It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by gypsychology909
Its somewhat discouraging that with all the tech out there, we can't even get a decent pic that shows mindblowing resolution from the moon's real estate.
We should be able to count the pebbles within a footprint on that piece of round fakeness, but strangely that capability lies beyond 'our' grasp and we only peck at altered crumbs that fall off the tables of those on higher levels.
Zoom zoom zoom.
Originally posted by JPeveto4
Did not even bother to read the whole post. The cosmos or the universe is infinite. That's it, there is no end and no beginning. It goes on forever. It does not matter that puny human brains that are subject to borders all there entire life don't understand infinite.
Dr Lineweaver said that the next step in the research is to out how close we are to maximum entropy, how much entropy is being produced and how much time we have left before the universe and all life in it dies in the inevitable heat death.
A typical galaxy's star-making gas supplies last just 1-2 billion years. The growing darkness was so incremental Braun said it would be impossible to notice in a human lifetime, but were someone to live for one billion years they would "see things changing very dramatically" in the skies above. Without a reversal in the universe's dark energy-fuelled expansion -- the likelihood of which remains a great scientific puzzle -- Earth's inhabitants would very slowly but surely inch toward nights of deep darkness, he added
Originally posted by myss427
I understand about the tellescopes having image problems looking through our atmosphere, but why do they put satellites in close orbit arround the moon with cameras that can not take higher definition, and almost real colour pics. There always seems to be enough budget to do the experiments but they always skimp on the quality or ability of the cameras placed in them.
Originally posted by coyote66
I was just thinking about Einstein's prediction, about the 4 dimensional cosmos we live in. About how he said, that the universe had no bound, but yet it was finite.
Somehow like the surface of the Earth was border/boundless, but still it was not infinite.
So I asked to myself, could we discover the edge of our universe using telescopes? Can we really know the real age of the cosmos if we could find the edge of it? Is it even possible?
How would light behave, when it hit the egde of the cosmos? Is light a 4th dimensional entity, since it consistent speed (not bound in time)? Or is it a 3 dimensional entity, and because of it, it would always go along the spacetime fabrics, and thus no possible way for us to "see" the border of our cosmos?
But then, if this ought to be correct, if we can build a telescope, so powerfull, we can scan a very deep field image! Is it possible, could/might it be, if we can scan the sky so deep, that we can see PLANET EARTH in a distant far far away place??? All of this because of our 4 dimensional sphere of the cosmos we live in. So, that light will travel in a perfect circle, like if Chuck Norris could hit the backside of his own head, after encircling the Earth?!
But there is a 2nd question: if this is true, how could the astrophysicist predict the age of our cosmos, in the first place? If light could never reach the edge of the universe? Have we been LIED TO all this long?
So, there are 2 main questions in this thread:
1. Is it possible for us to see ourselves in a distant distance? Assuming, we are living in a 4D circular cosmos! (like Einstein predicted)
2. How do we define the age of the cosmos, really??? Does anyone know?
I want to know your opinions about this. Trolles, please keep out! Thank you!
P.S.: I dont know whether there was already a similar thread, asking the similar question. So, my pardon in the advance, folks.edit on 11-4-2012 by coyote66 because: (no reason given)edit on 11-4-2012 by coyote66 because: (no reason given)