this post was submitted on
938 points (68% like it)
1,755 up votes 817 down votes

space

unsubscribe162,463 readers

~65 users here now

"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known". -Carl Sagan

You might also enjoy:

r/starparty

r/nasa

r/astronomy

r/cosmology

r/spaceporn

r/astrophys

r/aerospace

r/spaceflight

/r/spacemusic

/r/SpaceX

a community for

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

all 192 comments

[–][deleted] 71 points72 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And the universe is equally "vast" in the other direction (the smallest of things)

[–]lasernut 18 points19 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Indeed, there's new debate about how small things can be as you're probably aware. And then there are solar flares which give a bit of the local perspective.

[–]Ralith 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That article was a very interesting read; it's exciting to realize that we still haven't found a lower limit to the size of things.

[–]Vystril 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Maybe it's just empty space all the way down.

[–]lasernut 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Empty space > turtles.

[–]Vystril 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Maybe turtles are empty space?

[–]lasernut 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Interesting conjecture.

[–]what-s_in_a_username 24 points25 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

We're really, really, really, reaaaaally small but also really, really, reaaaaally big.

I feel so... medium sized?

[–]antipode 13 points14 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It's mindblowing to think about how limited our sense of scale is, just based on the things we can see/touch.

[–]what-s_in_a_username 16 points17 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Definitely. And the more you think about it, the more you realize absolutely everything we sense and think is incredibly skewed. Free will isn't real, matter is mostly empty, boobs are just flesh, everyone's upside down compared to someone else, air has stuff in it... and that's before you try drugs. Life is pretty much a long series of not having a clue about what's actually going on. Love it!

[–]AngryData 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Free will is still up in debate. Although it would be weird to find out for sure that we are just meat robots.

[–]what-s_in_a_username 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It is, I shouldn't assume it's a fact, but the more I think about it and read about it, the more I see there's really nothing there. It's really counter-intuitive to think that humans are meat robots, but why not?

I mean, just try to ask yourself where free will would come from, and then try to explain the answer with well known physical processes. Every time, you end up with nothing and you have to start over. It's like... well, there must be something, robots can't just ask themselves why they're robots! I can't believe I'm talking about free will without having it! Well... as strange as it sounds, everything you see around you can be explained without a soul or a spirit or whatever would contain free will.

It's a really interesting thought experiment, and the consequences of figuring out that maybe there's no free will are huge. I definitely encourage it.

[–]Panthios 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well there is a lot of evidence that says we are in a causality based universe. There is very little evidence to true randomness.

If free will exists then randomness I believe would be more provable.

I think we are rational creatures. Just as there are computers deliver rational equations and answers. I think the different is we self reflect on the inevitable variables and think the outcome was something that had control when in fact if could have been just the inevitable answer that always "was".

[–]BeefPieSoup 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You are incorrect. Randomness is a fundamental aspect of quantum mechanics. True, genuine, absolute randomness.

[–]Panthios -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And yet in theory true randomness can never be proven. All you can say is to our current technology something is unpredictable. Not that something happens with out a cause. It just may appear that way.

[–]BeefPieSoup 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Nope. Randomness is a fundamental part of Quantum Theory. Honestly. Read about it if you don't believe me, and here and especially here.

[–]Panthios -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I know that. But my claim is that you can never truly prove randomness exists only unpredictability to current methods of detection.

That is my point

[–]i_havent_read_it -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Our current understanding leads us to believe that randomness is a fundamental aspect of quantum mechanics

FTFY

[–]BeefPieSoup 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Okay, fine, but Panthios' assertion that "there is very little evidence to true randomness" is certainly incorrect, as I said. Quantum Randomness has been subject to intense scientific scrutiny for decades, precisely because it is such a counter-intuitive concept. As such, a large amount of evidence has been amassed for it.

[–]GargamelCuntSnarf -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And love is the only real thing.

[–]Panthios 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

love is as real I guess as any emotion, thought, or any other chemical based stimuli your mind experiences in its conscious reality.

[–]GargamelCuntSnarf -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Duh?

[–]Fastler 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Boobs may be just flesh, but they are damned nice flesh, don't you agree?

[–]what-s_in_a_username 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh, I agree, but it's the perception of it that's weird.

[–]RebelTactics 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Boobs are natures pillows. I can't think of anything softer and more cozy to sleep on.

[–]Vystril 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If there's no lower limit, and no upper limit, then everyone is medium sized.

[–][deleted] ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

[–]whats8[S] 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Completely irrelevant as a reply to his comment.

[–]kklafalot 24 points25 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

A couple amateur questions about space:

  1. Why are some stars, like VV Cephei, blue?
  2. In the infographic it mentioned a galaxy that is so large it shouldn't be able to exist according to our physics theories, what is it about our theories that states it shouldn't exist?

Thanks in advance, awesome pic btw!

[–]KingJulien 19 points20 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The color is determined by how hot the star is.

[–]kklafalot 15 points16 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Can a smaller star be hotter than a larger one?

[–]KingJulien 15 points16 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yes. Also, some of the bigger red stars are not longer burning hydrogen, which explains the color change. http://www.oneminuteastronomer.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/star-colors-.jpg

[–]IAmNotClaudius -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I thought the colour is determined by how far a star is from the viewer?

[–]AngryData 11 points12 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Things redshift the farther away they are but they still come in all different colors. We can correct the redshift to see what color it actually is.

[–]IAmNotClaudius 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Oh, that is quite interesting! Thank you.

[–]aceryz 12 points13 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm a layman myself, but as far as I know, the galaxy you mentioned is too big to be held by gravity alone; too great distances within it and not enough matter for a proper gravitation field. If dark matter was proved to exist, it might explain those gargantuan galaxies actually existing.

The wiki article on dark matter is lengthy, but provides more details.

(if I got it completely wrong, please someone correct me.)

[–]KingJulien 5 points6 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I was under the impression that the opposite was true - the galaxy was too big to not have collapsed into a black hole. I don't know if this is right though, since no details were given.

[–]kklafalot 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

that actually sounds really viable, i think i read somewhere that dark matter (if it exists) is shown to make up the majority of mass in the universe. If we can't see dark matter, can it be felt?

[–]IamcJ 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

THE FORCE!

[–]aceryz 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Not with any equipment or senses we've got now, no. And it's said that dark matter constitutes 96% of "stuff" in the Universe, so... well, I feel a bit blind.

[–]kklafalot 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Is dark matter extremely dense or does it have properties that generate gravity without having mass? What is "stuff" supposed to mean?

[–]aceryz 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"Stuff" is just something. A broad term for what we can see (ie. matter) and what might be there, but we can't say for sure yet (ie. dark matter). The gravity as we know it is a function of mass, so dark matter ought to have mass, I suppose. The problem is, we can't measure it directly - we can observe something that might be its effect (gravitational fields stronger than observable matter would indicate), but not the dark matter itself.

[–]kklafalot 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

is dark matter equal to or more massive than regular matter?

[–]aceryz 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

There is supposedly far more dark matter than the regular matter, so consequently it would be more massive. It's difficult to say more, because we can only see the effects it has on whole galaxies; we are yet to find a way to study it on an atom-comparable scale.

[–]Ralith 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'd also like to know more about why the galaxy shouldn't be able to exist.

[–]aceryz 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If you've got some spare time (and you obviously do, browsing reddit), here's first part of BBC programme on dark matter. Worth watching.

EDIT: there was a link to a playlist of all parts, so here it is. But the galaxy falling apart is mentioned right in the first part.

[–]Ralith 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If you've got some spare time

Man, I dunno—

(and you obviously do, browsing reddit)

Ouch.

Anyway, thanks; will do. Is that the only major theory about it?

[–]aceryz 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The only I've heard of. There is a scientist featured in the documentary who says there is no dark matter and all we need to do is update Newton's law, modifying it for some specific situations, so there's still a debate on this.

[–]Ralith 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

all we need to do is update Newton's law

Oh, is that all?

Man, I hope that guy makes a better argument in his publications.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'm probably not any more knowledgeable than you are at this subject but I do know that stars vary in color due to the temperatures they burn at. Red stars burn at the lowest temperatures, and white stars burn at the highest temps, which I think was supposed to be something like 20,000-25,000 degrees (celcius?)

[–]paddywhack 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Everything you ever wanted to know about stars and their associated colours / sizes etc can be explained by the hertzsprung-russell diagram. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hertzsprung%E2%80%93Russell_diagram

[–]vaelroth 18 points19 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

My favorite is just the final image, the Hubble Deep Field. Sure, you could compare it to all the planets and things, but why? On a cosmic scale even the stars are just dust in the wind.

[–]strawcat 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That's what I was expecting this post to be. That photo never ceases to amaze me.

[–]MxM111 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I do not know why, but those pictures of galaxies are absolutely breathtaking on some fundamental psychological level. Only picture of my daughter can compete with that. Why is that?

[–]Gadget3440 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That is so beautifully profound. I cannot help but be reminded of Dr Manhattan's eventual realisation

[–]tepkel 9 points10 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

someone should expand on this graphic. Add continents, cities, buildings, people, insects, hairs, cells, atoms etc

[–]whats8[S] 29 points30 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This should be exactly what you're looking for.

[–]kiwi_goalie 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That... blew my mind. I had to stop and shake my head when I went from smallest small to biggest big. DAMN.

[–]susanreneewa 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I desperately want to be far smarter than I actually am as I want to understand what you just posted.

[–]MaxChaplin 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You don't need to be smart, just educated.

[–]susanreneewa 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I am well-educated, but I have always felt that higher math is a closed book.

[–]MaxChaplin 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Is there higher math there? Just orders of magnitude. 10n means 1 followed by n zeroes if n is 0 or greater, or -n zeroes followed by 1 if n is less than zero (with a decimal dot between the first two zeroes)

1km=103 m
1cm=10-2 m
1mm=10-3 m (0.001 m)
1nm=10-9 m (0.000000001 m)

[–]susanreneewa 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yes, I understand what n means. However, if you're able to internalize the size differential between the Planck length and the size of an ant merely by looking at multipliers, you're smarter than I am, which is, I think, the point you're trying to get at here.

[–]MaxChaplin 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Division of powers of 10 is basically subtraction.
10m / 10n = 10m-n

[–]Trondolay 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

My mind needs to cool down from that explosion

[–]alfis26 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Damn! I spent the last couple of hours going through that... I need to lie down now.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

You know, this made me cry a little bit on the inside because I know for a fact I will not know what's out there in my lifetime.

[–][deleted] ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Nothing is impossible, nothing. The possibility of the human race though on the other hand, is so slim it doesn't even deserve a percentage.

[–]Qamata 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[–]FreeMoustacheRide 6 points7 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Have you seen a picture after that? There's this absolutely enormous web of mass and matter where each vertex holds roughly~5,000 galaxies. Apparently it's awfully similar to brain neurons.

[–]Enceladus_Salad 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The universe is getting smarter.

[–]G3aR -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That is completely incorrect.

[–]tamagawa 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

What is and why? Finish your thought, don't just

[–]G3aR 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It was a direct response to the statement, "The universe is getting smaller."

You can read here, here and here how that statement is incorrect.

[–]tamagawa 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The statement was 'smarter', not 'smaller'. Although if our planet is anything to go by, it's probably wrong either way ;)

[–]dylock 22 points23 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

No mater how many times I see this image I cant think of how tiny we are. I always wished I could live to a time where we could travel to those distant places. Perhaps someday we will. Until then I'll just keep watching Stargate...

[–]animorph 21 points22 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Stargates are limited. Try a TARDIS.

[–]FAHQRudy 9 points10 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I'll take both, thanks.

[–]silenti 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That would be the greatest crossover in science fiction history.

[–]IterativeLoop 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"Ladies and gentlemen, I bring you... the TARDISgate! It's like a TARDIS, but... we shaped it like a stargate. See?"

[–]bonesmccoy 11 points12 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Every single day of my life is spent wishing for this. Dont get me wrong, I like my life, but if I could trade it all to be a medical officer on the Enterprise-D, I would.

[–]AsAChemicalEngineer 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Same :(

As long as your granfather isn't Romulan.

[–]FirstDivision 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

...and they don't issue you a red shirt.

[–]Enceladus_Salad 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I like to pretend to pinch the heads off people who are far away. It makes me feel big. Try it with the sun and moon.

[–]qrpc 11 points12 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

one small error... not all the objects in the Hubble deep field are galaxies. The objects with diffraction spikes are the stars.

[–]Siggy778 47 points48 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This gets posted like every week

[–]alexbarrett 33 points34 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I feel like I upvote it every week.

[–]holohedron 34 points35 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If you can't look at it and be humbled, every week for the rest of your life, something has gone very wrong.

[–]ASexualPanda 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If you can't look at it and be humbled, every week for the rest of your life, the terrorists have won

[–]kyzf42 24 points25 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well, I must be the one who hadn't seen it yet. Thanks, OP!

[–]siggplus 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I've seen lots of graphics about the vastness of the universe, but this one I've seen the most.

[–]cantstopthe 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is.

[–]aantttt 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

HDF was done over ten days, not four months.

[–]FAHQRudy 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

From clears throat Wikipedia: "Placed in our Solar System, its surface would extend out past the orbit of Saturn. Light takes more than 8 hours to cross its circumference[12]. Some astronomers disagree, and think that VY Canis Majoris might be smaller: merely 600 times the size of the Sun, extending past the orbit of Mars."

[–]Spesh_Prince 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And despite being that much bigger than the Sun (nearly 10 billion times the volume at the largest estimate), its mass is only at most 40 times that of the Sun. Which I find very odd indeed.

[–]FAHQRudy 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

So...it's a bodybuilder. I used to have one of them as a friend. He was useless. Couldn't even help move a sofa. What a pointless lifestyle.

[–]gunner85 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The real question, though, is was he any good at moving fridges?

[–]FAHQRudy 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Lemme put it this way. My wife went to his place in late February or early March to see they still had their dead, bone-dry, firehazard of a Christmas tree still up.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

moving fridges ssssuuuuccccckkkksssss

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Did he get tail?

[–]FAHQRudy 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

True story: he got engaged to a friend of mine (a blonde rock singer), told her they should stop having sex until the wedding. She wasn't happy about this (she was about 30 then) but figured it was worth it. Two years later they get married, have sex only once on the honeymoon, and then he basically never touched her again. He would deny her sex as punishment for not doing the dishes, laundry, etc. Yeah. She divorced his ass in less than two years. Then she went out and fucked anything with a pulse, which was equally awkward for everyone.

[–]Kamiwill 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I like this one: The apparent size of the andromeda galaxy vs. the moon. That thing is huge! It is still 2.5 MLy away, but it is coming at us!

[–]mushpuppy 3 points4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And here we are with our little stupid worries.

[–]Puredeez 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

How awesome would it be if we found an earth-like planet the size of the sun.

[–]kyzf42 6 points7 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Wouldn't be very Earthlike then, eh. Imagine how many other variables would have to be radically different to compensate for the size. To start with, the gravity would be enormous, unless the density were cranked way way down, which would make the planet structurally weak and brittle, not to mention the effect on the magnetic field. An interesting thought exercise, but way beyond my ken.

[–]elloelloello 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

can we put this in the sidebar? This gets posted like once a week, probably more.

[–]DaMountainDwarf 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I teared up first time I saw the deep field.

[–]KrishanuAR 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[–]polymathica 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It takes a lot to give me literal goosebumps these days. This does it.

[–]aristideau 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This has been bugging me for a while. Regarding that last photo of space that showed the Universe when it was 800,000 years old, does that mean if we had taken that same photo 800,00 years ago we would see nothing in that space?.

[–]We_Are_All_One 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Anyone?

[–]Annyeongbluth 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Bueller?

[–][deleted] ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[deleted]

[–]Jemmani 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

he said when the universe was 800,000 years old. not 800,000 years ago. universe is 13,000,000,000 + so give or take 12,000,000,000

[–]subgameperfect 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Since the oldest light in the image was created 800,000 years after the beginning of the universe, the most distant/faintest pieces of that image would be invisible if you were to go back further than that point in time. However, not every single star and galaxy in that image is that old, you have to remember that we see all light from that little patch from the earliest to the most recent. So I'm sure that a small amount of the material would be missing, more would have a different appearance than in the current Hubble deep space image, and other parts of it would be relatively unchanged.

Imagine that the image is a core sample taken from ice and rock in the arctic. If you were to sample a 1cm section going down a mile, you would get a history of that piece of earth. The top-most layers would have been relatively recent sediment, the deepest would be ancient sea-bed and other rocks from millennia ago.

[–]aristideau 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Sorry, I meant only those stars that were 800,000 (or less) years old.

I suppose the point that I was trying to make is this; If we could could get a hypothetically super powerful telescope that could observe a planet's surface that say, was inhabited and that was formed 800,000 years after the big bang, would we be able to view the people moving normally in real-time?. Another way of saying this is at what point in that planets timeline would we be observing if we trained out super telescope on that planet, say 3 billion years ago?. Would it still be 800,00 years old to us as observers 3 billion years ago? or is there some kind of time dilation effect going on?.

[–]subgameperfect 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The photons from that region of space wouldn't have reached our planet before that threshold in time. There is a dilation effect for mass moving at relativistic speed, but a massless particle/wave like a photon is able to move at relativistic speeds without experiencing time-space distortions that we, as matter, experience.

Because of this, yes, we would be able to see the people moving about on the surface if there was a technology that allowed for that resolution over extra-galactic distance (there are a ton of physical problems with that very premise, but for fun we'll ignore them.) The light coming on to us from the stars is literally a snapshot of a time passed, but, just as reality moves from one moment to another, the images emitted from the stars move forward through time as well.

[–]localhorse 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The large galaxy pictured here contains 8 times as many stars as our Milky Way Galaxy. It is so large, it technically shouldn't exist according to current physics theories.

Could someone elaborate on this, please?

[–]macneo 6 points7 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

They used the same image (rotated 90 degrees ccw) for both Arcturus and Betelgeuse.

[–]Bruc3w4yn3 7 points8 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Betelgeuse

[–]Aenimatic 10 points11 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Betelgeuse

[–]ginandsoda 6 points7 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Now you've done it.

[–]DavidJMurphy 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That's because they're the same star from different points in spacetime

[–]redditisforsheep 5 points6 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Images like this quickly lose their meaning. The human brain is unable to compare scales of this magnitude. It works for about 6-8 frames tops.

[–]reeboo 9 points10 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

"Nah bro. Universe is only 6 thousand years old, says it in the bible."

[–]ransom00 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I know you are kidding, but really, it doesn't.

[–]tellu2 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

It doesn't? Where the hell do people get that idea from then?

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

They added up the ages from everyone in the bible and got ~6000. Therefore the world is that old... The sad part is that is 100% serious.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Wow wtf!

[–]ransom00 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

People get this view primarily by using the information of family trees in the Bible and tracing the lineage back to Adam. It comes from several places in different books. The most notable person to constructive a chronology of the world by doing this (although he doesn't base it solely on that) was James Ussher. It was included in annotations in several popular versions of the Bible from about 1700 onwards. Becuase of this, his chronology, or at least his methodology of using the biblical ages, approximate dates using the Jewish calendar, etc., became very popular in the U.S.

As the article on him notes, even before the common acceptance of the theory of evolution as likely valid and well before the suggestion and proof of the big bang theory, theologians disputed his method and claims. They were doing this even in the eighteenth-century.

For what it's worth, youth earth creationism is a minority view within Christianity. It is so well known in popular culture because some of its proponents are quite vocal (and probably because it's fun to make fun of...). I have two degrees in theology, one from a very conservative, charismatic Christian school and the other from a moderate, mainline, nationally known university. At neither place did I find a professor who believed the earth was young, whether it was one who taught in the sciences, biblical studies, or theology.

edit: grammar

[–]iigloo 8 points9 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

This is just a compilation av other graphics/videos. And I hate that I am now becoming totally desensitized to these graphics. The first times I saw them I was in awe. Now I don't really give a damn, which is a shame I guess...

[–]Zaph_q_p 12 points13 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Just try and think about it more.

[–]em22new 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Please check this out in video form : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEheh1BH34Q

[–]mynameismeech 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Spaaace!

[–]SeeDerekRun 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Must stay away from existential thinking, must stay away from existential thinking... DAMN IT!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Does anyone know if this exists in poster-size? I can probably recreate it, but if it already exists, I'd like to get it to hang on my kids' wall.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Photo is blurry. Anyone got a higher res version please?

[–]kneaders 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Hi Rez version?

[–]Grandarbiteraugustin 1 point2 points ago*

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Could any physics genius attempt to explain something to my simple brain? Why is that large galaxy in the 28th frame too large to exist according to our physics theories?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

That caught my eye too. Anyone?

[–]hidinginthebushes 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I love how you're looking 13 billion years back in time by viewing this.

[–]The_Real_Cats_Eye 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Our combined knowledge = nothingness. Higher intelligence? HA!!! We're overgrown monkeys with less hair. We're basically still in the primordial sludge stage as a species. Now I know why our species believes in "gods".

[–]michaeltruhl 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Makes you wonder about the plausibility of wormholes as a means of aliens traveling to us, or vice versa. Even at light speed, many systems in our own galaxy are prohibitively far away, so wormholes are the key to bridging the distance.

[–]princetrunks 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The deep space galaxies in this image aren't 13 billion light years away. The quasars/early galaxies that are roughly 11+ billion light years or so are rather red-shifted and not as clear as most of the deep space section in this photo. The newest ones we have been recently photographing are being discovered in the infrared spectrum since they are so distant, they are red shifted that far in the lower light spectrum...even beyond the impressive power of the Hubble. The recent ones we have been observing are roughly 12-13+ billion light years away..but the farthest we can observe is the CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background)...the afterglow of the Big Bang @ 13.7 billion light years away...where the electromagnetic signals are so red shifted, they are in the microwave portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. </melvin rant>

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Ok, there definitely are aliens somewhere. The probability of us being the only form of life seems too small at this point.

[–]Eakere 4 points5 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Has it been a week since the last 'Mind=blown space is big!' post? Time sure flies.

[–]KingJulien 11 points12 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

They never really fail to interest me though.

[–]YAOMTC 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

JJ.am probably has their mark on more images than anyone else... and they're not even around anymore

[–]EmitStop 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah they are, they've just changed their name to 4gifs.

[–]YAOMTC 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Huh. I just assumed they sold the domain. Still the same people behind it?

EDIT: Now I see that they put their watermark on everything too, in the same location and style. I'm gonna guess... yes, it is the same evil bastards.

[–]VinylCyril 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If I were the editor of that image, I would've put a different number into "over 10,000 galaxies," you know.

[–]MurasakiYugata 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

VinylCyril! What does the Hubble Telescope say about the number of galaxies in this photo?

[–]rawlyn 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I disagree. "Impact" is usually related to conciseness. This image is long-winded and complicated, so doesn't really have "impact" in my opinion.

[–]Urizen 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Yeah, this is the first time I've seen this graphic and my mind can only recoil in terror.

[–]c14941 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I love this. But I always wonder that since we are looking back in time when we view these images perhaps the galaxies have since spread long and far apart. Also it seems like having VY Canis Majoris going super nova would lead to a shitty day in the neighbor hood.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Are those actual photographs of all of these stars, or are they just illustrations? If the former, I would like to collect these photos and put them on my hard drive; of not just these stars, but other ones.

[–]Magneson 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Far Out

[–]qoa 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If I see that deep field image one more time...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Man, fuck you.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

For me it has always been this.

[–]ddunnpsyd 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

10,000 galaxies? Time to rewrite science fiction.

[–]celfers 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And everything visible in the deep field is only 4% of what there is. Matter is only 4% of the universe so 96% is dark energy or matter or something not in any textbook.

My mind just can't focus on the deep field and fathom it. The dark energy/matter just shuts down all thought.

Amazing, fantastic, incredible.

[–]DoccSampson 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

The part that always gets me is the second to last frame. We can literally look back in time.

[–]Rosatryne 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Well. Strictly speaking, you don't have any other option!

[–]DoccSampson 1 point2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Touche, sir.

[–]Lobbby 0 points1 point ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Indeed, quite erm... MIND BLOWING

[–]GTbulldog -5 points-4 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

And to think all of this came about because some tiny particle decided to explode someday. Yeah, right.... Awesome graph.

[–]iamsmrtk -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

Since ytmnd is down/broken: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnqsN2MniF4

[–]Emleaux -1 points0 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

[–]johnjonestheman -2 points-1 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

this is what I show to people that don't believe in God...

[–]acidrocker 2 points3 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

wat?

[–]danthek54 -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

FW FW FW FW FW FW

[–]GrossPig -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

If I dropped a deuce in space, where would it be on the chart?

[–]Heelincal -3 points-2 points ago

sorry, this has been archived and can no longer be voted on

I get this in e-mails all the time... Are we no better than chain e-mails sent by grandmothers???