Hubble's Latest Photo Is Unbelieveable! (1 Viewer)

[StevenK]

If the laws of physics are true, then matter cannot be created nor destroyed. So, scientfically, all matter always existed. So either randomness or some sort of system is in place to create a steady state where all things can co-exist.

Well, for one the laws of physics are rather incomplete. They are correct up to a certain point and could possibly be revised upon further scientific discovery...which is the whole point of our eternal search for "The Answer". Think of Newton's Laws of Motions and how they were revised by Einstein's Theory of Relativity. The question of how large the domain where the current laws of physics is as important a question as any other (well okay, not as important as which pants to wear tomorrow: khakis or corduroys). People postulate that once the "Grand Unifying Theory" is proved, we'll truly have an complete set of laws of physics...but somehow, I doubt it'd ever be complete.
Nevertheless, our current laws of physics does quite a job of buttressing the theories of the creation of the universe. As someone stated, plain ole quantum mechanics is still going strong. Moreover, the continual discovery of anti-matter lend credence to a state of nothingness before the Big Bang. That is the existence (or rather non-existence of positrons, anti-quarks, etc lead to the theory that the sum of the energy/matter in the universe is/has been zero. Personally, I think the more interesting question is what catalyst drove the universe (or non-universe) from its former steady state to its current steady state. I go with the cyclic theory in that the momentum of one state leads it to the other and so on and so forth. Alas my lack of deeper knowledge concerning quantum physics prevents me from truly understanding the theory.

 

[ace peterson]

Thanks for the update! That is really really neat. I wish I was looking through Hubbel first-hand instead of a grainy 5x7 photo on my computer.

 

[Max Leung]

For some reason I would think we would get even better, closer shots of stuff in our own solar system.

Frank, I think they pointed the Hubble at Mars a while back. If you follow the links on the "official website", you might stumble upon them!

 

[Bill_Weinreich]

RE: PHOTO COLORS

Not sure about Hubble but in amatuer astrophotography, multiple, long exposure pictures are taken with different color filters. These images are then combined to give the final result. Using different color filters allow them to bring out prominent features and because the images are dim to begin with, long exposure times allow the picture to appear brighter. A lot of images will also combine ultraviolet and x-rays into the pictures. Seeing a galaxy through a telescope eyepiece may seem boring or dull to a novice. Most are small grey blobs.

Bill

 

[Rob Longmore]

If the universe was created from "nothingness" then was there anything (beyond our grasp) before "nothingness"?

Maybe it came from the world of the Abslolute!

everything IS Nothing, and Nothing Is everything! a place where infinite matter is in an infinatly small point in space and time, yet, time doesnt exist! the past is nothing more than electrical impulses in our brains we call memories! the future, does not exist, as it hasnt been created yet! and everything that has ever happened and will ever happen, exists only as 1 moment in time! the absolute.

Doh, No im confused! brain freeze! (strike stupid confused Austin powers pose.....here)

 

[John Thomas]

For someone who was asking for pictures of planets:

Colors used in this computer generated picture of Magellan radar data are based on color images from the surface of Venus transmitted by the Soviet Venera 13 and 14 landers. The bright area running roughly across the middle represents the largest highland region of Venus known as Aphrodite Terra.
And, a "clouded" view: