How is it we can see galaxies light years away?

[rell.hiphopupdate]

"lightyears" = time not length

so the images the telescope receives are how those galaxies looked xlightyears ago.

EX. if a planet is 7 lightyears away, and blew up this second, we wouldnt notice for another 7 years


cue that smiley lol

 

[eaalto]

I could have sworn stuff like this was common knowledge, but I've been surprised before.

I was trying to help a co-worker who is going to community college with her algebra class, and she had a worse understanding of it than I did when I was in 6thgrade, and she is 20 years old.

She did not understand that two negatives make a positive, or that a negative and a positive make a negative. She did not understand that 1 + - 5 = - 4


This is a serious question for NT:
What math did you take at each grade level in high school?

 

[nothin4ever]

UFO'S >>> NASA SHIPS


SINCE ITS OVER 100,000 PLANETS OUT THERE LIKE EARTH

PICTURE WE CAN VIEW ONE FROM AFAR

WITH DINOSAUR LIFE ..WOULD BE CRAZY

 

[Specter]

Originally Posted by Lieutenant Kif

Originally Posted by Dips3tRydah

Originally Posted by StonedFace

you're not looking at the present, but at the past

I get that, just like how the suns light takes 7 minutes to hit earth, but how is it in only 20 years we can see galaxies 40+ light years away? Doesn't make sense to me.

huh?

This is how it works. The closest star to earth is about 4 light-years away, this means that if you look at it tonight, you are actually seeing the light of that star from 4 years ago. If you look at it 4 years from now, you will be seeing the light it emitted today.

For stars that are 20 light years away, in 20 years you will see the light that it emitted today.

Yeah you're right I was looking too much into it lol. Props to the people who actually contributed to this topic positively.

 

[blondsoccerplyr]

Here's a fun question to add to the mix:

How far can the human eye see without a telescope or other zoom lens?

 

[eaalto]

Originally Posted by blondsoccerplyr

Here's a fun question to add to the mix:

How far can the human eye see without a telescope or other zoom lens?

That is relative to the size of object and the distance from which it is perceived. The moon is some 240,000 miles from Earth, and we can clearly see that. Butwith the naked eye we would not be able to perceive a much smaller object, such as a man, from the same distance. I won't say that we can see stars becausewe aren't actually seeing the stars, we're seeing the light emitted from them millions of light years ago.

 

[impalaballa187]

Have none of you taken basic Physics/Astronomy courses in HS? If anyone in here confused is currently enrolled in college, or a college graduate... you shouldbe ashamed

 

[o fenomeno]

Originally Posted by blondsoccerplyr

Originally Posted by Nktran001

I love these kind of topics.

Me too, because it reveals how poor the education system is in America.

SERIOUS are you guys hella dumb? this is some 5th grade %!%% right here.

 

[blondsoccerplyr]

Originally Posted by eaalto

Originally Posted by blondsoccerplyr

Here's a fun question to add to the mix:

How far can the human eye see without a telescope or other zoom lens?

That is relative to the size of object and the distance from which it is perceived. The moon is some 240,000 miles from Earth, and we can clearly see that. But with the naked eye we would not be able to perceive a much smaller object, such as a man, from the same distance. I won't say that we can see stars because we aren't actually seeing the stars, we're seeing the light emitted from them millions of light years ago.

Well, it's a trick question that you kinda passed. Typically people say 10-20 miles. And yes, we are seeing the stars. Even though it's like emittedmillions of years ago, it's the light of the star, at the star's location. Would you say we can't see the sun because the light was emitted 7minutes ago?

 

[torgriffith]

Space is a representation of the past expanding and accelerating at a constant rate of change. Planets and stars get further from each other, but still retainthe same scale factor ( like a building drawn on paper scaled into real dimensions). (Although the universe exists multi-dimensional and simultaneously- pastpresent and future =a constant now)

What I think about is how time is merely just a measurement of movement around a fixed point(s). In the same manner that the atom structure has a centralnucleus with protons and electrons in orbit just as planets orbit our sun which I like to think of as the nucleus of our existence on his otherwise darkplanet.

And I think our concept of space travel is backwards. I think flying into the past on a rocket doesn't really make too too much sense to me. I believe thatsince we ourselves are the seeds of the future, depending on how well cultivate our body, travelling into the future is internal. We have to go inwards.Thought a lot about this while watching Avatar with the whole transformation of conscience into another body. It's just that our western conceptions ofreality make that kind of world impossible to the naked eyes, what the navi saw with their true eye.....

 

[eaalto]

Originally Posted by blondsoccerplyr

Originally Posted by eaalto

Originally Posted by blondsoccerplyr

Here's a fun question to add to the mix:

How far can the human eye see without a telescope or other zoom lens?

That is relative to the size of object and the distance from which it is perceived. The moon is some 240,000 miles from Earth, and we can clearly see that. But with the naked eye we would not be able to perceive a much smaller object, such as a man, from the same distance. I won't say that we can see stars because we aren't actually seeing the stars, we're seeing the light emitted from them millions of light years ago.

Well, it's a trick question that you kinda passed. Typically people say 10-20 miles. And yes, we are seeing the stars. Even though it's like emitted millions of years ago, it's the light of the star, at the star's location. Would you say we can't see the sun because the light was emitted 7 minutes ago?

Well that's where I say that the distance limitation comes into play. It takes a little over a second for the light reflected from the moon to hit theearth. It's close enough that we could say we are perceiving it in real time. Yes, we can see the sun, but we are seeing the sun 7 minutes ago, not the sunof the present. When I look at my monitor, the light was emitted at 11:00, and hit my eyes at 11:00. If I looked at the moon, the light was reflected at 11:00and hit my eyes at 11:00. If I looked at the sun at 11:00, I would be seeing the sun as it was at 10:53.

 

[doosta45]

Originally Posted by eaalto

I could have sworn stuff like this was common knowledge, but I've been surprised before.

I was trying to help a co-worker who is going to community college with her algebra class, and she had a worse understanding of it than I did when I was in 6th grade, and she is 20 years old.

She did not understand that two negatives make a positive, or that a negative and a positive make a negative. She did not understand that 1 + - 5 = - 4


This is a serious question for NT:
What math did you take at each grade level in high school?

not all the time fam.

1 + -5 = -4
1 - -5 = 6

'plus a negative' took me a minute to grasp that concept back in grade school, but once i got it i was

 

[eaalto]

Originally Posted by doosta45

Originally Posted by eaalto

I could have sworn stuff like this was common knowledge, but I've been surprised before.

I was trying to help a co-worker who is going to community college with her algebra class, and she had a worse understanding of it than I did when I was in 6th grade, and she is 20 years old.

She did not understand that two negatives make a positive, or that a negative and a positive make a negative. She did not understand that 1 + - 5 = - 4


This is a serious question for NT:
What math did you take at each grade level in high school?

not all the time fam.

1 + -5 = -4
1 - -5 = 6

'plus a negative' took me a minute to grasp that concept back in grade school, but once i got it i was

What you wrote didn't refute what I said, all you showed was that two negatives make a positive.

I wasn't saying that a positive number and a negative number combined will always yield a negative integer, (e.g.) 7 + -3 = 4.

But for other operations, like multiplication, a negative and a positive always yields a negative. -1 x 2 = -2 ; -1 x -2 = 2 etc.

The point was that there are people that made it all the way through highschool without understanding this concept. I don't understand how that ispossible.

 

[whph10]

Put shorty on to the number line.

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by Rell

"lightyears" = time not length

so the images the telescope receives are how those galaxies looked xlightyears ago.

EX. if a planet is 7 lightyears away, and blew up this second, we wouldnt notice for another 7 years


cue that smiley lol

It is distance. If it was time tell me how much time is in a light year.... you can't. It is the distance it takes the light to travel.

 

[mycoldyourdone]

light year means light like coke light or diet coke so its a smaller year

huh

 

[eaalto]

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by Rell

"lightyears" = time not length

so the images the telescope receives are how those galaxies looked xlightyears ago.

EX. if a planet is 7 lightyears away, and blew up this second, we wouldnt notice for another 7 years


cue that smiley lol

It is distance. If it was time tell me how much time is in a light year.... you can't. It is the distance it takes the light to travel.

A light year is the distance that light travels in a year. I can tell you how much time is in a light year. A year.

 

[atlien seeko]

Good thread. I actually wrote a little essay off this thought. I'll post it if anyone's interested...

 

[curt2121]

On a very basic level, it is important to note that there is a range away from the earth that, due to the expansion of space between that point and the earthoccurring faster than the speed of light, light emitted from anything beyond that distance will never reach the earth and we will never have any idea of itsexistence.

 

[onhollowedground821]

Okay so all of this still doessnt really answer the OP's Original question lol

 

[chokeonsmoke]

speaking on space travel
i heard that if the hydrogen collider goes as planned, theres gonna be a crazy leap in technology
im talking about building engines that boost harder like the ones in star trek....

 

[sterrett02]

THIS IS WHAT I DONT UNDERSTAND

WHY DO WE SEND ROBOTS TO MARS WHEN WE HAVE TELESCOPES THAT CAN SEE IMAGES THAT ARE 150 LIGHTYEARS AWAY

CANT WE JUST USE THE TELESCOPE TO CENTER ON ONE BIG SECTION OF MARS AND SEE WHATS GOING ON OVER THERE


AND AGAIN I'M NOT SCREAMING

 

[yungchris504]

Originally Posted by eaalto

Originally Posted by yungchris504

Originally Posted by Rell

"lightyears" = time not length

so the images the telescope receives are how those galaxies looked xlightyears ago.

EX. if a planet is 7 lightyears away, and blew up this second, we wouldnt notice for another 7 years


cue that smiley lol

It is distance. If it was time tell me how much time is in a light year.... you can't. It is the distance it takes the light to travel.

A light year is the distance that light travels in a year. I can tell you how much time is in a light year. A year.

My point is that it is a measurement of length and not time as the NTer above stated. I worded it incorrectly, my bad.

 

[frankie valentino]

Think of Galaxies like you would see houses and cities from inside an airplane at night. You look outside your window and instead of houses you see dots oflights. You know in your head that there isnt just a dot of light, theres a house with multiple lights inside and out, but due to your distance it looks like asingle dot.

 

[frankie valentino]

Originally Posted by sterrett02

THIS IS WHAT I DONT UNDERSTAND

WHY DO WE SEND ROBOTS TO MARS WHEN WE HAVE TELESCOPES THAT CAN SEE IMAGES THAT ARE 150 LIGHTYEARS AWAY

CANT WE JUST USE THE TELESCOPE TO CENTER ON ONE BIG SECTION OF MARS AND SEE WHATS GOING ON OVER THERE


AND AGAIN I'M NOT SCREAMING

Telescopes can only provide 2d imaging. Theres alot we can learn by being on the surface and sending rovers that we simply cannot replicate with telescopes.