For the astronomer in you

[Deleted member 38]

I love going down rabbit holes when it comes to astronomy and theoretical physics, even if I'm unable to understand most math they present. One of the most fascinating things for me though is how some people still think we're alone in the universe. The possibility for that being the case is so remote it's ridiculous.

"According to Jos de Bruijne, a scientist at the European Space Agency (ESA) who works on the galaxy-mapping Gaia mission, the current estimate is between 100 to 400 billion stars. Getting to a definitive number, de Bruijne told Space.com, will be difficult.

The Gaia mission, in orbit since 2013, has managed to map positions of 1.7 billion stars in the sun's neigborhood up to the distance of 326 light-years. While astronomers could extrapolate those numbers to model the entire galaxy, even Gaia struggles to see some of the faintest and smallest stars and its results are therefore not perfectly accurate."

The above is an excerpt from this article, for the people interested in it.

I definitely think we're not alone in our own galaxy, let alone the whole Universe. The best image Hubble eXtreme Deep Field could reveal was approximately 5,500 galaxies over an area of about 1/32,000,000th of the observable sky, so whoever thinks we're alone, I certainly don't share your "optimism".

 

[Darth Vader]

"According to Jos de Bruijne, a scientist at the European Space Agency (ESA) who works on the galaxy-mapping Gaia mission, the current estimate is between 100 to 400 billion stars. Getting to a definitive number, de Bruijne told Space.com, will be difficult.

The Gaia mission, in orbit since 2013, has managed to map positions of 1.7 billion stars in the sun's neigborhood up to the distance of 326 light-years. While astronomers could extrapolate those numbers to model the entire galaxy, even Gaia struggles to see some of the faintest and smallest stars and its results are therefore not perfectly accurate."

The above is an excerpt from this article, for the people interested in it.

I definitely think we're not alone in our own galaxy, let alone the whole Universe. The best image Hubble eXtreme Deep Field could reveal was approximately 5,500 galaxies over an area of about 1/32,000,000th of the observable sky, so whoever thinks we're alone, I certainly don't share your "optimism".

The math is pretty amazing

Average number of stars per galaxy - 100,000,000 (100 million)
Average number of planets per star in our galaxy - 1.6
Number of galaxies - 2,000,000,000,000 (2 trilion)

Now onto the math:

• Number of galaxies X number of stars per galaxy = 200,000,000,000,000,000,000 = two hundred quintillion
• Number of stars X number of planets on average per star = 320,000,000,000,000,000,000 = three hundred and twenty quintillion

That's an absurd number of stars in the universe.

Now, let's estimate that only 0,0000000001% (number pulled off my ass) of all planets can harbour life as we know it. The magic number is... 32000000000 = Thirty two billion

And btw, I'm of the opinion that life exists pretty much everywhere, and likely in our solar system (there's a couple of moons that could harbour it, like Europa).

Edit - I don't think I messed up my math but I may have.

 

[Deleted member 38]

The math is pretty amazing

Average number of stars per galaxy - 100,000,000 (100 million)
Average number of planets per star in our galaxy - 1.6
Number of galaxies - 2,000,000,000,000 (2 trilion)

Now onto the math:

• Number of galaxies X number of stars per galaxy = 200,000,000,000,000,000,000 = two hundred quintillion
• Number of stars X number of planets on average per star = 320,000,000,000,000,000,000 = three hundred and twenty quintillion

That's an absurd number of stars in the universe.

Now, let's estimate that only 0,0000000001% (number pulled off my ass) of all planets can harbour life as we know it. The magic number is... 32000000000 = Thirty two billion

And btw, I'm of the opinion that life exists pretty much everywhere, and likely in our solar system (there's a couple of moons that could harbour it, like Europa).

Edit - I don't think I messed up my math but I may have.

Because people have different takes on what "life" might mean, some will think microbes, while others will consider "life" a species like ours. But there is definitely more of it out there.

 

[Darth Vader]

Because people have different takes on what "life" might mean, some will think microbes, while others will consider "life" a species like ours. But there is definitely more of it out there.

Even intelligent life, more intelligent than us, is not just possible, but very likely.

 

[Deleted member 38]

Even intelligent life, more intelligent than us, is not just possible, but very likely.

I think there's a Kardashev Scale floating around even in this thread... and I think even that is limited by our own imagination compared to what might exist out there.

 

[Deleted member 38]

Magnetars, anyone?

The case is building that colliding neutron stars create magnetars

Magnetars are some of the most fascinating astronomical objects. One teaspoon of the stuff they are made out of would weigh almost one billion tons, and they have magnetic fields that are hundreds of millions of times more powerful than any magnetic field that exists today on Earth. But we don't...

phys.org

 

[Deleted member 38]

Rare 'Obi-Wan Kenobi' star survives death by supernova, returns stronger and brighter

In a galaxy far, far away, a celestial "force ghost" appears for the first time.

www.livescience.com

 

[Darth Vader]

Rare 'Obi-Wan Kenobi' star survives death by supernova, returns stronger and brighter

In a galaxy far, far away, a celestial "force ghost" appears for the first time.

www.livescience.com

 

[Deleted member 38]

Near the horizon the full moon often seems to loom large, swollen in appearance by the famous Moon illusion. But time-lapse image sequences demonstrate that the Moon's angular size doesn't really change as it rises or sets. Its color does, though.

Image Credit & Copyright: Lorenzo Busilacchi

 

[Darth Vader]

Near the horizon the full moon often seems to loom large, swollen in appearance by the famous Moon illusion. But time-lapse image sequences demonstrate that the Moon's angular size doesn't really change as it rises or sets. Its color does, though.

Image Credit & Copyright: Lorenzo Busilacchi

The moon looks bigger near the horizon because it suddenly has a reference point for size

 

[Todd Howard]

I love stars but.... I also love fields!

 

[Deleted member 38]

I love stars but.... I also love fields!

You must be a... farmer?

 

[Darth Vader]

I love stars but.... I also love fields!

What about fields of stars?

 

[Todd Howard]

What about fields of stars?

Just had an idea for a game.

 

[Deleted member 38]

Just had an idea for a game.

Please, make it GaaS!

 

[Penny Royal]

@Aeorath will you be tracking Webb Unfolding the Universe ITT or starting another one?

 

[Deleted member 38]

@Aeorath will you be tracking Webb Unfolding the Universe ITT or starting another one?

Please fee free to start another one, it will get more visibility

 

[Deleted member 38]

Looking for planets in Alpha Centauri's habitable zone.

Does Alpha Centauri have habitable zone planets? Webb could settle the debate

Astronomers are betting valuable observing time on the search for a world in the star's habitable zone.

www.inverse.com

 

[Deleted member 38]

And here it is, Webb's first deep space photo!

NASA’s Webb Delivers Deepest Infrared Image of Universe Yet - NASA

NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope has produced the deepest and sharpest infrared image of the distant universe to date. Known as Webb’s First Deep Field, this image of galaxy cluster SMACS 0723 is overflowing with detail.

www.nasa.gov

 

[Darth Vader]

And here it is, Webb's first deep space photo!

NASA’s Webb Delivers Deepest Infrared Image of Universe Yet - NASA

NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope has produced the deepest and sharpest infrared image of the distant universe to date. Known as Webb’s First Deep Field, this image of galaxy cluster SMACS 0723 is overflowing with detail.

www.nasa.gov