may even get an A2K update before then
Or, isd it possible by then, Sftw Spell'n Slobs will learn that 'isd' is a missp of 'is'
I thought we lived under a dome? I thought the earth was surrounded by an Ice wall? Why isnt there any real pictures of the moon? Why havent we gone back or landed on it again?
Lol just some food for thought.
I thought we lived under a dome?
great book, but the mini series was just plain awful...
Is there a site where one can purchase POSTERS of these nebulae an Glxies? I am really interested in one of M16- , a part of which is that nebula they named "THE PILLARS OF CREATION"
I wanted to superimpose a small recipe over that and title it something like "Making primordial Soup".
The Simpson''s version wasnt too bad. I heard that Stephen King favored the cartoon also.
I suspect that there probably is, but I've never investigated it. (Yes, I understand that you were cracking a joke.)
Actually I wasnt. Im team teaching a seminar during summer 2018 and weve decided on going through creation hypotheses to draw out discussions. This will be a grad (and what makes it unusual) it will also become a lifelong learning seminar. SInce weve been assigned a small teaching auditorium we wanted to include some not too threatening or all position oriented visuals regarding these hypotheses (and possible theories). Ya gotta alk lightly these days or folks will turn off discourse. Think about how politics has "matured"
No joke intended, when it comes to this stuff, I really have no sense of humor until Ive fished the waters for a while. We also have a picture of Michelangelos Sistine chapel cartoon of the hand of god and you can see a chef's hat in the cloud . A colleague from the neighboring divinity school is pulling that one together
I took the recipe comment to be the joke.
You'll want to start with an accretion disc:
When it's a new, solitary star, that's what you get before the lumps start to sweep up debris to form planet, or planet-like objects.
I really don't know where to tell you to find posters or slides of this stuff, but I'd recommend contacting NASA-JPL and the IAU.
mmmm accretion discs.... Stir vigorously at a uniform temp of 2300 Kelvin and select 10^^23 gms of heavy nuclei. The recipe may actually become interesting.
I found a site that sells these as Iris downloads(there copyright free since theyre al like JPL or NASA) so I could do the assembly on line and just send it for poster printing.
M-16 (in the Egle Nebula) 6500 ly from us and this one is like 11 to 15 LIGHT YEARS in vertical photo length
Click here to visit the page for teacher resources from Hubble.
Or maybe just got to http://hubblesite.org
to find the contact us link, then send them a note about what you will be doing and what you want in the way of resources. It couldn't hurt.
Farm thanks for M16. 'v always thought it one of the most beautiful astro photos ever taken, 'nuff't make y'b'l'v'n God !!
you mean God--zilla (thats what it looks like to me)
I wonder which method of determining "distances from earth" they use to calculate for all these galaxies and nebulae?
when you go deeep space, parallax gets waay dicey even when you focus from different poles of earth's seasonal orbit its still less than 1/10000 arc.
standard candle and Redshift seems a bit too much of a range for me to accept the numbers they give out.
I know this makes me a scientific philistine, but I leave that crap to the boys and girls with the geek and nerd credentials. If someone says: "You're wrong, it's 12.5 light years!" I just say: "OK, Bubba, whatever you say."
deeep space, parallax gets waay dicey
Man, lovit !!
But when I do it the TAT tear me apart
standard candle and Redshift seems a bit too much of a range
Wonder Mere if y'd 'lucid't ? 'cuz not quire sure in ref to what nor why
... God--zilla (... looks like to me)
Good'n' Armer. Looks like Horseman chokin' a dog, don'tit //??
I dont really g.a.s. about the actual mileage (or lightyerage), I just wonder wht methods they use. Im familiqr with one that we had to develop for beginning gps surveying but not deep deep space atuff.
It occurred to me last night that I have misstated my point of view here. Brian Cox did not elucidate (to my knowledge) his statement that we are the only technological civilization in this galaxy. But I have come to agree with this speculation.
When I wrote that there were probably no more than one or a few planets in each galaxy where life has arisen, that was not a statment of my view, and it was erroneous. There are probably no more than one or at most a few technological civilizations in each galaxy--and some galaxies may have none. Life is nowhere near as common as people would like to believe, in my never humble opinion, but we can see in the spectra of distant stars and galaxies that the building blocks, the organic molecules of life are ubiquitous.
So we have a strange dichotomy in operation here. Life, while not common, is very likely ubiquitous, at least to the extent that it probably appears in almost all galaxies, although it may not last long. At the same time, technological civilizations are probably, as a proportion of however many planets there are where life has or potentially could arise, extremely rare. There may be billions of technological civilizations, but that is only a function of there being billions of galaxies.
I've explained my reasoning elsewhere, and more than once, so I won't rehearse it here. So like Brian Cox, although perhaps not for the same reason, I doubt that there is another technological civilization in this galaxy.
Cat contemplating the immensity of the cosmos for the first time.
This must be the second time