UFOs?

[MickeyLee]

i still believe in a Man in a Blue Box

the universe is big, is vanity to think small hairless monkies have some divine understanding of how anything works.

and Men in Blue Boxes make it all seem like so much fun!

 

[185248]

I can not get past the problem of moving physical matter the distances that appear to be involved.

The Earth travels around the sun at about 30 klms per second. Our solar system revolves around the center of the Galaxy at 230 kps or 885,000 kilometers per hour. Whatever put things in motion, sure gave us a good push. There is a lot out there moving a lot quicker.

I'm just glad most of the stuff is going the same way...be pretty crappy if we met another galaxy going the opposite direction. Bang!

 

[185248]

If you believe roswell and other reports then a number of flying saucers have crashed. The stuff they're built off , if you believe these reports , isn't that sturdy. Why did they crash in the first place ? So that might mean they can be shot down.

I don't know if those reports are true or not. There was a sighting in New Guinea back in the fifties. Remote location witnessed by many people and a known UFO skeptic. Took a while for the news to get out because of the location, but I reckon it's one of the best, most credible reports.

It's a shame there was no Julian Assange or Wikileaks around back then. We might not be sure of UFO reports whether they are real and all that. But we can be pretty sure of what happens to people when they touch on some sensitive supersecret info

 

[Calboner]

I'm just glad most of the stuff is going the same way...be pretty crappy if we met another galaxy going the opposite direction. Bang!

Not exactly. A galaxy, like the rest of the universe, is mostly empty space. When one of them passes through another, there is virtually no chance of stars colliding. The galaxies will, however, get extensively reshaped by gravitational attraction.

Curious About Astronomy: What happens when galaxies collide?

 

[185248]

Not exactly. A galaxy, like the rest of the universe, is mostly empty space. When one of them passes through another, there is virtually no chance of stars colliding. The galaxies will, however, get extensively reshaped by gravitational attraction.

Curious About Astronomy: What happens when galaxies collide?

Hey Cal...I meant if there was another expanding Universe in the vacuum travelling in the opposite direction to ours. >>>>beepbeep scrrrrrrrrreeechBANG<<<<

 

[Calboner]

Hey Cal...I meant if there was another expanding Universe in the vacuum travelling in the opposite direction to ours. >>>>beepbeep scrrrrrrrrreeechBANG<<<<

I don't think that makes any sense. Two things can collide or travel in opposite directions only if they are in the same universe. A universe is not the sort of thing of which one can intelligibly predicate motion.

But perhaps you are imagining something more along the lines of a Chuck Jones cartoon.

Marvin the Martian

 

[AtomicMouse1950]

While traveling home from work one morning on HY 99, I was traveling north... From Stockton I noticed 4 amber lights seemly following me. I was the only car on the road at 5 am. As sunrise approached the 4 amber lights seemed to head towards the sun and disappeared. The next day on the news, air traffic controllers saw & reported the vary same amber lights.

 

[185248]

..Ahhh, good ol' Marv

I suppose it depends on ones definition of the Universe. Where does ours end and another may begin?

We can create a vacuum inside a jar. Is the vacuum in space endless, or does it have boundaries? If our expanding Universe as we know it at the moment is not contained by boundaries, then you could probably say it is one Universe. It does not mean though that somewhere in the endless vacuum there are not another group or groups of near infinite Galaxies heading toward us.

If the surface of a still pond were the vacuum and you create two sets of ripples by tossing stones in at opposite ends, at some point the ripples will meet. I know with the surface of a pond the ripples only expand across the surface.

 

[Calboner]

I suppose it depends on ones definition of the Universe. Where does ours end and another may begin?

We can create a vacuum inside a jar. Is the vacuum in space endless, or does it have boundaries? If our expanding Universe as we know it at the moment is not contained by boundaries, then you could probably say it is one Universe. It does not mean though that somewhere in the endless vacuum there are not another group or groups of near infinite Galaxies heading toward us.

If the surface of a still pond were the vacuum and you create two sets of ripples by tossing stones in at opposite ends, at some point the ripples will meet. I know with the surface of a pond the ripples only expand across the surface.

I can't be sure that you are not just pulling my leg, but you seem to have confused the idea of an expanding universe with the idea of galaxies colliding within the universe. As the universe expands, the distances between galaxies grow. It does happen here and there that galaxies collide. But overall the expansion can only draw galaxies away from one another. You seem to be entertaining the idea of a quasi-universe-within-the-universe meeting another quasi-universe-within-the-universe moving in the opposite "direction." But that makes no sense. The universe is expanding in all directions, and if there were any such mini-universes within the universe, they would all be moving away from one another too.

 

[petite]

Not exactly. A galaxy, like the rest of the universe, is mostly empty space. When one of them passes through another, there is virtually no chance of stars colliding. The galaxies will, however, get extensively reshaped by gravitational attraction.

Curious About Astronomy: What happens when galaxies collide?

Have you heard about the the galactic plane oscillations? If you haven't, I'm sure that it would interest you. We might not be in danger of stars colliding from hitting another galaxy, but that doesn't mean that due to the movement of our solar system, we aren't in danger of being hit by something else that could mean an end to all life on earth.

For your reading pleasure.

Perturbing the Oort Cloud
Michael Szpir​

Far beyond the orbit of Neptune, nearly halfway to the nearest stars, our solar system is surrounded by a vast spherical reservoir of comets known as the Oort cloud. In the classical view, first proposed by the Dutch astronomer Jan Oort in 1950, these comets remain in the distant reservoir until a passing star perturbs the cloud, diverting some of the comets toward the inner solar system. Once close to the Sun, the comets may careen through the solar system for thousands of years until they are ejected into interstellar space or until they collide with another body such as a planet.

This scenario has largely been accepted for several decades now as the most likely explanation for the orbital habits of certain comets--except that a passing nearby star is no longer seen as the primary perturber of the Oort cloud. Some recent developments suggest other explanations. The resulting debate has implications not just for the celestial mechanics of comets, but for theories about the mass extinctions of species that shape life on earth.

For those unfamiliar with the theories, a brief history lesson should provide some background for the present debate. As the story goes, every 26 million years or so the fossil record seems to record the extinction of an abnormally great number of species. The cycle can be traced back through the past 250 million years and just happens to include the extinction event at the end of the Cretaceous period, 65 million years ago, that marked the end of the dinosaurs. This finding alone is remarkable, but it became even more so when several groups of scientists independently proposed that the cause of the extinctions was nothing less than a periodic bombardment of projectiles from space.

The intellectual climate was ripe for the idea: Only a few years earlier the discovery of a deposit of iridium in the rocks of the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary suggested to some scientists that an extraterrestrial impactor had wiped out the dinosaurs. Especially intriguing was the finding that the record of terrestrial impacts seemed to have a 28- to 32-million-year cycle. The apparent convergence of the extinctions and the impacts on a near 30-million-year cycle kindled a cosmic question: What mechanism could drive a cycle of extinctions and impacts with such an enormously long period?

Among the more intriguing responses was a theory that linked the extinction cycle to another well-known cycle: the periodic oscillation of the solar system, back and forth across the plane of the Milky Way galaxy, about once every 30 million to 35 million years. The extinctions appeared to be occurring just when the solar system was crossing the densest part of the galactic disk. According to the proponents of the theory, the Oort cloud was being greatly perturbed by something in the galactic midplane, and this caused a catastrophic rain of comets on the inner solar system (including the earth) every 30 million years.

You can read the rest at Perturbing the Oort Cloud » American Scientist

Just an uplifting little article to remind you that our time here on earth is limited. :biggrin1:

You're welcome!

(If you prefer to go straight to the source, here is one, but there are plenty others if you Google them. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1993BASI...21..125D)

 

[185248]

I can't be sure that you are not just pulling my leg, but you seem to have confused the idea of an expanding universe with the idea of galaxies colliding within the universe. As the universe expands, the distances between galaxies grow. It does happen here and there that galaxies collide. But overall the expansion can only draw galaxies away from one another. You seem to be entertaining the idea of a quasi-universe-within-the-universe meeting another quasi-universe-within-the-universe moving in the opposite "direction." But that makes no sense. The universe is expanding in all directions, and if there were any such mini-universes within the universe, they would all be moving away from one another too.

I'm not very good at explaining myself I'm afraid. My vocabulary lets me down at times and I tend to go off on tangents.

Yes, the galaxies we know of are expanding and moving away from eachother. But is the vacuum they are travelling in expanding along with them or does it have a boundary? Was the vacuum always there? Or was it created at the same time as the galaxies?

If it has no boundaries and is endless and always was there pre galaxies, what is to say that wayyyyyyyyyyyout in that vacuum there was another huge bang and there are other galaxies headed back our way?

I have done a crapp drawing... the page is the vacuum the dots are two separate bangs, not necessarily banging at the same time

 

[185248]

Have you heard about the the galactic plane oscillations? If you haven't, I'm sure that it would interest you. We might not be in danger of stars colliding from hitting another galaxy, but that doesn't mean that due to the movement of our solar system, we aren't in danger of being hit by something else that could mean an end to all life on earth.

For your reading pleasure.



You can read the rest at Perturbing the Oort Cloud » American Scientist

Just an uplifting little article to remind you that our time here on earth is limited. :biggrin1:

You're welcome!

(If you prefer to go straight to the source, here is one, but there are plenty others if you Google them. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1993BASI...21..125D)

Yup it's all good when cruisin the highway with the traffic goin one way, have a bit of excitement now and then. When ya come to into the big city and the traffic gets a little busy, accidents happen.

 

[Calboner]

Have you heard about the the galactic plane oscillations? If you haven't, I'm sure that it would interest you. We might not be in danger of stars colliding from hitting another galaxy, but that doesn't mean that due to the movement of our solar system, we aren't in danger of being hit by something else that could mean an end to all life on earth.

Thanks, but Vibrationzzz was not speaking just of the possibility of the earth banging into some large body moving in the opposite direction: he's got it all mixed up with inflationary cosmology.

Yes, the galaxies we know of are expanding and moving away from eachother. But is the vacuum they are travelling in expanding along with them or does it have a boundary? Was the vacuum always there? Or was it created at the same time as the galaxies?

If it has no boundaries and is endless and always was there pre galaxies, what is to say that wayyyyyyyyyyyout in that vacuum there was another huge bang and there are other galaxies headed back our way?

I have done a crapp drawing... the page is the vacuum the dots are two separate bangs, not necessarily banging at the same time

The idea of multiple "bangs" makes no sense. The theory of the Big Bang is supposed to explain the origin of the universe. That means the space-time continuum as well as all the matter and energy in it. I wish that I knew all about it so that I could explain it to you, but I don't, so I'll just refer you to this "primer":

Big Bang Cosmology Primer

I hope you won't take it in bad part if I say to you that, if you are interested in cosmology, you would gain more from studying the actual science of it than from indulging in speculations built upon meager information.

 

[petite]

Thanks, but Vibrationzzz was not speaking just of the possibility of the earth banging into some large body moving in the opposite direction: he's got it all mixed up with inflationary cosmology.

Oh, I know! I understood that.

I was bringing up that crashing into another star wasn't such a concern since long before that would probably happen, we would have been bombarded by other objects in space that would have already eliminated all life on earth.

Boy, astronomy sure is fun! :biggrin1:

 

[185248]

Thanks, but Vibrationzzz was not speaking just of the possibility of the earth banging into some large body moving in the opposite direction: he's got it all mixed up with inflationary cosmology.

The idea of multiple "bangs" makes no sense. The theory of the Big Bang is supposed to explain the origin of the universe. That means the space-time continuum as well as all the matter and energy in it. I wish that I knew all about it so that I could explain it to you, but I don't, so I'll just refer you to this "primer":

Big Bang Cosmology Primer

I hope you won't take it in bad part if I say to you that, if you are interested in cosmology, you would gain more from studying the actual science of it than from indulging in speculations built upon meager information.

It's ok cal, I'm old and ugly enough to take a rip or two In the second paragraph it mentions the theory that the Universe was born out of vacuum fluctuations. This vid Vacuum Fluctuation Models - YouTube speaks about the theory of vacumm fluctuations, the theory that several Universes can be born out of the vacuum. Although the theory was poo pooed, it is still there and has not been totally disproved. Yet in the link you gave me, it uses the theory of vacuum fluctuations as the beginning of the Universe.

What scientists are saying basically is that this event only happens once and the Universe and galaxies are formed. But they say this without knowing how big the Universe or Vacumm we speed through is. There has to be a galaxy #1 in the lead out there somewhere on the edge of our expansion. Millions of light years away, has it reached the end of the vacuum? Or has it encroached on another expanding Universe?

I like playing with science, even though I know little about it, after all it's half fiction friction until it's proven rot or not

 

[185248]

While traveling home from work one morning on HY 99, I was traveling north... From Stockton I noticed 4 amber lights seemly following me. I was the only car on the road at 5 am. As sunrise approached the 4 amber lights seemed to head towards the sun and disappeared. The next day on the news, air traffic controllers saw & reported the vary same amber lights.

Were they slow or fast moving?