the galaxies could collide but 99% of the stars/planets/etc would actually not even come close to colliding physically.

They will however have their gravitational paths disrupted as you can see clearly from the photographs.

So there may actually not be much death at all from a collision of this nature.

Inevitably there would be at least a few collisions so it does probably happen just far more limited than we initially expect.

I am pretty sure it was Carl Sagan who discussed this like 20-30 years ago




[edit on 7-8-2010 by muzzleflash]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 

Yes that was my first thought - looks like a beautiful embryo.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
About the expansion of the universe...

The expansion has been observed. All cosmic bodies are moving away from a central point in the universe, as if they began in or at that central point and "exploded" out from it.

I think that what is outside of the furthest point of matter in the universe is just empty space. It would be silly to think that existence itself ends with the edge of the physical universe. There cannot possibly be an end. It's like numbers. Think of the largest number imaginable, and then add 1 to it. There is no largest number. It goes on forever. Infinity. That's what the "universe" is like, I believe. Even though there may or may not be anything at all existing (matter or energy of any kind) beyond what we know as the physical universe, it's still just unoccupied "space", devoid of anything whatsoever. But as soon as the universe expands into that space, nothing really changes, except now that space is occupied by matter. To me it's like spilled milk. After the initial spill, the milk moves along whatever surface it's on, "expanding". Except that surface is empty space, the milk is all matter an energy that we call the "universe", and it's 3D instead of 2D.

And about the collision of galactic bodies. That's definitely because of gravity. Gravity is so weak and yet so strong. Magnetism is stronger than gravity, yet a magnet cannot move planets around a star like gravity can. Depending on the mass of the two affected bodies and the distance between them, gravity can have varying effects. In the case of these two galaxies, somehow they came within too close a proximity and their gravities became the more affecting force over the movement away from the center of the universe (Newton's law: any object at motion will stay at motion unless acted upon by an outside force), just like a magnet coming too close to a paper clip and completely overriding the effect of gravity.

Obviously, the expansion of the universe does need to be evaluated, because if all matter were moving away from a central point, all galaxies would be getting further away from each other indefinitely. So how did these two galaxies become close enough to affect each other gravitationally? HOW? They cannot have been moving along different vectors, because that would eliminate the idea that they all began at the same single point and are moving away from it. They were both already fully formed galaxies, so how did they form independently, and then "run into" one another?




top topics



 
39
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join