Astronomy and Cosmology

They found very evolved galaxies cluster 9 billion light year ago! Does it chalenge the BB model ? http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7087 Choice quotes: Also see: http://www.physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/3/2/1

instead of making a space ship that goes to the moon or to mars in a 1 shot deal, why not make a larger ship that would sit in earth orbit until its needed, in which case all nasa would have to do is boost up some equipment and fuel etc. and then send it on its way out. saving the cost of boosting a full fledged interplanetary space ship every time nasa wanted to go to anouther planet

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7854 the central bar is about 27,000 lightyears in length.

which comes first: the sun dying or andromeda colliding with milky way?

how bigof a telescope would be required to make out thefine details of plutos surface?

This find may provide support for the alternative concepts in plasma fusion research. And I love the art work Cluster makes turbulent breakthrough (August 2005) - News - PhysicsWeb http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/9/8/7

I have a telescope, a Meade, D= 60mm, F = 700mm, f/11. In my astronomy class the other day my lecturer was explaining how to get a CCD chip out of a cheap camera and that this could be fixed on my telescope and then i could hook it into my computer and get alot more from my telescope (like colours of planets, as theyre too bright normally) so i was wondering if someone could tell me how and where on my telescope to fix this, also what are the specs of the camera that has a CCD chip in it should i get? BTW im a student, cant afford anything to expensive. Thanxs

I've been reading various different books on various subjects but I'm after some suggestions of books that can offer introductions to Astronomy, Cosmology and the physics of those and related fields. Basically what books would you suggest a beginner to read and why? Amazon awaits a few orders!

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/29jul_planetx.htm?list757502 If Pluto is considered a planet, this definately should be.

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/24jun_electrostatics.htm?list757502 Interesting concept... does anyone think it will work?

http://www.iaa.es/~ortiz/brighttno.html As I interpret this report, they have computed the orbit for the thing and its semimajor axis "a" is equal to 43 AU, comparable to Pluto's which is a bit over 39 AU their estimate of eccentricity (ovalness) is around 0.2, so the orbit is not very circular. Part of the time it comes in as far as Neptune or so and part of the time it is well out beyond Pluto orbit. they arent sure about the diameter, think it might be 1500 kilometer or larger. it will take more time to figure out its diameter, they are just guessing now based on the brightness and they don't know the albedo. roughly Pluto size, anyway, on that ord…

im wondering (for a pro evoulution argument) how many planets are in teh universe (obvously a very rough estimate) do we have any idea do we have a minumum number?

Hi there. If astronomy were a fruit, which one would it be and why?? I've got a good feeling about pears. Thanks, tungstenboy

If the Universe is said to be expanding and of finite size,then there must be something(Space) outside of it for it to increase. If everything was contained in a vacuum to begin with as the Big bang suggests,then there would be nothing outside of itelf to expand or increase into?Wouldn't it be more correct to say the Universe is finitely bound in infinite space than than to say space is finitely bound in a finite Universe(as the big bang suggests)

Hi. I was just wondering if planets have a gender? i.e. mother earth (which means she is female)? If so, what about the other planets, especially Jutiper. Thanks guys!! Bob

The Big Bang theory, derived from Hubble's original hypothesis regarding red-shift, states that the Universe is expanding. Hubble's hypothesis was effected by Einstein's observations of light (c is constant) and by Doppler's experiments and statement of the "Doppler Effect". The three fundamental supporting pillars for the "Big Bang" are: redshift interpreted as the Doppler Effect the abundance of light elements in the visible Universe cosmic background radiation interpreted as remnant heat The problems with these pillars (and I've always had this issue) is that the theoretical logic is exceptionally circular and affected by the "culture of the times." The …

Von Neumann probes sent out to cultivate seeds of life through out galaxy may be the cause of origin of life on earth. just think that, we type 0 civilization can think of this.. then what ideas and technology civilization type III would be having. Or it is entirely possible that berserker probes may have caused mass extintions like that during dinosaurs, by delibrately sending astoroied to hit the earth so that life may not develop or remain under control or to sterlize the galaxy so that other intelligent civilization may not arise. Completing such project would take only half million year . -------------------------------------------------------------------------- h…

A singular mass in a singular space-time would have the problem of its gravity making it a black hole. Space expansion cannot explain the Primorial egg dividing into single seperate particles. It began with matter spread out. It expanded from a point and under the pressure of space expansion mass was created. With mass orginally created seperated the gravity of the universe could be overcome by inflation/expansion. There has to be a finite density that is nonsingular;a Maximum Mass Density. I believe this directly follows the Pauli exclusion principle. There is always some space between particles.

What happens if a black hole collides with a white hole? I guess that the black hole will suck in energy that is emitted from the white hole until they collide, but is that everything that happens? And what diffrences would it be if the two holes were linked to each other or not? Sorry for my bad english, but I hope you understand me :/

i listened to a discussion Michio Kaku was giving and he talked about a region of space where causality was reversed, where soup would boil in your stomach etc. He said it all had to do with something called the Arrow of time, and he said that in some regions of spce the arrow of time would be reversed. Can anyone elaborate on this?

This is just something i thought about, its just a thought, correct me if im wrong, im not a scientist, just like to think about things: Time does not exist as most people imagine it. Only movement and space. "Time" is a way to measure an amount of movement, we say "one day" but we really are just refering to the rotation of earth, we then picture everything we did in that day and see it as a progression of events related to morning, night, and other movements we can use to measure our activities, but the truth is that matter does not exist in a time line, it just "exists" in an infinite instant, changing its form, location, etc. Time travel as imagined, is not possib…

today somebody was asking basic BH questions in another thread I know there are a bunch of good educational links about BH but I couldnt immediately provide them. If you have some good BH links please post them there, so this can be a BH reference library I know that Univ. colorado Andy Hamilton website has some excellent animations of falling into a BH and some java applets generating orbits around BH at various distances. Recently I ran into timelapse movie of actual astronomical observation of stars orbiting a BH, IIRC it was the one at our galaxy's center, roughly 2 or 3 million solar masses. there are a bunch of good links to BH facts and movies whi…

This has to be relevant by looking at the apollo 11 mission to the moon, With all the pictures that are taken there is something missing, Where are the stars? When you go into space and look up shouldn't there be stars? Does nasa crop pictures of planets as well Because of pictures that I have seen with planets up close there are no stars? can someone answer this

This email is going around, but I haven't heard about it anywhere else. Is it true?

If the big bang is true, wouldn't there be empty space in the middle of the universe? All matter would be sent outward, and the universe would be expanding in all directions. However, the center would be an area of empty space that is constantly increasing in size. Wouldn't this be true?