Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Evolution and the mass of the galaxy

galaxies milky way large magellanic cloud small magellanic cloud

  • Please log in to reply
93 replies to this topic

#1    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 32,144 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 07 April 2014 - 08:39 PM

Darwin meets Newton: evolution and the mass of the galaxy


theconversation.com said:

If the solution to a problem does not reveal itself straight away then why not let your initial guesswork evolve? Thatís the approach weíve taken in trying to determine the mass of our galaxy by mapping the historic movement of two nearby galaxies.

Many of the 200 billion stars in our galaxy, known as the Milky Way, can be seen in a narrow band stretching across the night sky.

The southern night sky throws up more surprises, in the form of two indistinct, fuzzy blobs. Larger than the full moon, and often seen overhead, these are two galaxies in their own right, known as the Large and Small Clouds of Magellan.

Posted Image Read more...


"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#2    taniwha

taniwha

    Hi. If im an idiot, then im an idiot for truth.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,639 posts
  • Joined:25 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 April 2014 - 12:37 AM

Darwin meets Newton???  Oh dear God!!!    lol.

Does this mean if this computer simulation is accurate it should also be able predict the course of the magellanic clouds for, well, forever?  

The problem is they would have had to extrapolate their data forward in time some 160,000 years to be any where close to the current mass of the milky way so it is a HUGE mathematical leap of FAITH.  

Im not convinced that our galaxy or the cloud galaxies have always been a constant UNCHANGING mass, and if they are continuously evolving which seem very likely then there is no solid foundation in their method to begin with.

The hubble should be able to check the finer details of these miscalculations over time and they will be scratching their heads in disbelief like im scratching mine now.

Seriously if you even think about it a little you will see that their method is as unrealistic as taking a photo of an over head cloud and based on what the wind direction was 5min ago,  plot a world wide weather forecast for the next 100 years!  








#3    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 32,144 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 08 April 2014 - 01:11 PM

View Posttaniwha, on 08 April 2014 - 12:37 AM, said:


Does this mean if this computer simulation is accurate it should also be able predict the course of the magellanic clouds for, well, forever?  

Have you never heard of three-body problem?

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#4    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 32,144 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 08 April 2014 - 01:27 PM

View Posttaniwha, on 08 April 2014 - 12:37 AM, said:


Im not convinced that our galaxy or the cloud galaxies have always been a constant UNCHANGING mass, and if they are continuously evolving which seem very likely then there is no solid foundation in their method to begin with.
And exactly what mechanism are you proposing for this change in galactic mass that makes these conclusions invalid?

What observations are you going to cite to back up this mechanism?

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf, 08 April 2014 - 01:31 PM.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#5    taniwha

taniwha

    Hi. If im an idiot, then im an idiot for truth.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,639 posts
  • Joined:25 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 April 2014 - 10:15 AM

View PostWaspie_Dwarf, on 08 April 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:


Have you never heard of three-body problem?

The inability to find a solution?

View PostWaspie_Dwarf, on 08 April 2014 - 01:27 PM, said:


And exactly what mechanism are you proposing for this change in galactic mass that makes these conclusions invalid?

What observations are you going to cite to back up this mechanism?

Well it was a hunch really.  Logically a galaxy can change mass because of the black holes at their hearts.  It didnt take long to find this...

Quote

The research reported in the journal Science, found these exotic gravitational wells radiate far more energy into local space, which can change star formation rates and the amount of gas in a galaxy.

http://www.abc.net.a.../28/3953671.htm

This is also an interesting read...

Quote

What this study found for the first time was that this ratio of dark matter to star-matter is not a constant as the Universe ages but is actually changing.

http://lateuniverse....ange-over-time/

It appears from this that change is the only constant in the universe.


#6    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,108 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 10 April 2014 - 05:18 AM

How exactly does the black hole at the center of a galaxy change the mass of the galaxy?


#7    taniwha

taniwha

    Hi. If im an idiot, then im an idiot for truth.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,639 posts
  • Joined:25 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 April 2014 - 06:17 AM

View Postspacecowboy342, on 10 April 2014 - 05:18 AM, said:

How exactly does the black hole at the center of a galaxy change the mass of the galaxy?

Im only taking a stab in the dark but all matter that is swallowed by the hole could be converted to what is known as dark matter?
Maybe black holes are responsible for dark energy?  Does that sound plausible to you?  Can the Universe also be the Anti-verse?

I could be wrong,  so I have my own  two-body-problem for you to consider.

If you eat an apple does your mass change?  Does the mass of the apple change?  If the answer is yes then the earth becomes affected and a three-body-problem arises.






#8    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 32,144 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 10 April 2014 - 01:44 PM

Yet again you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

I asked about the three body problem because it is a specific problem in calculating gravitational relationships between bodies. Whilst it is possible to calculate how two bodies interact gravitationally, it is not possible to calculate for three or more.

Hence, if you had known what the three body problem was you would have known the answer to this question:

View Posttaniwha, on 08 April 2014 - 12:37 AM, said:


Does this mean if this computer simulation is accurate it should also be able predict the course of the magellanic clouds for, well, forever?  

The answer is that it is impossible to calculate the course of the Magellanic Clouds forever.

As for your nonsensical gibberish about apples and people...

The black hole at the centre of the galaxy is a part of the galaxy. It's mass can change by devouring objects, such as stars... which are part of the galaxy or by evaporation, in which case energy is released... into the galaxy. Either way the mass of the galaxy does not change significantly.

Think of it this way, if you weigh yourself holding an apple and carry on weighing yourself as you eat the apple will there be any change in the overall weight?

You have dismissed out of hand the work of experts whilst showing not even the most basic grasp of the concepts involved. Do you not see a problem with this?

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#9    Waspie_Dwarf

Waspie_Dwarf

    Space Cadet

  • 32,144 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bexleyheath, Kent, UK

  • We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.

    Oscar Wilde

Posted 10 April 2014 - 01:47 PM

View Posttaniwha, on 10 April 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

Im only taking a stab in the dark but all matter that is swallowed by the hole could be converted to what is known as dark matter?
Maybe black holes are responsible for dark energy?
This is not a stab in the dark, it is doing what you do in post after post, making stuff up as you go along. You aren't even sure if you mean dark energy or dark matter here are you?

View Posttaniwha, on 10 April 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

I could be wrong
No "could be" about it.

"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-boggingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the street to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space." - The Hitch-Hikers Guide to the Galaxy - Douglas Adams 1952 - 2001

Posted Image
Click on button

#10    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,108 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 11 April 2014 - 12:52 AM

View Posttaniwha, on 10 April 2014 - 06:17 AM, said:

Im only taking a stab in the dark but all matter that is swallowed by the hole could be converted to what is known as dark matter?
Maybe black holes are responsible for dark energy?  Does that sound plausible to you?  Can the Universe also be the Anti-verse?

I could be wrong,  so I have my own  two-body-problem for you to consider.

If you eat an apple does your mass change?  Does the mass of the apple change?  If the answer is yes then the earth becomes affected and a three-body-problem arises.
A black hole doesn't actually eat matter as you eat an apple. It gravitationally attracts matter like anything else. The black hole is a part of the galaxy so whatever mass falls into it is still in the galaxy. The mass of the galaxy does change all the time as stars convert mass to energy. As far as dark matter is concerned, I have no idea where it comes from but it seems to give galaxies there shapes and links them together


#11    taniwha

taniwha

    Hi. If im an idiot, then im an idiot for truth.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,639 posts
  • Joined:25 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 April 2014 - 12:39 PM

View PostWaspie_Dwarf, on 10 April 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:

Yet again you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

I asked about the three body problem because it is a specific problem in calculating gravitational relationships between bodies. Whilst it
is possible to calculate how two bodies interact gravitationally, it is not possible to calculate for three or more.

Hence, if you had known what the three body problem was you would have known the answer to this question:

The answer is that it is impossible to calculate the course of the Magellanic Clouds forever.

I didnt claim to measure the mass of the milky way,  they did.  I found your lead about three body problem very fiiting in their case.  

Quote

As for your nonsensical gibberish about apples and people...

The black hole at the centre of the galaxy is a part of the galaxy. It's mass can change by devouring objects, such as stars... which are part of the galaxy or by evaporation, in which case energy is released... into the galaxy. Either way the mass of the galaxy does not change significantly.

Think of it this way, if you weigh yourself holding an apple and carry on weighing yourself as you eat the apple will there be any change in the overall weight?

Just try and think logically.  If You plant a seed and grow a tree, how is it that the mass of something so small can become the mass of something so big?  Change in mass by conversion of energy,  also known as growth is the correct answer. As I see it the same rules apply to the universe.

Quote

You have dismissed out of hand the work of experts whilst showing not even the most basic grasp of the concepts involved. Do you not see a problem with this?

As I stated,  the only thing constant in the universe is change. The 'experts' uphold the precept specially well by constantly changing their theories year after year.   Do you not see a problem with this?  




#12    taniwha

taniwha

    Hi. If im an idiot, then im an idiot for truth.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,639 posts
  • Joined:25 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 April 2014 - 12:44 PM

View PostWaspie_Dwarf, on 10 April 2014 - 01:47 PM, said:


This is not a stab in the dark, it is doing what you do in post after post, making stuff up as you go along. You aren't even sure if you mean dark energy or dark matter here are you?


No "could be" about it.

Dark energy or dark matter?  Dark matter or dark energy?   Why not both?  Tell me then where do they come from?


#13    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,108 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 12 April 2014 - 04:36 PM

View Posttaniwha, on 12 April 2014 - 12:44 PM, said:

Dark energy or dark matter?  Dark matter or dark energy?   Why not both?  Tell me then where do they come from?
Dark energy is the energy of empty space that apparently counteracts gravity. Dark matter is something that is gravitationally attractive but is invisible to light. I don't know where they come from but, I think, all they have in common is the word dark


#14    Kenemet

Kenemet

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 562 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2014

Posted 13 April 2014 - 04:03 PM

There's a huge difference between biological evolution and stellar evolution.

Stellar evolution is driven by a small number of forces (velocity, mass, etc.)

Darwinian (biological) evolution is driven by thousands and thousands of factors, including local climate, local geology, local soil composition, local food source availability, predation, disease, mating preferences, distance or nearness of other members of the same species, accidents (that remove otherwise fit individuals from the breeding pool), habitat (including plant types and water availability), etc, etc.


#15    Rlyeh

Rlyeh

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,129 posts
  • Joined:01 Jan 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The sixth circle

  • Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. - Terry Pratchett

Posted 13 April 2014 - 05:34 PM

View Posttaniwha, on 12 April 2014 - 12:39 PM, said:

Just try and think logically.  If You plant a seed and grow a tree, how is it that the mass of something so small can become the mass of something so big?  Change in mass by conversion of energy,  also known as growth is the correct answer. As I see it the same rules apply to the universe.
How is this poor analogy even logical? It completely ignores the response Waspie gave you. A more accurate analogy would be a planet containing a seed, which grows to a tree, no mass change.

Edited by Rlyeh, 13 April 2014 - 05:36 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users