Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Speciality Forums >> Science! Astronomy & Space Exploration, and Others

Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)
Starman1
Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)
*****

Reged: 06/24/03

Loc: Los Angeles
Re: Galactic evolution new [Re: deSitter]
      #5922802 - 06/15/13 08:22 PM

This 9-page article will illuminate many things about galactic evolution:
http://aramis.obspm.fr/~combes/sciam-19aug.pdf


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CounterWeight
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 10/05/08

Loc: Palo alto, CA.
Re: Galactic evolution [Re: Starman1]
      #5927460 - 06/18/13 12:40 PM

In the McScience press we are treated to McFactoids. In other places there is a lot of publication going on based on data and mostly scientific method, not nearly as exciting or headline grabbing. And we are learning often just how much we don't know, but would like to learn about. I look at the Hubble 'tuning fork' as a natural consequence of what was understood at the time, 'nearly nothing'... and in the spirit of Darwinism. 'perception based', it was in ways thought of as science at the time though there were those that felt more research necessary and it was possibly a bit pre-mature.

I gave a talk on this topic some years ago and one thing prevails. As we look for more and always find more, our concept of a galaxy has changed accordingly. Looking at visual wavelength pictures we were able to grasp a certain amount, and sending satellites up and using radio we find the structure and energy distributions different again. The largest features of galaxies being invisible to us at our visual sensory level.

But taking a step back, consider for a moment the Voyager program in our own solar system, if it wasn't for the more primitive 'Pioneer' program Voyager would have been burnt out by the massive radiation field (profiled by the Pioneer) around Jupiter. There is so much more here. The speed of matter in the atmosphere of the planets as a function of temperature took some time to understand, and there are some things about that we still have difficulty with. Matter and temperature and energy - seems simple, but not simple. In our lab's on earth we know that matter has some extremely interesting characteristics and even some bordering on extraordinary phenomena at very low temperatures, not just the ho-hum members of the periodic table but the isotopes as well!. Every bit as interesting as that at the other end of the temperature spectrum. And area wise the lions share of the universe as we understand it is not at that very high temperature end of things, just an extremely interesting tiny fraction of it - and that we can easily see. Not encountered in everyday life in the 'habitable zone' here on Terra.

So there are 'laws' and there are 'laws' and then the math's that we manipulate them with according to our understanding and experience. These 'math's' are evolving as well.

How computers can help is then when we get some perceived insight we can model extraordinarily difficult ideas, even many at a time and 'see' the results, try and compare that to other observation. The idea of 'observing', binoculars, telescopes, radio telescopes, gamma ray and infra-red satellites and each time we see something we modify accordingly and try to go to a next step in the understanding. Try as we might, it is still observational as we as humans function in a large way by the input from those things going right to the center of our brains - very helpfully so. Here the computer can be a helper, but it does not replace the brain, which I feel is the only thinking machine that makes sense in any organic way 'at large'.

In a humorous way the galaxies we have been observing have not evolved nearly as much as our ability to see them, and each time we see more they are still the same - it's our (or at least some that are interested) perception of them that changes, and we are too largely the same for the effort. And we still have that periodic table and Helium which is very interesting stuff!

Plasma is also interesting stuff. Light and dark. Swaths of it light years long at extremely low temperatures of photonically activated at less than low temperatures all over the galaxy disks.

Our brain at this point is the only satellite that can encounter these things.

Quote:

"The Secret Sits

We dance round in a ring and suppose, But the Secret sits in the middle and knows" Robert Frost





Sometimes I feel as though with all the publicizing and hunger to fill web page and other space that someone is hoping for 'a lucky shot' and it will all somehow congeal into a compact and succinct understandable whole. Analyzing computer algorithms and comparing to other data. Could happen, then too might not. One new satellite with one new type of data could hurl it off the throne. That said, with the massive increase in media and folks access to it, desire to get research $$, the rise of science - especially cosmology and relativistic cosmology as entertainment has increased. This is very important, keeping it in the public conversation while asking for massive amounts of funding. Is it a distraction from scientific method because it is entertainment? Maybe for the easily distracted.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | (show all)


Extra information
3 registered and 4 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  LivingNDixie, FirstSight, JayinUT 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 850

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics