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.

 

Grains of sand

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
I was watching the history channel, and saw where they said there are a lot more stars than all of the sand on our planet. Imagine not only beaches but deserts.

I pick up a hand full of sand, and it is impossible to count what is even in my hand.

What I am getting at is. How legitimate is this claim, because I find it very hard to believe.

There are some answers here. answers.google.com...

Like one person says there is no real way of knowing, but I am curious on others opinions. I can't be the only one that thinks this may be false. Or close to false!




posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   
The universe is potentially infinite, whereas the grains of sand on Earth are finite.

I have no trouble believing this claim.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by _Highlander_
 


New grains of sand are being created everyday, but I can understand where your coming from. Also the universe has a size according to astronomers I forget how they determined it, but it was on The Universe I would have to dig a little.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Crumbles
 


New stars are are being created everyday as well, and the universe is expanding so there will be more.

It would be intersting to see what is being created faster, grains of sand or new stars



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
The universe is so large it is hard for our brains to comprehend.

We have a lot of sand grains on earth but the amount of stars in the universe is potenially much more. In just the observable universe there is more stars than grains of sand, now think about the amount of the universe that we cannot see.

We can view only about 10% of the universe and yet we can make claims like this, just wait till we see what else is out there.

The claim is valid and although it sounds like an over estimation, it is without a doubt, an under estimation.

Pred...



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by _Highlander_
 


Very true
because by the time it takes one grain of sand to be formed. The one rock it took to make the one grain of said will have made many from all of the corrosion. As for a star it take awhile for all of the dust, and whatnot to collect.

No matter how you look at it, it is hard to tell.
edit on 30-11-2010 by Crumbles because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:49 PM
link   
I'v heard the exact same thing and had no problem believing it, like a poster said above, the universe is potentialy infinite where as the grains of sand on Earth are definetely finite, some of those stars are bound to have planets. Other life out there? I don't see how there couldn't be, but if there smart they'll stay FAR away from us






Edit to add: S&F
edit on 30-11-2010 by XxRagingxPandaxX because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by XxRagingxPandaxX
I'v heard the exact same thing and had no problem believing it, like a poster said above, the universe is potentialy infinite where as the grains of sand on Earth are definetely finite, some of those stars are bound to have planets. Other life out there? I don't see how there couldn't be, but if there smart they'll stay FAR away from us


What about the grains of sand on all the other planets
hmmmmm.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 09:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by _Highlander_
The universe is potentially infinite, whereas the grains of sand on Earth are finite.

I have no trouble believing this claim.


The space the universe takes up is infinite, but the mass within it isn't, stars have to made of something.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Crumbles
 
your pushing it!








posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Crumbles
 


What about'em?
The proposition is that there are more stars in the sky than grains of sand on the earth. Obviously, if we have an infinite number of stars we have an infinite number of planets and so, an infinite number of grains of sand, at which point the whole question becomes irrelevant. So...



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by _Highlander_
reply to post by Crumbles
 


New stars are are being created everyday as well, and the universe is expanding so there will be more.

It would be intersting to see what is being created faster, grains of sand or new stars




That is funny that is evolution at its best yet in all of recorded history man has never seem a new star form only destroyed.

But hey I am game show the empirical evidence of new stars being formed, now that is not discovering new stars but seeing a new star form in an area that had no star.
edit on 30-11-2010 by ACTS 2:38 because: no hw



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 


How is that evolution?

Not to go off track here, but I'm curious as to your answer.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by drakus
 


Well as I just said there is not infinite mass in the universe so you can't have an infinite number of stars.

Even if the two were both infinite however that doesn't mean both infinities are equal, one infinity can be larger then another infinity.

Infinity is funny like that



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Maybe look at is this way...

The mass of Earth is...

'5, 973, 600, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000 kilograms'

The mass of the universe is...

'The current estimate is 1.59486 × 1055 kg'

Now find out the mass of all the stars currently formed based on hubbles stellar density and subtract from the mass of the universe


Once you have that you have a guide to a rough answer....easy


Good luck!














posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by drakus
 


Back on topic. Have you ever really just picked up a hand full of sand, and really looked at it . I am guessing you have at least picked up the handful. Now with just looking up you don't see near that many stars compared to the grains of sand in your hand. I know it goes far beyond this, but its just something to think about.



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by _Highlander_
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 


How is that evolution?

Not to go off track here, but I'm curious as to your answer.



Cosmic evolution----the Big fiss

Chemical evolution---that is where the hydrogen that was supposed to have been created at the big fiss turns into other elements by more big fisses through out the billions of years

Stellar evolution ---- that is where this matter that was traveling in linear motion slowed downed gathered together and began spinning in angular motion ( Laws of physics do not apply here). Note several moons in our own solar system travel in the opposite directions, from what angular momentum would have had it do, (that is because evolution does not have to follow the laws of physics)

Organic evolution ---- that is where life popped up from a mud puddle of soup washed off rocks that were formed by the above events first.

Macro evolution--- fish into lizard lizard into chicken

micro evolution--- big dog making a little dog, white corn making yellow corn (oh yea this is called adaptation or variation and is the only form of evolution to be excepted by both creationist and evolutionist, but evolutionist use this form to try and prove the rest as truth.)



posted on Nov, 30 2010 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ACTS 2:38
 



No offense mate but your way off in a lot of what you have posted there, but this is not the forum to argue such things, plus I am leaving my abacus and going home now.

So untill another time live long and prosper



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Crumbles
 


Funny you should ask......

Starry starry starry night: Star count may triple
New study suggests universe has 300 sextillion of red dwarfs
updated 12/1/2010 1:00:26 PM ET

WASHINGTON — The night sky may be a lot starrier than we thought.

A study suggests the universe could have triple the number of stars scientists previously calculated. For those of you counting at home, the new estimate is 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. That's 300 sextillion.


more:www.msnbc.msn.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2010 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ACTS 2:38

Originally posted by _Highlander_
reply to post by Crumbles
 


New stars are are being created everyday as well, and the universe is expanding so there will be more.

It would be intersting to see what is being created faster, grains of sand or new stars




That is funny that is evolution at its best yet in all of recorded history man has never seem a new star form only destroyed.

But hey I am game show the empirical evidence of new stars being formed, now that is not discovering new stars but seeing a new star form in an area that had no star.
edit on 30-11-2010 by ACTS 2:38 because: no hw


www.sciencedaily.com...

Astronomers Discover New Star-Forming Regions in Milky Way

ScienceDaily (May 27, 2010) — Astronomers studying the Milky Way have discovered a large number of previously-unknown regions where massive stars are being formed. Their discovery provides important new information about the structure of our home Galaxy and promises to yield new clues about the chemical composition of the Galaxy.


Thing is, it's not like you're going to see one just poof into existence.




top topics



 
4

log in

join