Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Waspie_Dwarf

Ghostly Shape of ‘Coldest Place in Universe’

14 posts in this topic

ALMA Reveals Ghostly Shape of ‘Coldest Place in the Universe’

At a cosmologically crisp one degree Kelvin (minus 458 degrees Fahrenheit), the Boomerang Nebula is the coldest known object in the Universe – colder, in fact, than the faint afterglow of the Big Bang, which is the natural background temperature of space.

Astronomers using the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) telescope have taken a new look at this intriguing object to learn more about its frigid properties and to determine its true shape, which has an eerily ghost-like appearance.

arrow3.gifSource

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget your long johns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What surprises me is that his object is actually quite close, yet energetic. Can it really be just 1 Kelvin degrees? I would have surmised that any energy (sufficient to cause expansion of the planetary nebula) to be well in excess of this value.

Perhaps, Waspie, you could enlighten us as to how an energetic object at this presumed temperature, has sufficient energy to drive expansion?

Why is such a close, expanding object, so cold? Why is the furthest object at 35 Billion Light Years distance (I get the Expanding Universe concept - but do not accept that we have a Universe expanding at multiples of the speed of light) actually much more distant that the presumed age of the universe

What are we truly measuring? Are our measurement techniques at risk of being incorrect? Are we extrapolating theories beyond their capabilities to offer fidelity?

I just dont get it....

Edited by keithisco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do they know the temperature of something so far away?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What surprises me is that his object is actually quite close, yet energetic. Can it really be just 1 Kelvin degrees? I would have surmised that any energy (sufficient to cause expansion of the planetary nebula) to be well in excess of this value.

Perhaps, Waspie, you could enlighten us as to how an energetic object at this presumed temperature, has sufficient energy to drive expansion?

Why is such a close, expanding object, so cold? Why is the furthest object at 35 Billion Light Years distance (I get the Expanding Universe concept - but do not accept that we have a Universe expanding at multiples of the speed of light) actually much more distant that the presumed age of the universe

What are we truly measuring? Are our measurement techniques at risk of being incorrect? Are we extrapolating theories beyond their capabilities to offer fidelity?

I just dont get it....

Me neither.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, Waspie, you could enlighten us as to how an energetic object at this presumed temperature, has sufficient energy to drive expansion?

I think you'll need a physicist for this, not an ex-chemist.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you'll need a physicist for this, not an ex-chemist.

LOL Waspie, but I know what you mean. As an aeronautical engineer with a passing amateur interest in pure physics some things fall well beneath my radar of understanding :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coldest place in the (observable) universe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We measure its temperature from details of its spectrum.

I would assume energy has been taken out of it by the expansion. That tends to cool things a bit as energy is consumed pushing outward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how can stars be cold? they emit lights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry this is not stars but a nebula, which is typically very very rarefied gas or dust.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We measure its temperature from details of its spectrum.

I would assume energy has been taken out of it by the expansion. That tends to cool things a bit as energy is consumed pushing outward.

The problem with that is CMB. CMB is everywhere and is hotter than the observed temperature of the nebula. Things only cool when they expand, if the space they are expanding into is less energetic (i.e. cooler). In this case that is not true. In theory, nothing should be naturally cooler than the temperature of empty space which, with CMB pervading it, is ~2.7 Kelvin.

Edited by Leonardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems improbable that the most extreme "anything" would be that close to our little corner of the universe.

BTW, I hate when then and than are confused (see the first sentence). I hate it almost as much as when people use BTW, BTW.

Edited by Twin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That be god that :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.