A Galaxies Cluster Older Than Possible! Scientists say.

page: 2
83
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by letmeDANz
Absolutely humbling.
And beautiful.

I firmly believe one human life span is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too small for us to know even a small bit about the 'universe' we live in.

Thank you for sharing


Among other things that is why I believe that one human lifespan is not all we get
Just to make it clear that is my opinion and please do not flame me based on your (generally speaking) belief




posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
It is amazing just how many scientific theories are embraced and cleaved unto as fact, just to be disproved later. Makes you wonder if blind worship of ANY scientific theory is a sign of insanity????


It's the business of science to test theory, and to try to disprove it, then offer a better model, and then test that. Tossing theories out the window isn't a weakness of science, it's a strength.

Think of it this way:

We once knew the earth was flat, ACK! Wrong answer. So we found when that theory died, that it was actually round, because some people tested the new theory.

We once thought the sun revolved around the earth, till it was proven that it was earth's spin that made the sun appear to move, and that we actually revolved around the sun. Another theory bites the dust.

We once thought of the universe as this giant deterministic clockwork, till it was proven not be so and the old clockwork theory was tossed on the scrap heap.

Good things come from disproved theories.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
This will definitely shake up the cosmologists, if it proves accurate. I like the theory that our universe collided with another and this galaxy crossed over into ours. Ever since I read about membrane theory (our universe is a "bubble" along with other universes, and they collide from time to time), something about it rings true to me.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by mydarkpassenger
 

Yes, that is my whole point. Most especially it is my point concerning Darwinism. All I see in this theory is adaptive changes. I see absolutely no evidence of change from one species to another species.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I think a lot of people think that science is EXACT...when it's actually not. Just because there is a certain rule or theory that says something is true now, doesn't mean that it won't be proved wrong later. If we all thought this way, how on earth would we progress as a civilization? We wouldn't. We'd be stuck back in the stone age if we didn't constantly review and refine or even change our views of the how the world works. I think it's awesome that the cluster is older than "humanly possible" because this kind of sets humanity "in its place". It's kind of pompous of anyone to think that we really know what's going on or where the universe came from or when it originated...



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 07:01 PM
link   
I think that this data and the previous image posted in the OP can change our vision of what really there is "out there" ....





posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER
so im going to say hey cool we get to learn more about the question of
the universe and everything =44

xploder


"Hitchhiker's Guide" FAIL!


Dude, everyone knows the ultimate answer to the ultimate question is 42, NOT 44 (unless you know something we don't. SPILL!!!



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by OldCorp
 


lol
please reveiw some of my threads
some of them go indepth in these areas
and trust me the guide is wrong
=44
lol

xploder



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arken
I think that this data and the previous image posted in the OP can change our vision of what really there is "out there" ....





can you please supply a link for this image
i would love to take a look

thanks xp



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   
I disagree with the astrophysicists who have discovered this new galaxy about how they claim it should not exist. Space doesn't care about there opinions. Space has it's own order and rules and does whatever it wants. This includes having a galaxy that is really old. There are probably galaxies out there that are even older.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:08 PM
link   
The only thing we can absolutely, positively, without a doubt agree on is that the more we know, the more we know... WE DON'T KNOW. Apparent there are "KNOWN UNKNOWNS." Rumsfeld was correct.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Anyone wishing to discuss a recent news article concerning the many-worlds, multiverse, or eternal chaotic inflation theory, there's a thread going on here about the subject. Though it has degenerated into an argument on whether or not we need to redefine the word universe, or come up with a new term, etc.
Astronomers find first evidence of other universes

But this is an interesting article, too. The big bang theory may not be wrong on all accounts, but it certainly looks like "big bangs" are not unique events.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Blind worship of ANYTHING is just that, blind. As for if it's insanity I'm going to have to say no, seeing as how many people do take part in blind faith/worship (insanity being abnormal mental or behavioral problems)

As for your comment of Darwinism, this is not about evolution, it is about cosmology. Just because the very nature of science is to question its' validity and to test it resulting in either proof or disproof, doesn't mean that all scientific theories should face the same intensity of questioning as the actual theory in question. If you claim there is no evidence of species to species in evolution you're just choosing not to look at the evidence. If you on the other hand of another theory that would explain this better present the evidence, or present the evidence that would shine evolution in the negative light you feel it needs to be shown in.


Back to the topic at hand, this is pretty amazing, i love it when something upsets current knowledge. Getting rid of as many as possible false beliefs is the goal here people. Truth is Truth
edit on 15-12-2010 by Stuffed because: typo



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER
using on optics model
if there was an optical lens refracting the image then the location of the image and the physical location of the mass could be in completly different places
ill use a einsteins gravitational ring as an example
if we are veiwing a galaxy that is being lensed it could be much further away


Indeed and I believe there is a story about this very thing somewhere....

Ah, yes, here we go. A story about the effects of Gravitational lensing and it's affect on the perceived location of what you're observing....

Have a read! It is very possible that they are looking at a cluster that is being lensed by an intermediate body, altering it's perceived location and distance.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
It is amazing just how many scientific theories are embraced and cleaved unto as fact, just to be disproved later. Makes you wonder if blind worship of ANY scientific theory is a sign of insanity????


If you speak to most sensible scientists and those that are of a sciencey mind, no one has a "blind belief" in anything.

They have their theories (and please don't use that word to mean something is just an idea - a scientific theory is based upon observed data and is on "fairly" solid ground as opposed to "I have a theory my wife is shagging my brother") and they then seek to either prove or disprove these.

If they disprove it, they will work up a new theory or alter the previous one to fit the new observed data. At least with science, they try to find answers, rather than the idiotic cop out of "God did it"...



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 





We don't know nothing! And everything is possible!


yeah but we call those people conspiracy theorists, and only accept what the scientists believe they know about the universe, then others parrot what they believe untill somebody else comes along.

but i agree with you, we know less than we think we do, as a race.
edit on 15-12-2010 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-12-2010 by lifeform11 because: typo's



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by gothicvamp
I think a lot of people think that science is EXACT...when it's actually not. Just because there is a certain rule or theory that says something is true now, doesn't mean that it won't be proved wrong later. If we all thought this way, how on earth would we progress as a civilization? We wouldn't. We'd be stuck back in the stone age if we didn't constantly review and refine or even change our views of the how the world works. I think it's awesome that the cluster is older than "humanly possible" because this kind of sets humanity "in its place". It's kind of pompous of anyone to think that we really know what's going on or where the universe came from or when it originated...


If people think Science is "exact" it is probably due, in part, to the arrogance and grandiose claims of some scientist who often defend their pet theories with an almost religious fervor. Some, scientists, not all mind you, are not above using mockery and humiliation to quiet those who question their claims. The battles some of the scientists have waged even with their own colleagues is well documented. I wish more would adopt a more humble attitude when challenged, especially when dealing with something as unknown and mysterious as the universe.. But I guess that is just human nature.
This is a very interesting discovery...I am looking forward to witnessing the ripple effect this will have on the commonly accepted theories about the age and formation of the universe. Star & Flag.
edit on 12/15/2010 by Sparky63 because: additional thoughts



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldCorp

Originally posted by XPLodER
so im going to say hey cool we get to learn more about the question of
the universe and everything =44

xploder


"Hitchhiker's Guide" FAIL!


Dude, everyone knows the ultimate answer to the ultimate question is 42, NOT 44 (unless you know something we don't. SPILL!!!


He must have forgot to engage the improbability drive.
This could result in some rather bizarre hyper-dimensional physics which could result in 44. Once converted though the correct answer would be of course, 42.
edit on 12/15/2010 by Sparky63 because: final thoughts



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Just as galaxies collide with galaxies, and galactic clusters collide with other clusters, I think that Universes (not in the sense of being different dimensions or anything...but simply different "Big Bang" events) may collide with other universes. Maybe this cluster is actually from another such Universe, on ITS outer edge, and overlapping into ours? Would explain its existence..... Kind of like how stars are born, collapse, reborn, etc.

Maybe we need a new term, for what the Universes float around in?



edit on 15-12-2010 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)


And maybe this "macro" thing that universes float in is only one of many "macro" things floating around, and they themselves are inside of something else... and it goes on forever and ever.

Wouldn't be that surprising, seeing as much of our physically known universe seems to be fractal.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketgirl
 


ok.. where to begin...
you obviously missed the point..they didnt mean it literally...
they are correct that 'it shouldnt exist' with the way we think today (todays standard)
but guess what? it does...so now we need to look at things differently to begin to understand...

get it?





new topics
top topics
 
83
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join