The universe's furthest object ever

Either one really, shouldn't we have found something in the form of signals or actual life, considering we can detect something like this? You are talking abourt two whole entirely differnt things here, What we see in the photo is taken by optical telescope which dont pick up on radio signasls but rather optical sights, Now if you are aware the ATA or Allen Telescope array which is designed to pick up radio signals then that is the one to that do that, In other words two totally different machines serving its own perspective dutys,

two point five septillion meters away,, WOW, thats a number we can not grasp very easily, I wonder how many zeros that would be?? Anyone know?? Hi TFF... I read that article and sat there dumbfounded,thinking , "Who the hell uses meters to describe interstellar distances?" 2.5 E24 meters is incomprehensible of course, as you say (take 25 and write 23 zeroes behind it and you have it). We reduce those immense numbers to a convenient unit, which, while not making the distance any more conceivable, makes it alot easier to describe, and avoids mathematical error, which was made in this article. Th... [More]

Hi TFF...I read that article and sat there dumbfounded,thinking , "Who the hell uses meters to describe interstellar distances?" 2.5 E24 meters is incomprehensible of course, as you say (take 25 and write 23 zeroes behind it and you have it). We reduce those immense numbers to a convenient unit, which, while not making the distance any more conceivable, makes it alot easier to describe, and avoids mathematical error, which was made in this article. That unit is the light year (LY). I had to laugh actually reading it. They're describing, as you correctly indicate, a Gamma Ray Burst, GRB090423, ... [More]

Mid thanks for your time calculating all this, It makes perfect sense and is iresputed,, Hats off to MID; Thank you sir, and... You're welcome TFF ! I'm surprized that post of mine made sense at all...I try to keep things real simple when discussing interstellar distances. I describe a light year as "a godzillion miles away" (not approved terminology, but just as effective as talking about and quadrillions and septillions and octillions and ridiculous numbers like those!) I use that term for anything beyond a trillion...because a trillion is a million times a million and I think that's as far ... [More]

If it were a static object--i.e. if the universe wasn't expanding--and everyone's numbers are right, about 175,000 years. But it isn't just x distance away, it's x distance away from us and it's receding from us much faster than the speed of light. So it'd take the Enterprise...a while. Could you show me how you got to 175000 years?

Could you show me how you got to 175000 years? Sure. That's just a back of the envelope calculation using the distance quoted in the original post and the velocity of Warp 9 provided by Spidercyde. Assuming (wrongly) that spacetime itself isn't moving, you just divide distance by velocity (making sure you put them in the same units first) to get the time it would take to get there. However, as I said, it's a meaningless calculation because the universe is still expanding. Further, as MID pointed out, distance is tricky (the number of meters quoted in the original post is almost certainly wrong... [More]

While I think the thought process at work in that paper is a bit flawed I would tend to agree with this statement. To be quite frank I have never been too fond of the Fermi paradox myself as it might not be a paradox at all. the general idea stands--the fact that we're not seeing any signs of anybody (including radio signals) might suggest that there aren't quite as many civilizations out there are Star Trek would suggest. That of course depends on what Star Trek really suggests, I guess. But what if the light speed barrier is insurmountable and there are no short cuts? What kind of signs woul... [More]

Sure. That's just a back of the envelope calculation using the distance quoted in the original post and the velocity of Warp 9 provided by Spidercyde. Assuming (wrongly) that spacetime itself isn't moving, you just divide distance by velocity (making sure you put them in the same units first) to get the time it would take to get there. However, as I said, it's a meaningless calculation because the universe is still expanding. Values approximate...(and please feel free to double check all numbers (I did this with a few beers in me)-- ) 260,000,000,000 LY = 1.5 x 1024miles. (Jesus...how ridiculo... [More]

260,000,000,000 LY = 1.5 x 1024miles. 2.5 x 1024 meters is not 1.5 x 1024miles. It's 1.5 x 1021miles. That's why you're overestimating travel time by three orders of magnitude.

2.5 x 1024 meters is not 1.5 x 1024miles. It's 1.5 x 1021miles. Yes, that's true. But 2.5E24 meters is also not 260 billion LY.... It's ~ 260 million LY. We're suffering from an article that used a ridiculous unit to describe interstellar distance, and made an error in calling that distance 260 billion LY...aaack!