How about some new numbers on the scale of our universe.. Even some E.T thrown in for good measure

Some of the latest numbers on our universe presented in the following video using layman's terms. Not long ago 1900ish or just about one long lifetime ago people had no conception of what lay before them in a universe so large that even today we can not really grasp the numbers of stars and galaxies we have discovered in just the last 30 years.

I remember that not to long ago the consensus on how many stars were in the Milky Way was an guesstimated 250 billion.. Now the guess is 400 billion with ten to fifty billions of planets with liquid water residing in what is called the Goldilocks Zone in our galaxy alone. Those numbers if even close to being correct are really numbers to ponder........ and there are trillions of galaxies some bigger and some smaller than our Milky Way..

Even with our current technology we can not see the edge of our expanding universe, and from this position we never will.. No one knows how big this universe truly is and it has been theorized this is but one of many such universes.. Amazing even if this is the only universe and there is nothing else..

Since this is not a political thread it I doubt it will stir up much discussion however stuff like this really is amazing... well to me anyway.. hahah
youtu.be...

a reply to: 727Sky

It's amazing to me too and something I often think about. So many theories about everything but I just get the sense that we are missing an enormous part of the puzzle something that fundamentally we perhaps do not even possess the logic to grasp.

a reply to: 727Sky

Its astounding when you think about.

I play a game called Elite Dangerous.
It actually has helped bring the enormity of our galaxy to a comprehensible understanding.

But the wonders out there.... simply mind blowing

I've sometimes envisioned the possibility that every cell in our body is infact a separate, unique universe, size being but a relative concept.
And from that the next logical conclusion is that our universe is but a single cell existing in another body, impossibly immense from our perspective but basically invisible to an observer in that universe.
As they say, "as above, so below".

originally posted by: 727Sky
Now the guess is 400 billion with ten to fifty billions of planets with liquid water residing in what is called the Goldilocks Zone in our galaxy alone.

Makes you wonder how anyone can question life elsewhere. And then you get to try to understand if a planet it 10 times bigger than Earth would it's inhabitants be the same general size as us, or much larger?

a reply to: 727Sky

I often wonder how one can see past infinity. How many Big Bangs were there? Are there Big Bangs happening all the time? Does the universe end? Is it possible for it to end? Does the universe have a border? It would be great to travel the universe and truly see what is out there with one's own eyes.

Great vid!!

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: 727Sky
Now the guess is 400 billion with ten to fifty billions of planets with liquid water residing in what is called the Goldilocks Zone in our galaxy alone.

Makes you wonder how anyone can question life elsewhere. And then you get to try to understand if a planet it 10 times bigger than Earth would it's inhabitants be the same general size as us, or much larger?

When I was a kid I read a story about a hero that lived on a planet about ten times larger than earth along with ten times the gravity. The Hero was a many legged bug and the forest he lived in was not all that tall either !! If you fell you died due to the gravity.. That is all I can remember about the story and I would not have remembered that without you comment.. So thanks..

iT IS SIMPLY THE LIGHT GOING ROUND AND ROUND. WE ARE SEEING THE SAME GALAXIES OVER AND OVER AGAIN, EVEN OUR OWN SEVERAL TIMES OVER.

the 'creation wave' that forever expands into the void-nothingness at a speed-greater-than-light-speed can only mean that time acts in multiple levels of exponentially fast paces so that a Galaxy of Stars can come into being in only seconds of 'Our' elapsed time... which was once compressed time, or packets of time involving some 500 Billions of our physical Universes' pace of 'time'

infinity is not compatible with a physical, material, 4 dimensional Universe such as the one we believe we see/experience

I think I will tune in to the daily free broadcast of the announcer from LA radio 7-10 PM California time, thanks for the lead
as the C2C nightly show starts here at 1 AM-5AM...and my daily dose of Michael Savage ends at 10 PM nightly
yeah I listen to more Radio than TV or Netflix binge watching

originally posted by: BlackIbanez
I've sometimes envisioned the possibility that every cell in our body is infact a separate, unique universe, size being but a relative concept.
And from that the next logical conclusion is that our universe is but a single cell existing in another body, impossibly immense from our perspective but basically invisible to an observer in that universe.
As they say, "as above, so below".

in that case every atom would represent a galaxy

there are approximately 100 trillion atoms in a human cell
which is a reasonable number of galaxies in the universe

we can not really grasp the numbers of stars and galaxies we have discovered in just the last 30 years.

a reply to: 727Sky Not only that but they can't grasp that there could be as many, if not more, stars hidden exactly behind the center of each star they are able to observe........It sure seems to be a big place, that's for sure..

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: 727Sky
Now the guess is 400 billion with ten to fifty billions of planets with liquid water residing in what is called the Goldilocks Zone in our galaxy alone.

Makes you wonder how anyone can question life elsewhere. And then you get to try to understand if a planet it 10 times bigger than Earth would it's inhabitants be the same general size as us, or much larger?

Another post by someone who has done absolutely NO research on the possibility of ET-life.

originally posted by: BlackIbanez
I've sometimes envisioned the possibility that every cell in our body is infact a separate, unique universe, size being but a relative concept.
And from that the next logical conclusion is that our universe is but a single cell existing in another body, impossibly immense from our perspective but basically invisible to an observer in that universe.
As they say, "as above, so below".

This is pretty close to what I believe.

I think galaxies and atoms are the same thing at different scales and through 3D mapping we will eventually discover common patterns in galaxy groups because they are in fact molecules... or cosmolecules as I like to call them.

a reply to: 727Sky

I watched a ted talk recently where the speaker went over the Fermi paradox and the other theory where the guy attempts to guess the number of intelligent species in the galaxy/universe...


I’m sure most interested in space /aliens have seen it..


Take the 400 billion stars x’s estimated planets per star..


Then you divide per every foreseeable hurdle life would have to jump..


Say 400 billion x’s 10= 400 trillion..

Divide estimated number of planets in Goldilocks zone..

Divide for simple life starting..


Divide for multi cellular..

Divide for radio technology..

Exc..

I’m sure I goofed it a little bit hopefully you get the point..

Well the Ted talk guy proposed “what if there are more hurdles than we are counting?”””


If we assume there is one more hurdle that means there is only one advanced species per galaxy..

If we assume 2 more hurdles there is only one species per 1000 galaxies,,

More hurdles could make us literally the only advanced species presently in the universe.


Well homie comes up with the number that even if assuming 1/1000 at every step. That would still leave like 1500 advanced species..

a reply to: 727Sky

I watched a ted talk recently where the speaker went over the Fermi paradox and the other theory where the guy attempts to guess the number of intelligent species in the galaxy/universe...


I’m sure most interested in space /aliens have seen it..


Take the 400 billion stars x’s estimated planets per star..


Then you divide per every foreseeable hurdle life would have to jump..


Say 400 billion x’s 10= 400 trillion..

Divide estimated number of planets in Goldilocks zone..

Divide for simple life starting..


Divide for multi cellular..

Divide for radio technology..

Exc..

I’m sure I goofed it a little bit hopefully you get the point..

Well the Ted talk guy proposed “what if there are more hurdles than we are counting?”””


If we assume there is one more hurdle that means there is only one advanced species per galaxy..

If we assume 2 more hurdles there is only one species per 1000 galaxies,,

More hurdles could make us literally the only advanced species presently in the universe.


Well homie comes up with the number that even if assuming 1/1000 at every step. That would still leave like 1500 advanced species..

a reply to: BlackIbanez

I think almost everyone has thought that at one point or the other..


Nucleus look like a sun and electrons planets, but apparently that doesn’t actually work mathematically or what have you..


I have seen multiple big wig physicist completely dismiss the idea... like it doesn’t work at all

a reply to: Bone75

I have seen multiple bigwig physics guys completely dismiss the idea.

I guess the math for the universe and quantum mechanics are just totally different

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: Bone75

I have seen multiple bigwig physics guys completely dismiss the idea.

I guess the math for the universe and quantum mechanics are just totally different

You've seen multiple bigwig physics guys completely dismiss the idea that galaxies and atoms are the same thing?

Show me.

I know one who completely agrees with me and is working to prove it as we speak.

There are interesting implications from the idea of atomic to macro scale comparisons. If you were to equate atoms to a solar system level, then what is a black hole when you equate the opposite direction?

Couldn't we equate some interactions back down to help clear up the movement patterns of quanta?
What does a macro neutrino interaction look like, if downscaled back to atoms? Do nuclei constantly have some sub quanta particle flowing through them? There is a limit to that possibility in our current model, and we don't allow for an "object" to be smaller than a certain scale. My memory is fuzzy and this isn't a term paper, so I want to say we prohibit anything smaller than a Planck moment. I could be wrong, because this is all off memory. (My memory is a little fuzzy at best. I remember the cornucopia in the Fruit of the Loom logo.)

There are interesting implications from the idea of atomic to macro scale comparisons. If you were to equate atoms to a solar system level, then what is a black hole when you equate the opposite direction?

Couldn't we equate some interactions back down to help clear up the movement patterns of quanta?
What does a macro neutrino interaction look like, if downscaled back to atoms? Do nuclei constantly have some sub quanta particle flowing through them? There is a limit to that possibility in our current model, and we don't allow for an "object" to be smaller than a certain scale. My memory is fuzzy and this isn't a term paper, so I want to say we prohibit anything smaller than a Planck moment. I could be wrong, because this is all off memory. (My memory is a little fuzzy at best. I remember the cornucopia in the Fruit of the Loom logo.)