There are more things in heaven and earth…
…than are dreamt of in your philosophy:
The individual galaxies in galaxy clusters are held together by dark matter, according to the National Radio Astronomy Observatory. During the universe’s first few million years, dark matter (and normal matter) began to collect into larger concentrations, eventually creating galaxy clusters. Some clusters are thought to contain up to thousands of galaxies.
To study the formation stage the protocluster was exhibiting, researchers ran observational data from the ALMA telescope through computer simulations. The two teams found that what they were witnessing occurred less than 1.4 billion years after the big bang. However, existing theoretical and computer models suggest that a protocluster as large as SPT2349-56 should have taken much longer to evolve.
“How this assembly of galaxies got so big, so fast is a mystery,” Tim Miller, a doctoral candidate at Yale University and lead author of one of the papers, said in the statement. “It wasn’t built up gradually over billions of years, as astronomers might expect. This discovery provides a great opportunity to study how massive galaxies came together to build enormous galaxy clusters.”
[NOTE: Hamlet said it.]
Just saw this earlier in the week, a rather dense article, but then so is the universe.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5683499/Stephen-Hawkings-final-theory-claims-universe-finite-far-simpler-thought.html
Another quote from the article:
“Both research studies focused on a galactic collision that scientists believe has already happened.”
Ha! Yeah, it happened at a time of 10% of the age of the universe, while the age of our solar system is about 65% of the age of the universe. Anything observed outside our galaxy is something that happened a long time ago. But scientists “believe” it has already happen, just like they believe the earth is not flat.
The ALMA is the Atacama array in Chile. I regret never having made the modest drive to Socorro NM to see the VLA, when I lived in NM.
I was trying to say that the “event” in question happened at 10% from zero, the big bang, on the universe’s time line, while the formation of our solar system happened at about 65% on the time line. Of course, our solar system is considerably younger than the universe.
For your delectation, The Galaxy Song:
https://www.bing.com/search?q=the+galaxy+song&qs=AS&pq=the+galaxy+&sk=AS2&sc=8-11&cvid=C87D325A55584471A96D05645BC41402&FORM=QBLH&sp=3
Most of this is theoretical based off of certain patches like invisible dark matter that are needed to explain why Newton’s theory of gravity has an error of 120 zeroes compared to galaxy formations observed through optical and telescopes.
What they have noticed is that due to the Three Body Problem being unsolved and basically unsolvable by Newton, Einstein’s space-time theory still can’t account for the observed data of the heavens. Like I said, there’s an error margin of 120 zeroes in cosmology. If you get it wrong by 1 or 10 significant digits in scientific research, that’s horrible. 120 significant digits… there’s something wrong with your theoretical foundations and math.
Eventually they will have to admit to the public that the math doesn’t work. They haven’t gotten it to work even though two people, Newton and Einstein, were at the forefront of physics for several generations.
The Big Bang is a theoretical model, similar to a climate change computer model. The formation of the solar system is a theoretical model, often using computer models.
The reason why the public and popular science treats it as some kind of proven fact is that they have been watching too many sci fi movies and have mistaken the cgi as reality.
Climate change came out just as the internet began, so people didn’t entirely buy into it when they heard the scientific consensus has concluded. That’s because there were still scientists around that contested the theories and models and could point out to the laymen and ignorant that the data was corrupt and wrong. Well, that happened in cosmology but it happened hundreds of years ago. People don’t know and have forgotten the details of the debate, so they assume that it has been accepted as fact by everyone.
Just saw this earlier in the week, a rather dense article, but then so is the universe.
It’s not all that dense to me. It is frustratingly lacking in details, math, and doesn’t even have the pop sci fi references and explanations normally found in Popular Science.
I just saw this cool timeline on Wikipedia which they call a “Nature timeline.” I would have put zero time at the bottom, but they put zero at the top representing “now.”
The galaxy collision event observed by the astronomers would be placed a bit above the “Reionization band” at -12.4 billion yrs.
“Computer simulations”, huh?
You mean like global warming simulations and forecasts, also done by computer?
But this computer simulation is not an attempt to save Gaia by crushing humanity. There’s that, at least.
I read Ymar’s after posting. Think alike on this one!
Man caused global warming simulations are inputted into the computer on the assumption that human made carbon is affecting things like temperature or Ice Ages. This affects how the computer model works since data can be interpreted as temperature being affected by unknown factors (sunspots) vs known factors (carbon or man made pollution).
If a simulation got good enough that it could replicate all known and unknown variables in the world, then it’d just be another Matrix. The computer models exist to test the assumption of the theory, whether climate change happens because of X variable or Y variable. However, if the original cause was misinterpreted, data misinterpreted or corrupted, then the model isn’t all that useful. So global warming is done by simulations in a computer, with data gathered from things like heat measurements of concrete cities. But even if their data was accurate and non corrupt, the interpretations aren’t necessarily correct.
Cosmology currently uses the assumption that the 9.8 meters/second/second force on Earth is caused by the mass that is on a space-time field. The higher the mass, the greater the depression of the field, which causes attraction and pull on all other things in the universe, omni directionally. Another assumption made is that red and blue light means that something is going away or towards us, the observer. However, Mars is red not because it has dropped off its orbit and is now flying away from the solar system but just because it is Red. Since it is difficult to independently verify whether something is flying away or towards us, when we can’t tell what it is doing that far away, certain assumptions had to be made for the cosmology models.
This wouldn’t be a problem except that computer models correlating observation to the theories don’t match. There’s a higher degree of error in cosmological models than there are in weather simulations. And weather simulations are not entirely accurate, especially for years or centuries in the future.
Einstein solved some of the perceived problems and error with Special and General Theory of Relativity. Space-time explained a few observable facts. But it is not the only explanation or interpretation of the data: there is string or super string theory.
Dark matter and energy, which is invisible, is needed to explain other things in the universe to make the models accurate in prediction to the observed cosmos. If it wasn’t for dark matter, the galaxies and other perceived stellar objects moving around would not be predictable by either Newton or Einstein’s math. Dark matter has to exist, and be 97% of the universe’s matter/energy, because otherwise there would not be enough “gravity” to attract mass in the fashion that they have observed.
If they re do the interpretations of gravity as being universal, omnidirectional, a result of space-time folding, or a result of mass depressing space, then they would not need dark matter/energy. Gravity is still un Unified in physics because it does not obey the inverse square law all the time. Thus either what we see is not what there is in the universe, or our interpretation of what causes gravity isn’t entirely correct. The scientific consensus on gravity being the cause of space time distortion and mass fields has been around longer than the internet. It has gotten stuck without any possibility of more research done on it, despite the problems it causes for cosmology and physics.
As for why this affects us, states put money into projects even though there are problems with the science and math. For example, NASA uses the standard accepted cosmology premises, which is why they haven’t gotten back to the moon in x amount of decades. A mistake in using feet vs meters, causes things like probes to crash land on planets and disappear x amount of millions of funding. Gaia warming is also probably a dead end project as well but people are still forced to fund it via taxes.
NASA, even though its funding has decreased a bit, still takes about 30-60 million per day from the US treasury. They have not done enough to gather data for research purposes. There isn’t even a 24 hour digital camera attached to a satellite looking at the Earth from space, or a 24 live stream of the Earth and stellar bodies from the moon. These things are kind of important to corroborate and test certain cosmological models. If our observations don’t match our mathematical models here on Earth, then just move the observer, via Einstein’s relativity model, to the moon. We don’t need it to be on Mars, although the probes they said are still working on Mars (the rovers), should be sufficient as well.
Like all government agencies, NASA acts incompetent. Green Energy was mostly a way to funnel money to Al Gore’s friends when it first started.
https://yournewswire.com/nasa-moon-travel-technology/
The current excuse they have given us is that NASA can’t get back to the moon because the technology used has been lost or destroyed. That’s not the only thing NASA ended up “destroying” along with their funding. I wouldn’t be surprised that part of the DS is laundering money from all those NASA projects by now. It would explain a lot of things.