Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hubble snaps stunning baby pic of cosmos Galactic whirls from 12 billion years ago
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/space/06/19/bigbang.view.reut/index.html ^ | Thursday, June 19, 2003 Posted: 2:19 PM EDT (1819 GMT)

Posted on 06/19/2003 7:54:36 PM PDT by DannyTN

New Hubble peers deep in cosmic past and future (2002)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- A new wide-angle view of the universe looks back to a mere billion years after the Big Bang, revealing secrets about the lives of galaxies and the black holes at their hearts, scientists reported on Thursday.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: ageofuniverse; hubble; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-139 next last
To: The Shootist
"If the velocity of light were "wrong" by more than a tiny tiny amount (< .000000001 or so) the stars wouldn't shine and fusion and fission bombs wouldn't work. e=mc2."

Granted the formula E=MC2 might not work anymore, but how do you know the stars wouldn't shine and fission wouldn't work. Couldn't there be an alternative set of physics rules where light is a little slower but the nuclear physics is appropriately adjusted and still allows starlight and fission?

101 posted on 06/20/2003 9:45:18 PM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
It looks to me like 11 3/4 billion years.
What a bunch of marrrooons!!!
102 posted on 06/20/2003 9:52:25 PM PDT by US_MilitaryRules (Daddy needs a Hummer! The H2 will do!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
A hoot!

You need to spend a year or so in a truly relativistic environemt, then you would see your remarks for what they are - riscible.
103 posted on 06/22/2003 3:41:07 AM PDT by John Valentine (Writing from downtown Seoul, keeping an eye on the hills to the north.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Hooray - very beautiful - I now have a new desktop image for work.

Also, I have already placed dibs on three particular galaxies I intend to claim and begin making improvements on. I suggest you do the same before the rush is on. They are toward the middle right. One will be called 'Glum Heights, one 'Glum Ranch Estates, and one 'Glum Crestview Manors.
104 posted on 06/22/2003 4:08:46 AM PDT by Puddleglum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ctonious
or how the other side of the universe that we're looking at - warp-drove away from us at many times the speed of light right after the Big Bang - and then deigned to slow down to show us what it was doing at 1 billion years old.

I've wondered about that myself. How could matter and light travel faster than the known speed of light (which supposedly takes infinite energy) yet slow down to "current" speeds? If it continued to slow down that would be easier to believe but now we are told that there is a sudden acceleration in the expansion of the universe and no one can tell us why. Dark Matter is invented to explain the acceleration but how does DM explain fast-slow-fast?

105 posted on 06/22/2003 4:25:30 AM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: kjam22
You've just redefined the meaning of a "light year".

This whole thread is messing with it. For consistent measurement of a light year, please use this device:


106 posted on 06/22/2003 4:28:58 AM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
There are definitely no other intelligent life forms out there. I mean, if you see all those tens of 1000's of galaxies (in just a tiny arc of space) and know that there are billions of stars in each one, well, it's clear that we are the only intelligent life form.
107 posted on 06/22/2003 4:37:39 AM PDT by Lazamataz (PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kjam22
So what is reality? Can reality ever be different than what we perceive it to be? Is reality subjective?

Just as truth exists without regard to our perception of it, so does reality. Reality is not subjective though our limited ability to perceive it would make it seem so.

108 posted on 06/22/2003 4:38:24 AM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Puddleglum
Also, I have already placed dibs on three particular galaxies I intend to claim and begin making improvements on. I suggest you do the same before the rush is on. They are toward the middle right. One will be called 'Glum Heights, one 'Glum Ranch Estates, and one 'Glum Crestview Manors.

You will have to take that up with a race called the Xenglobulans. They are 12 feet tall, green, have vast spaceship armadas, and the deadly deadly Blasto Ray(tm).

They do, however, have a wonderful sense of humor, so they are more likely to laugh at you, "pants" you, and send you scampering in the sand dunes then they are to kill you.

109 posted on 06/22/2003 4:41:04 AM PDT by Lazamataz (PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: The Shootist
The speed of light is what Congress decrees it to be. No less; no more.
110 posted on 06/22/2003 4:43:10 AM PDT by Lazamataz (PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Jewels1091
If I remember right, the Bible does not tell how God created the earth and Heavens, it just says that he did....whats to say he didn't make a BIG bang to do it?????

Besides, the Big Bang serves a "point of creation" better than a static universe, I think.

111 posted on 06/22/2003 4:43:40 AM PDT by Diva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
"there is no gravity.

Then what caused the apple hit Newton's noodle?

Simple. The world sucks.

112 posted on 06/22/2003 4:46:46 AM PDT by Lazamataz (PROUDLY POSTING WITHOUT READING THE ARTICLE SINCE 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
Hmmmm? God said, "Let there be light" and light was. That could have been the "big bang".

Interestingly, Moses recorded what happened in Genesis about 3500 years before "science" finally admitted the universe had a beginning.

113 posted on 06/22/2003 4:49:41 AM PDT by Dataman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
unbelievable that on a thread of this kind there would be personal attacks and posts removed....that said this is way over my brain/knowledge but it awesome to see all these great minds here agree and disagree about such a wonderful subject.

I just love looking up when I get in late and the awe of all the stars.

I am hoping we get some great showers this year in the PNW for the last five years I have camped out in the back at the estimated times wrapped up in my comfortor and dissapointed.
114 posted on 06/22/2003 4:58:57 AM PDT by oceanperch (Warning: James Carville is showing up again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
Scientifically challenged? Hardly. Just because I don't hold that people spontaneously evolved from mud and rocks doesn't mean that I am unable to effectively deal with science. I am an electrical engineer and deal with scientific principles every single day.

Do you consult the Bible for electrical engineering? Why should a cosmologist or an anthropologist consult the Bible then? Do you agree with scientific methodology or does it have to adhere to some dogma?

115 posted on 06/22/2003 5:01:00 AM PDT by Eternal_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: nravoter
Great movie.
116 posted on 06/22/2003 5:02:17 AM PDT by oceanperch (Warning: James Carville is showing up again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
I feel like the blonde in a joke reading these posts...you guys are amazing and I am getting dizzy...time for me to go to bed or crawl back down to a lower thead. : )
117 posted on 06/22/2003 5:08:45 AM PDT by oceanperch (Warning: James Carville is showing up again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
Granted the formula E=MC2 might not work anymore, but how do you know the stars wouldn't shine and fission wouldn't work. Couldn't there be an alternative set of physics rules where light is a little slower but the nuclear physics is appropriately adjusted and still allows starlight and fission?

Sure one can postulate that the laws of physics have changed over time. The problem I have with that is that it violates Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is often the correct one.

118 posted on 06/22/2003 9:25:16 AM PDT by The Shootist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Puddleglum
"Also, I have already placed dibs on three particular galaxies I intend to claim and begin making improvements on."

You better get there quick and stake your claim. After 12 billion years, no telling what sort of rift-raft has moved in.

119 posted on 06/22/2003 10:10:15 AM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
"there is no gravity"

So does that mean a black hole...really is a hole?

120 posted on 06/22/2003 10:15:26 AM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-139 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson