That small? Shit, if there are more of those we should harvest the fuck out of them when we have FLT.
Then again, Diamond prices would plummet.

>>7323562

The entire Diamond Market is artificially inflated anyways. Diamonds have very little practical use for their value, they are just shiny and public opinion has made them basically required purchases for everyone who wants to get married.

A supernova goes off in our vacinity, or something like that. A quazar works too.

Have you ever wondered why there are no green stars?
>The color of a star is a combination of two phenomena. The first is the star's temperature. This determines the wavelength (frequency) where the peak of its electromagnetic radiation will emerge in the spectrum. A cool object, like an iron rod heated to 3000 degrees, will emit most of its light at wavelengths near 9000 Angstroms ( the far-red part of the visible spectrum) in wavelength. A very hot object at a temperature of 30,000 degrees will emit its light near a wavelength of 900 Angstroms (the far-ultraviolet part of the visible spectrum). The amount of energy emitted at other wavelengths is precisely determined by the bodies temperature, and by Planck's radiation law of 'black bodies'.

Type..... Color...............Temperature

O........ blue................30,000
B........ blue-white..........20,000
A........ white...............10,000
F........ yellow-white........ 8,000
G........ yellow.............. 5,000
K........ orange.............. 4,000
M........ red..................3,000

>We see stars in the sky using our black/white rods not our color-sensitive cones. This means that only the very brightest stars have much of a color, usually red, orange, yellow and blue. By chance there are no stars nearby that would have produced green colors had their spectral shapee been just right.
>So, there are no genuinely green stars because stars with the expected temperature emit their light in a way that our eye combines into the perception of 'whiteness'.
Something to ponder.

>>7323562

Diamond prices would plummet if the DeBeers cartel didn't control their trade as it is.

Diamond prices are already plummeting. Artificially made diamonds are actual, real diamonds which happen to be made in a lab.

You can buy a 10 carat Internally Flawless, Grade D (highest), perfect cut diamond for about $1000. This is 100x less than they cost a couple of years ago.

>>7323624
Didn't know that, awesometh.

Why does the Sun shine?

>>7323682
See
>>7323624

>>7323682
so you can see how hideous you are when you look in the mirror

>>7323682
The sun is mass of incandescent gas, a gigantic nuclear furnace,
where hydrogen is built into helium at a temperature of millions of degrees.

The sun is hot, the sun is not a place where we could live.
But here on earth there'd be no life without the light it gives.

We need its light.
We need its heat.
We need its energy.
Without the sun without a doubt there'd be no you or me.

The sun is mass of incandescent gas, a gigantic nuclear furnace.
Where hydrogen is built into helium at a temperature of millions of degrees.

The sun is hot.
[It is so hot that everything on it is a gas, iron, copper, aluminum, and many others.]

The sun is large.
[If the sun were hollow, a million earths could fit inside, and yet the sun is only a Middle-sized star.]

The sun is far away.
[About 93,000,000 miles away, and thats why it looks so small!]
But even when its out of sight, the sun shines night and day.

We need its light.
We need its heat.
We need its energy.
The sunlight comes from our own sun's atomic energy.

[Scientists have found that the sun is a huge atom-smashing machine. The heat and light of the sun are caused by the nuclear reactions of hydrogen, Nitrogen, Carbon, and helium!]

The sun is mass of incandescent gas, a gigantic nuclear furnace.
Where hydrogen is built into helium at a temperature of millions of degrees.

>>7323642

where can I buy one of these 10 carat internally flawless, Grade D diamonds then?

Because they aint in any jewelers or goldsmiths where I live

Here's one.

There is a nebula in our galaxy made up of pure ethynol. That's right, a celestial body composed of frat party grade alcohol. Imagine the joy in a space dwarf's eyes...

>>7323724
He's Malkavian. don't bother.

>>7323727
That's because the MAN is trying to quash the distribution of these diamonds.

>>7323682

Because you touch yourself at night.

Malkavians are from the moon.

>>7323642
Can they make other artificial gems? Like rubies and sapphires?

Because it'd be awesome to have a diamond ring with ruby, sapphire and emerald mounts. No, the ring itself is made of diamond.

The Great Attractor - a mysterious gravitational force which is pulling vast amounts of stars and matter around, but which is currently unobservable. Nobody knows what this mysterious object must be. If it is an object it must be massive, so massive that we must wonder why it has not simply collapsed into a black hole - unless it is the largest black hole in the universe. Or perhaps something else is out there, playing with gravity.

The inner layers of gas giants are theorized to contain layers of liquid metallic hydrogen, a substance that has only ever been created for millions of a second in labs with insane levels of heat and pressure.

It is also theorized that metallic hydrogen is a superconductor, even under temperatures as high as room temperature. Though the heat and pressure in gas giants that should lead to creation would work against this, should a way be found to stabilized the metallic hydrogen outside of heats and pressures greater than found in the core of the earth, then it could become useful.

>>7323773
>so massive that we must wonder why it has not simply collapsed into a black hole - unless it is the largest black hole in the universe.
So we are all already behind the event horizon?

This is an accurate map of the entire universe that we have observed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17jymDn0W6U

There's a stellar object out there that looks suspiciously like the Eye of Terror; a thread was posted on /tg/.

Somebody also found Azathoth, but it's probably not really a horrible cthulhoid god.

>>7323799
I dunno, lol. I'm not really up to scratch on astronomy or space exploration but I pick up the occasional tidbit from /tg/ threads and NASA website info.

>>7323787
The crazy part about liquid metal hydrogen is that hydrogen obviously doesn't exhibit metallic properties (conduction of heat and electricity), but when it's compressed so tightly, it magically gains these properties.

>>7323727
Look online. Gemesis, Nexuslabs, etc.

The biggest difference between artificial diamonds is impurities, and how they effect appearance. Cubic Zirconia is nothing but CZ and oxygen and isn't 'real' at all. Moissanite is brighter than diamond and almost as hard, but also just as artificial. Gemesis synthetics are true diamonds, pure carbon with trace amount of bonding agents (they typically contain less impurities than mined diamonds). Gemesis diamonds are identical in every way to real diamonds. Nexus diamonds are similar but with slightly more impurities. Gemesis uses a better (and more expensive process), but Nexus is significantly cheaper. The optical capabilities of Nexus' are identical to diamonds, but the hardness is only a 9.9 instead of a 10. They've been closing the gap though with every passing year though.

It's not that expensive to get a diamond now. Even the "cheap" artificial diamonds contain less impurities than the vast majority of diamonds mined out of the Earth. As a fun fact, the process for determining if a diamond is fake or not is looking for impurities, and if a diamond is TOO PERFECT, it's decided to be a fake.

>>7323906

is it still explosive when liquid?

>>7323826
This has peaked my intrest, do you have these pics?

>>7323823

No offense to the Earthmother but we need to get off this rock pronto. There's a galaxy full of candy and we're just sitting here.

>>7323949
That's a pretty good question, actually.

Depends on the detonation, because at the pressures the hydrogen is experiencing it's going to take quite a start to get it moving.

Our theories of the universe are a little off - but they shouldn't be, and in fact they'd be perfect except for a few parts of the nearby galaxies where the calculations don't quite add up right. Why is this? Scientists have said that some kind of unobservable dark matter is at work, pulling matter about from the 'proper' orbits.

Will a theory of quantum gravity solve this riddle? Dark matter itself has never been observed or even proven, so a refined theory of gravity might just be able to solve this problem. Might.

Gentlemen I posit this: the errors are not the result of some sort of weird invisible anti-material, but simply star which our telescopes are unable to see. Why might they be unable to see them?

Dyson spheres.

>>7323979
Well maybe Gaia should get off her fat ass and reveal to us the secrets FTL travel. But NOOoooooo

"Do it yourself dear, its right there if you look hard enough,"

>>7323949

You mean combustible? Sure, why not.

>>7323906
>The crazy part about liquid metal hydrogen is that hydrogen obviously doesn't exhibit metallic properties (conduction of heat and electricity), but when it's compressed so tightly, it magically gains these properties.

There's nothing crazy about it. It's not magic.
If you compress any element with enough pressure, you'll end up with some type of metal.

>>7323990
>Dyson spheres.
I like the way you're thinking, but I could've sworn you were going to say something about our universe actually being inside one.

>>7323980
Sadly without FTL travel, which in it self is laughably impossible with our current understanding of things, we will most likely never travel outside of our own system, let alone are distant arm of our galaxy

>>7323724

The sun is a miasma
Of incandescent plasma
The sun's not simply made out of gas
No, no, no

The sun is a quagmire
It's not made of fire
Forget what you've been told in the past

(Plasma!)
Electrons are free
(Plasma!)
A fourth state of matter
Not gas, not liquid, not solid

The sun is no red dwarf
I hope it never morphs
Into some supernova'd collapsed orb
Orb, orb, orb

The sun is a miasma
Of incandescent plasma
I forget what I was told by myself
Elf, elf, elf

(Plasma!)
Electrons are free
(Plasma!)
A fourth state of matter
Not gas, not liquid, not solid

(Plasma!)
Forget that song
(Plasma!)
They got it wrong
That thesis has been rendered invalid


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrtklvgsmWU

>>7323990

That's a pretty cool theory; But wouldn't we be able to pin-point gravity wells, even though we can't see the body creating it?

>>7323979
Somewhere out there there is a planet with hydrocarbon oceans comprised of primarily sucrose

In this image you will see two shapes.

The small dot you see is our sun, and next to it is Canis Majoris, the largest "thing" we have ever bore witness to.

The Earth wouldn't even be a fraction of a pixel...

>>7324122
fuck

>>7324068
At extreme distances it would probably be tricky.

>>7324122
I don't know if I'm wrong, but haven't there been found a even bigger star?

>>7324025
>i don't actually know the answer to your question, but OH FUCK NIGGER, HE USED A TECHNICALLY INCORRECT TERM TO DESCRIBE SOMETHING, I AM ON THAT SHIT NEPHEW FUCK I THINK I CAME A LITTLE

>>7324122
>Canis Majoris
...I want to see it explode

>>7324078
itt planets humping

>>7324145

Nope, that's it, it's stupidly big.

It takes light years to travel across it's diameter....

>>7324148
It is exploding, right as we speak, or possibly already done exploding billions of years ago but the light hasn't reached us yet.

In any case it's that big because it's dying.

>>7324161
How can it hold itself together?

>>7324141

There IS some controversy about the size, apparently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VY_Canis_Majoris#Controversy

Either way it's still pretty damn big.

>>7324178
Gravity, I guess.

>>7324178
see
>>7324174

It's no longer holding it together, but that much mass takes time to expand.

If you assume the universe is infinitely large, given an infinite number of galaxies, planets, etc... there would be, somewhere mind-bogglingly far away, an exact copy of Earth in every detail, including you, reading this shit on their /v/.

Also dickgirls.

>>7324161
Light Years measure distance, not time.
"It is Light Years in diameter."
...
Holy fuck. It takes 8 minutes for light from the sun to reach us, but it takes YEARS for light to reach the other side of this thing?
I... I want to see it. I want to be there.

>>7324321
The universe isn't infinitely large, no one said that.

It's just insanely big.

>>7324321
>/v/

At least change the board name in your pasta, bro.

>>7324322
He means "if light wanted to cross it, it would take light years to do so."

>>7324068
that's how we kow black holes exist. We observe their effects on gravity, not the source itself.

>>7324161
>>7324322
When inside a star, it takes thousands of years for light to travel through it. This includes our sun.

So of course it would take many light-years to travel across a star's diameter, if you're magically flying through the middle of it.

>>7324322
That's just it, you can't see it, it's impossible to see. It's just too big. The only way to see it is from hundreds of lightyears away.

Ponder this: If you look straight at it, the light from the side facing you directly is from years earlier than the light from further back.

>>7324348

actually, Einstein said that.

>>7324322
It's also bullshit. VY Canis Majoris is probably about 2000 solar diameters in size. That's a few light hours, about the distance from Sol to Saturn. Still incredibly fucking big.

>>7324322

I think if you got close enough to even begin to get a feel for its size you would be incinerated.

Even otherwise, I'm not sure if it would be possible for the mind to comprehend something that big even when looking at it. I mean.. Jesus. It would be a wall of all-consuming fire so large you may suffer a mental breakdown by even trying to see the whole thing.

>>7324389
He was wrong. The universe is EFFECTIVELY infinitely large, because by the time you got to one edge, even at the maximum possible speed according to Einstein, it would have retreated away from you many times that distance.

As for the actual size, I always think of it in these terms:

The visible universe extends about 13.7 billion lightyears in any direction. Compared with the actual, full size of the universe, the visible universe is as big as a US quarter sitting in the middle of a football stadium.

>>7324389
He also said human stupidity is infinite.

And I truly believe this.

>>7324041
What the fuck... no.

>>7324423
Also incorrect. Humans can only get so stupid before they're not human anymore.

rolled 5, 6, 2 = 13

>>7324407
Even our own Sun's big enough to do that to you. It's 1,000,000 times the size of the planet we're sitting on right now.

>>7324422

well, he did say that he wasn't sure about it.

>>7324439

this part he was very sure of.

>>7324439
To be something more or less then human is also humanly thing to do.

>>7324439

biology would like a word with you.

>>7324422
May I ask how you know how large the universe is, because you know, if it is not in the visible universe, we can't see it.

>>7324428
Actually yes, with enough pressure anything can be a metal.

The metal may not exhibit all the classical metallic properties, but it is still a metal.

>>7324444

Wow. An immense, raw ball of continuous nuclear fury that dwarfs us so utterly. If you think about it, you realize how fragile we all are. Something so powerful exists so nearby, and only through our limited understanding of its nature do we know that it's not going to up and consume us at any moment.

>>7324379
It takes so long because there is so much energy rebounding off itself inside. it just boggles my mind that something so large that it takes one of the fastest forces in existence YEARS to traverse it.

>>7324464
Which is a cool conundrum in one direction and stupid in the other.

Let's see, awesome science...

How about Quasars? Those things are pretty boss.

>>7324476

We can't see a lot of space, but that's because the visible spectrum is incredibly weak.

We rely on other forms of radiation

>>7324322
nah, even at our largest estimate of its size the radius is still under 100 light minutes, so the diameter is at most about 3 light hours.

>>7324444
And we can't even properly comprehend the size of that planet. It's so far outside of what our brains were made for - if you had a way of approaching the sun to its 'surface' without burning to dust, you'd lose the concept of it being a stellar body at some point. It'd turn into a barely curved plane, a seemingly flat surface made of fucking hot that expands as far as you can see, far less obvious than the curvature of the horizon on Earth. There'd be just two hemispheres, one filled with sky (or corona actually but let's not destroy the imagery here) one with blinding, hot light.

>>7324476
That's just how I heard it. I Am Not A Scientist.

It's probably a prediction based on current theory, and may very well be wrong.

>>7324499
If I recall from my college education, visible universe refers not to the parts of the universe that we can see in the visible spectrum, but to the parts we can see using telescopy in all spectrums. My question is how can you estimate the size of the universe, if there is no way to observe it?

>>7324543
Take the expected expansion rate using the physics of the day and extrapolate based on the amount of time that has passed since the Big Bang.

The universe used to be considered a lot smaller until we discovered that the expansion is accelerating and not decelerating.

rolled 6, 3, 2 = 11

>>7324543
We can only estimate the size of the visible universe, I believe. The farthest objects we can see are Quasars; the degree of redshift in the light received from them tells us how far away they are.

According to Wikipedia, the current estimate of the universe's size comes from calculations based on cosmic background radiation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift#Extragalactic_observations

rolled 2, 2, 5 = 9

>>7324594
Oh balls.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#Size.2C_age.2C_contents.2C_structure.2C_and_laws

It's 93 billion light-years across.

no one really knows for sure. but, if one theory is correct it went something like this:

the expansion of space went faster than light. we don't know how far it could have expanded. the universe could even be older than the big bang. there may be other big bangs out there that are so far away that the light not only hasn't reached us, but because space is still expanding it will NEVER reach us.

First decent thread in /tg/ in weeks.

Space is neither malevolent nor benign.

It is merely indifferent.

Though mankind has an obligation to survive, if only because we are the extreme of unfathomable odds, and that each second we continue to exist is a roar of defiance against those odds, it doesn't matter to the universe.

It does not yearn for us to continue, nor does it wish for our destruction, it is merely indifferent.

>>7324644
It's less that it went faster than light, and more that the speed of light was temporarily increased somehow. At one point, light just went faster.

Of course, that's just one theory, and it acknowledges that it's basically just going 'what the hell, that's what it looks like.'

Pictured here is a closeup of Saturn's many rings. You'll take note of the disturbance happening near the bottom.
The cause of the disturbance is Daphnis, one of Saturn's many moons. It sits right inside of the rings, cutting through them.

The reason it cuts a gap between the rings is because the particles in the ring are actually traveling faster than the moon is orbiting, so they part.

What amazing, is that because of the moon's off-kilter magnetic poles, it actually "slings" the particles upwards, perpendicular to the ring's plane. The particles float for a while and then eventually join back with the ring and become a tight disc again.

To put size into perspective, Those waves that you see are roughly three times as tall as Mt. Everest.

I think space is a pretty cool guy. eh boggles minds and doesn't afraid of anything.

>>7324695
so basically... Humanity FUCK YEAH!!?

>>7324695
>the universe is indifferent

this, of course, was proven empirically false in the galactic year 50.73.24, when the sum total of mass in the universe was made into a massive collective consciousness device. It cares.

The discoverer of Dark Flow, the strange force that seems to be pulling entire clusters of galaxies in strange ways, has come to the conclusion that the most reasonable explanation for this phenomenon is that our universe is interacting with a body that exists *outside* our universe.

I shit you not. Look it up.

I don't think many people get how big a supernova really is.

It releases about 1 to 2x10^44 joules of energy. For reference, the bomb at Hiroshima released 8.8x10^13.

One going off in our vicinity would pretty much kill everyone.

There are events even larger, called Hypernova.

Magnetars are great big spinning barrels of fun.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/12/27/anniversary-of-a-cosmic-blast/

>>7324716
Even if the Universe was sentient, it wouldn't care due to how insignificant we are.

It would have the same indifference a glacier feels for a single pebble that stands in its way

>>7324720
I'm sorry, I can't hear you over my colony ship that rides supernovae radiation.

it's a little tricky, though, because for a long time before it's a "colony ship" it's a "solar station"

>>7324699
>Those waves that you see are roughly three times as tall as Mt. Everest.

>>7324727
dude, this is a LONG time past the age of individual sentients.

eventually, it just turned into a war between clouds of von-neuman devices. and then clouds of hiveminds of von neumans. and then clusters of hiveminds, and then megaclusters of clusters, and so on and so forth until half the universe ate the other half. and now it's at peace.

>>7324699
Similarly: The rings of Saturn are thinner, compared to their width, than a sheet of paper.

http://xkcd.com/681_large/

>>7324710

.. no, you fool. Humanity can FUCK YEAH itself into a coma and the Universe will never, ever give even the tiniest shit.

>>7324710
Fuck no

rolled 1 = 1

Someone requested the REAL LIFE eye of terror?

delivered.

>>7324787
So? Who cares.

>>7324798
.

>>7324699
I see your rings, and raise you the Perfect Hexagon on Saturn's north pole.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17816192/

>>7324806
.. he does, I assume? I was answering his question.

>>7324784
Note to self: take my bike to Deimos.

>>7324695
Concept: the universe is sapient and wishes to create the perfect being
Method: MetaEvolution
Thus: Humans are a step in the right direction, just as DNA was a step in the right direction

Humans create robots, or somthing else, just as humans were 'created' by the evolution, robots then create something else and so on...

Result: The universe becomes one giant Von Neuman machine that eats other universes

>>7324787
but.. humanity and all.... now you've made me feel insignificant, i felt great pride in the fact that i even existed for a minute there

The Cartwheel galaxy was discovered by Fritz Zwicky in 1941 and was once a normal spiral galaxy like the Milky Way before it underwent a head-on collision with a smaller companion approximately 200 million years ago. When the nearby galaxy passed through the Cartwheel Galaxy, the force of the collision caused a powerful shock wave through the galaxy, like a rock being tossed into a sandbed. Moving at high speed, the shock wave swept up gas and dust, creating a starburst around the galaxy's center portion that were unscathed. This explains the bluish ring around the center, brighter portion.[5] An estimation of the galaxy's span resulted in a conclusion of 150,000 light years, which is slightly larger than the Milky Way.[6] It can be seen that the galaxy is beginning to retake the form of a normal spiral galaxy, with arms spreading out from a central core.

So Avatar made me check if there was an actual Pandora (turns out we don't know if there's even a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri, much less moons) and i ended up reading about solar sails and using nuclear explosions to propel a rocket.

The solar sails gave me this silly idea about galleons IN SPACE carrying god knows what from some far off planet, being raided by space pirates in smaller ships using engines of some kind that allow for fast maneuvering. It'd end up being the opposite to X-Wings though, closing the sails for battle when they would be useless and prone to damage.

The part about using nuclear explosions talked about using antimatter to cause a nuclear explosion with a very small mass (less than a gram), which gives me the idea of creating weapons from that. It'd be like an airsoft gun, loading the balls and separately the radioactive matter and the antimatter to trigger it.

>>7324817
Holy shit.

SOMEONE GIVE NASA CASH MONIES. I WANT A SPACE PROBE DOWN THAT THING NOW.

>>7324784
I actually like these things better than the regular comic.

>>7324817
I hate it when people bring up "perfect" shapes found in nature. Look at that picture, it is nowhere near perfect, it doesn't even have corners. It's just a six sided figure, get over it.

>>7324859
BAD ANTI-SPIRAL, BAD!

Stop throwing galaxies around like that.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/6250618/Hell-planet-where-rock-falls-as-rain-found.html

This is your next destination in [INSERT SCI-FI GAME HERE]

According to the most detailed measurements yet, scientists have discovered that our solar system, the Milky Way, is moving at 600,000mph, 100,000mph faster than originally thought. The speedier rotation also means its mass must be similar to that of Andromeda, around 270 billion times the mass of the sun.

It means that the gravitational pull the Milky Way exerts on its neighbouring galaxies is stronger, meaning a collision would happen sooner than expected.

The Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are the two largest in our cosmic neighbourhood, with the former 100,000 light years across, which is still only half the width of the latter.

Our solar system is around 28,000 light years from the centre of the Milky Way; Andromeda is around two million light years away.

The research, presented at the annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society in Long Beach, California, argues that the collision will happen around the same time our sun is due to burn up the last of its nuclear fuel, within the next seven billion years.

>>7324916
Forgot my pic.

One of these pictures is a mockup of what our universe looks like.

The other is a braincell.

>>7324916
>most detailed measurements yet, given in imperial units

That is less than half the time originally thought! We have to act faster, we are running out!

>>7324936
Quiet You.

>>7324932
micro = MACRO

mind = blown

>>7324965
Universe = Blown

>>7325016
multiverse = mind

>>7324965
Quiet you. It's a coincidence and nothing more.

Look at literally ANY OTHER BRAIN CELL.

They don't look like that.

>>7325020

With God, there are no coincidences

>>7325020
But if you could see all the OTHER universes, you'd see how they look compared to those braincells. Your faintest thought could be an untold span of realities, touched by other thoughts, influenced by others that are your equals. You can be a multiverse and a speck of dust all at the same time, your instant an eternity and your life naught but a flicker.

>>7324841

You shouldn't. We think ourselves important by virtue of the sheer fact we think. But we are localized on a tiny, fragile planet, and bound to require the most specific and minute of circumstances to even live, not just in regards to other planets but even within the diverse biospheres of our own.

There are billions of tiny things living on us right now, just as we are living on the earth. And just as noone mourns those tiny things when a man dies, noone shall mourn us when the earth passes, and takes all of human history with it. It shall be as if we never existed. And in the immense time and distance of the universe, did we really?

>>7325034
I will eat you.

I swear to god, I will find and consume you for energy and nutrients.

oh god my brain it just imploded

>>7324866
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_Planet

Humanity needs to party like its never partied before. Send nukes out into space like firecrackers and generally make as much cosmic noise as possible as we go into the night.

Then maybe, just maybe billions of years from now, some other intelligent species will pick up our noise.

>>7325103

..And then promptly slam their windows shut.

Goddamn kids, those aliens have to work in the morning you know.

>>7323969
Piqued. The word you're looking for is "piqued".

>>7325103

it is possible we are alone in this galaxy. the conditions that allowed us to evolve might be very rare.

So... is there an actual limit to the universe? Is there a proverbial wall you hit?

/tg/ - Science!

Also this thread is awesome.
And I pose a new question for you /tg/. What exsists at the edge of the universe? The next one? You just cant reach it? Catgirls in their millions? Hell?

>>7325125

there are trillions of planets in the universe, there has to be life somewhere else based on probabilites. dont be so closedminded like a christfag or something

>>7325125
To quote Arthur C Clarke

"There are two possibilities:

We are alone in this Universe, or we are not.

Both are equally terrifying"

>>7325139

no. there is no preferred frame of reference. every point in space is the "center" of the universe.

>>7325125
Even if there was only a .00000001% chance of life existing on a planet, there are billions of galaxies each with billions of stars that have bodies orbiting them. I think that math would state that there is a good chance life exists elsewhere,

>>7325143
It would be arrogant to believe that we are the only life in this universe, but at the same time it would be ignorant to claim that life MUST exist elsewhere.

We simply do not know, there is no evidence to suggest one way or the other.

>>7325034
What's funny is I didn't want to mention God in the thread, since it always gets things trollin'. But the most amazing faith takes into account the vast, splendor of the universe, appreciates the unfathomable scope of it all... and is confident that a being responsible for wonders we can't even comprehend can care about us as a people and as individuals. A being that could exist on such divergent scales could only be called God.

>>7325097
The worst part is i've seen it but i didn't remember.

>>7325172
Both Carl Sagan and Einstein fancied the idea that the laws of nature were a god unto themselves, just not in a traditional religious sense.

>>7325140

At the edge of our universe is the chest containing Dungeon Map.

alone in the galaxy is not the same as alone in the universe

see: Fermis Paradox

>>7325172
See
>>7325077

>>7325160

Chance plays nothing into this. There is as much of a chance of life existing elsewhere in the universe as it not existing. We cannot say one way or the other.

You can believe, but at this moment we cannot prove.

>>7325139

there is a little sign that says "Leaving the Observable Universe. Mind the gap."

>>7325140
you mean...what is the universe expanding into?

that thought always made me uncomfortable, like when you accidentally fall through the world in a game and see nothing but a single color void, or if youve ever expanded out so far as to be on the outside of the skybox and see the void. I always picured seeing...something. any second now, something massive, like the croc in the beginning of half life 2, or maybe...a face. maliciously grinning, looking right at me... thats my non phobia, just rediculous and out there fear/uncomfort.

>>7323773
>In 2005, astronomers conducting an X-Ray survey of the sky known as the Clusters in the Zone of Avoidance (CIZA) project reported that the Great Attractor was actually only one tenth the mass that scientists had originally estimated. The survey also confirmed earlier theories that the Milky Way galaxy was in fact being pulled towards a much more massive cluster of galaxies near the Shapley Supercluster which lies beyond the Great Attractor.
Sorry dood.

>>7325220

it is complicated. the universe isn't expanding "into" anything. it is just making more space, but isn't displacing anything. it's just getting bigger.

>>7325186
I have to admit, parts of this thread, just opening my mind to the possibilities of the (effectively) infinite universe are overwhelming on a scale most would call religious. I think I'd have to take mind altering drugs to even begin to approach a true appreciation of some of the bits of the universe we DO know about, much less the things we can only guess at thus far.

Space is insane. Most of the things in Space shouldn't even WORK.

>>7325067
If you could see the other Universes, they wouldn't be part of another universe. Universes by definition are all-that-is. There is no such thing as a multiverse, merely the realization of a larger and stranger universe.

>>7324718
Both micro and macro levels are beautifully complex, which is what makes science interesting.
As a biochemist, and a /m/an I'll offer you an example of a complex biological machine, which transforms electrochemical energy into mechanical energy and finally into chemical energy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOoHKCMAUMc&feature=related

Mechanisms with this level of complexity abound in biological systems, similar to our machines, but in a much smaller scale. Personally I think we area already mecha.

Always liked this gif.

>>7325220
>you mean...what is the universe expanding into?

Years ago, I remember seeing on TV some snot-nosed little Brit shit, who clearly knew everything, responding to some sound-byte collector.

Q: "What do you think is outside the universe?"
Shitstain: "Nothing"
Q: "What, nothing at all?"
Shitstain: "Well, it wouldn't be bricks, would it?"

I'm a bit hazy on the exact conversation, but that last line is a direct quote, I can still hear him. Still want to go to England, find him and rape him with a spoon.

>>7325261
There is a "bubble theory" that there are multiple big bangs going on creating their own universes with their own laws of nature.

That said, by THEIR very definitions, there is no way possible to observe or travel to them.

>>7324049
>It's not made of fire
I thought fire and lightning where both forms of plasma.

>>7325285
Well, he's right.

I mean there's a difference between being nice and being right but it's true.

Whenever life gets you down, Mrs. Brown,
And things seem hard, or tough,
And people are stupid, obnoxious, or daft,
And you Feel That You've Had Quite ENOUGH....

Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving, and revolving at nine hundred miles an hour...
Ant it's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it's reckoned, the sun that is the source of all our power...

The sun, and you and me, and all the stars that we can see, are moving at a million miles a day,
In the outer spiral arm, at forty thousand miles an hour, of the galaxy we call 'the Milky Way'...

Hmm, hmm, hmm hmm, hmm hm hmmmm

The Galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars, It's a hundred thousand lightyears side to side...
It bulges in the middle, sixteen thousand lightyears thick, but out by us it's just three thousand light years wide....
We're thirty thousand lighyears from Galactic central point, we go 'round once every two hundred thousand years...
And our galaxy itself is one of millions of billions in this amazing and expanding universe....

The Universe itself keeps on expanding, and expanding, in all of the directions it can whiz...
As fast as it can go, the speed of light ya know, twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest speed there is,
So remember when you're feeling very small and insecure, how amazingly unlikely is your birth,
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space, 'cause there's bugger-all down here on Earth.

>>7325258
Yet is does, so it does.

>>7325267
Thanks, I just shit myself... again.

>>7325267
Everything in this < Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann.

>>7325309

FUCK! I read that in his voice.

>>7324122
There is a similar scale star, VV Cephei.
It is part of a binary star system.

It is so large, that if it were any larger, pieces of it would literally tear off and form gas giants. It fully occupies the space it can.

also, that nebula that looks like it's flipping you off?
that's 7 light years across. If it were centered on Alpha Centauri, we would be enveloped in the cloud.

>>7325323
That's what's so WRONG.

Every time I learn about some big or tiny thing that's basically saying "fuck you" to every major theory, my brain dies a little from the confusion.

Ponder this: If there exists an advanced alien race out there that has created for itself, a dyson sphere, shouldn't we be able to see it?

Theoretically, yes. Depending on a few things, like the distance, and the type of dyson sphere. Since the sphere absorbs a large amount of the star's energy, the only real way to view the star is by looking for infrared, gamma, and x-rays which penetrate.

However as the distance between us and the star increases, the dimmer the star is going to be.

Additionally if an alien race constructs a matrioska brain, which is basically multiple dyson spheres around a star, they can further capture all the energy that is escaping, making it even harder for us to detect them

Which leaves only one method left - viewing their gravitational effect on the rest of the galaxy.

>>7325353
So what you're saying is that Dark Matter is actually entire galaxies of Dyson Spheres/Matrisoksha brians that we can't see?

>>7325353
Those sneaky bastards... we better get working on our spheres to one up them!

>>7325139
Yeah there's a limit, though not a 'Wall" as you might think of it. There'd just be nowhere for you to go after a while. Although the edge is receding away from you at many times the speed of light, so you could hardly tell.

This had better be archived, /tg/.
This board doesn't usually become so significant. In subject.

>>7325353
What if they put magnets on everything

>>7325377
well, there's also "if it's something, it's part of the universe."

the universe is, after all "everything that is." If the matter of the big bang were expanding INTO something, that would still be a part of the universe. it would be "the stuff outside of that former singularity." which would be observable.

but it isn't. because the origin of the universe was the origin of everything that is.

it's kind of counter intuitive, but the crux of it is that the universe is expanding, but not into anything. asking "what's outside of the universe" and the related question "what was there before the big bang (what was the time before time started?)" are roughly analogous to asking "what's north of the north pole?"

the answer isn't just "nothing." it's "the term itself precludes it from existing."

>>7325347
Then you're doing it wrong. The world is not the consequence of our theories as you seem to believe. Our theories doesn't matter for fuck, the universe just is, and these theories are our attempts to understand it. Obviously we're going to be wrong once and again.

>>7325330
Who's?

>>7325412
Finally someone who can talk sense.

>>7325353

you are forgetting about time

light has been traveling from distant galaxies for 13.2 billion years. that means these super aliens would have to have built their spheres before galaxies had even formed.

now, if we see stars going out without exploding your idea might have traction.

>>7325377
>at many times the speed of light
I thought this was impossible? I mean even gravity can't move faster than the speed of light.

I could be wrong though.

>>7325457
Einstein was convinced it was impossible, but he still made allowances for the expansion of space (I think).

The truth is, the speed of light applies only to things that have mass. Mass is equivalent to energy, so it applies to energy too. Space is neither mass nor energy so it doesn't follow the same rules.

>>7325472
If I remember correctly, doesn't space have energy? Otherwise the universe would not be flat. Then again that is Dark Energy, and no one knows exactly what that is.

>>7325245
If you want to get really into it, three-dimensional space is expanding into a fourth spatial dimension. This is to say, if one were in this fourth spatial dimension, you could orient yourself using four axes: Up/Down, Left/Right, Back/Front, and a fourth axis at 90 degrees to the other three.

Consider the square, a two-dimensional shape. It's an equilateral shape that extends into two axes, where the first is perpendicular to the second.

Then take the cube, a three-dimensional shape. It's a shape with equilateral sides that extends into three axes, where any one axis is perpendicular to the other two.

The fourth-dimensional shape, following this theme, is a tesseract. It's impossible to accurately represent in three-dimensional space, just as you can't accurately represent a cube in two-dimensional space, but it's an equilateral shape with sixteen sides, where each of these sides is at a 90 degree angle to those it shares an edge with. Picture related- it's an approximation of a tesseract in 2D.

>>7325472
But gravity doesn't apply to that either. Yet gravity is "capped" at the speed of light.

Btw, a funny effect of this is if our sun just suddenly winked out of existence we would still orbit it (i.e.nothing) for another 8 minutes.

>>7324423

Really?

>>7325487
This is quite a bit beyond my comfort zone, so I'll qualify and say I don't know dick about it. :P

Space has energy in it, but it isn't energy or matter, so no, rules don't apply.

rolled 4 = 4

>>7325500

HYPERCUUUUUBE!

Holy ass. I only had advanced physics in collage and I am totally fucking lost in this thread.

What are you guys? Clones from Einstein?

>>7325500
If I remember correctly, a tesseract is to this image what a cube is to the shadow of that cube on a flat surface.

I think this is Sagan talking.

>>7325512
I don't think Gravity is capped at the speed of light, but if it is, that tells me our theories about gravity being the curvature of space is wrong.

/tg/, I love you for this thread. It's awesome. You're awesome. Thank you.

>>7324903
>This proximity means that the planet is gravitationally locked, like the Moon to the Earth, so that one side of the planet always faces the star.

>So while its far side is in perpetual freezing darkness – around 50 degrees above absolute zero – its near side is a balmy 2,800C.

> one side of the planet always faces the star.
> far side is in perpetual freezing darkness, its near side is uberhot
Guys, We just found Mordia.

>>7325530

this sort of thing happens here every now and then. I think all the smar/tg/uys are back from winter break.

this thread makes me feel warm inside.

>>7325530
I am not that smart. I can conceptualize the ideas, the ramifications, of the weirdness of physics, but the actual meat of it, the math, is a strange voodoo as far as I'm concerned, worked by wizards and other workers in the arcane.

>>7325538
You're correct. In fact, you're thinking of this scene:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0

>>7325530
No, we just really really really like space

>>7325539
I'm pretty sure it is, yet the curvature theories you refer to are still correct... for some reason I honestly don't remember and would probably fail to regale properly.

>>7325539
Of course it is. That's the primary force behind the unified theory of space-time.

>>7325576
Rest assured that the math was just as bizarre to them until they spent years studying it.

>>7325588
This is sort of why I love physics, and at the same time could never, ever, do it.

Two things that contradict each other can both be true at the same time. Crazy sorcerers...

>>7325577
Oh Sagan you perfectly fabulous cad!

>>7325539
funny thing: gravity is capped at the speed of light. and it is the curvature of space.

you really want to get into mindfuck territory: if you have a pole. a long pole. say, here to mars. and you give the pole a shove, the matter will compress, then decompress along the length at the speed of light until the physical motion energy reaches the other end. so by just pushing it, you'll change it's length for a few minutes.
note I say minutes. earth to mars takes a while.

this actually applies to everything, but the speed of light from one end of a pencil to the other is generally unobservable.

>>7325539
It all comes down to what is true, Relativity or Quantum Mechanics? They both give us good answers, but there is the sticky matter of singularities, like a Black Hole.

>>7325634
String Theory bitches.

>>7325577
Wait, I think I missed this the first time I saw this.

So, Sagan is basically saying that it is tesseractian creatures that are responsible for the "voices in your head" cases we deem as simple lunatics?

mind=blown

>>7325653
String theory is in the process of being discredited.

>>7325634
The thing is, experiments have proven both relativity and quantum mechanics to be true. They're BOTH right, even though they say things that contradict one another in quite a few areas.

It seems to me more and more that the universe doesn't really operate under any specific set of rules, and if you break one or two it doesn't really do anything that noticeable.

Just more proof to me that the universe was a completely unplanned accident.

>>7325634

both can be true and also incomplete at the same time

there is a bit of wiggle room

>>7325660
Hell no. That's like saying evolution is in the process of discredited. Just because there are flaws in the theory doesn't mean the whole of the theory is wrong.

>>7325660
SUCK IT.

>>7325653
I refer you to the xkcd comic. Basic idea:

String theory summed up:

"What if all particles were made of tight bundles of rapidly vibrating strings?"

"What would that imply?"

"Iunno."

>>7325530
Naw, just a pizza delivery guy, who likes to learn in his spare time.

Most people just turn off their brains and coast on cruise control, it is sad.

>>7325673
No, it's actually falling apart.

The foundations of the theory are founded on false premises.

>>7325659

you might be reading too far into it. I don't think he ever >implied it

>>7325675
I can imagine Einstein looking at the String Theorist with a slight smirk on his face

"u mad?"

>>7325681
>xkcd summed up:

>"LOOK AT ME I'M SO MUCH SMARTER THAN ALL OF YOU"

>"ALL OF MY COMICS SOMEHOW MANAGE TO SEEM LIKE THEY'RE TALKING DOWN TO THE AUDIENCE"

>"STICK FIGURES HAVING SEX IS PURE AND BEAUTIFUL"

>>7325696
Stop being an ass, this is a smart thread.

>>7325696
I've always pictured the artist as some emo kid.

We all know there's a fuckhuge black hole at the center of the universe.

>>7325707
>xkcd
>smart

Oh you

>>7325666

one idea being bandied about is that causality is more local than we think it is. things that are far away can break causality from our point of view without the entire universe going down the shitter.

>>7325707
And as unrelated to /tg/ as what I'm posting.

>>7325666
>>7325634
Theories being based on what can be observed are great... until you observe something new and it fucks up everything. We'd have to observe everything to begin to understand it, and we're still very limited there. The best theory will be the one that anticipates the next discovery (which alot of our current theories have, up to a point).

>>7325530
I'll put on record that I'm not really smart. I just try to be reasonable, and I'm much more a philosopher then a scientist.

>>7325713
Much like Einstein, I have SUCH problems believing in quantum mechanics.

I understand that it's nessesary to understand things like computer chips, but I fucking refuse to believe that we have to simply accept there is something we cannot predict.

I can accept that we are limited in our ability, and it's impossible to predict things given our tools and understanding. That's just a limitation of being human. What I DON'T accept is that even if all circumstances would be known I couldn't predict something. I think knowing and understanding all circumstances would allow you to predict anything.

>>7325724
I wasn't calling that comic smart, I was saying to keep that stupid greentext shit out of a decent thread.

On topic, physics gets torn down and built back up based on new discoveries all the time, and each time we come a little closer to understanding what reality actually is. This is reflected in our advancing technology, if you think about it.

To have knowledge of something is to know how to control it, after all.

>>7325673
That comparison is besides the point evolution is not a scientific theory, it is a scientific fact. There is no point in saying String Theory is correct or not, in order to tell the difference between a String Theory Universe and a Non-String Theory Universe would require amounts of energy that are practically impossible to achieve even in the LHC.
>>7325666
Yes, but in different circumstances, the only experiments I am interested in as a scientist are those which can show me the difference.

>>7325768
You seem to imply there is no free will.

You'd better not.

>>7325768
Unfortunately current evidence says you are wrong.

The universe ISN'T Perfectly predictable, because not everything actually follows the rules. Some things just.. well, do whatever.

>>7325768

sucks to be you.

I can't agree with Einsteins idea of space-time because of the idea of future frames already existing undermines free will IMO.

>>7325795
There isn't free will in the way people think there must be. Free will is like god, people just keep moving the goalposts. We prove that the arrangement of your neurons gives you the ability to make decisions, and people just shout "But that's not REAL free will!" even though it looks, sounds, and operates EXACTLY like the mystical force they want would, just minus the magic.

>>7325795
free will is a loaded term...

what he says is that physics is not deterministic anymore
which caused me to lose sleep for a few nights after learning

>>7325768
Hear hear. I have the feeling that what we're calling "[x] is indeterminable" is actually just a short way of saying "our technology and understanding is currently incapable of determining [x]"

Actually, I just remembered something:

Enter the Many Worlds theory. Free will, perfect determinism, and IIRC, quantum physics and relativity all baked into one perfectly feasible and functional little package.

>>7325849
But we have not, and can not, actually observe these "Many Worlds."

If I remember correctly, the theory was plucked warm and stinking from some physicists ass, because he couldn't figure out how to explain the indeterminacy of quantum effects without infinite universes for them to happen in.

>>7325795
When I throw a die at the table, if I know every circumstance, the speed of the die, the rate it turns, the resistance of the table, the quality of the die's material, etc. If I knew every factor, I should be able to predict what facing that die will land on.

Dice don't have free will.

>>7325875
and from thence comes Quantum Computing, the idea that you can have your cake and eat it in 16 universes.

>>7325713
galaxy.

there isn't a center of the universe in conventional terms. it expands everywhere at all times.

that is, not only are the edges stretching out, but the space in between things is as well.

think of an oatmeal raisin cookie. as you bake it, the edges expand, as does the space between raisins.

now imagine that working in every direction, from every single point, to every single point, at all times.

this is what Finite but unbounded means.

>>7325875
Sure, but such is their nature.

I'm just saying, if we have a theory that bridges the gap between quantum physics and relativity AND free will and determinism, and no real arguments for why it doesn't hold true, well, why not go with it?

I honestly believe the Many Worlds theorem to be the solution to many seemingly paradoxical truths, but suffice to say I am not deluded enough to believe it has been thoroughly tested enough to definitely deem it true.

>>7325882
But you do have free will, thus you actually do make your own 'luck'.

>>7325882
If I threw a huge brick at your head, and I knew every memory you had, every gene and environmental effect you'd ever experienced, everything that made you "you", I could predict whether you'd try to duck or not.

But you would still have decided it.

So, there is at least one universe out there in which every one of us is batman.

>>7325849
I'd point out that the "free will" of the multiverse hypothesis isn't Libertarian free will. It's compatibilism.

In other words, they're saying, yeah, the universe is deterministic, but if you redefine free will enough, you TOTALLY get to still have it.

>>7325924
no, not really
there is no quantum state in your brain, thus your mind can be predicted by classical physics

In astronomy, an iron star is a hypothetical type of star that could occur in the universe in 10^1500 years. The premise behind iron stars states that cold fusion occurring via quantum tunnelling would cause the light nuclei in ordinary matter to fuse into iron-56 nuclei. Fission and alpha-particle emission would then make heavy nuclei decay into iron, converting stellar-mass objects to cold spheres of iron

>>7325944
Wat.

>>7325929
Considering our brain is nothing more than electrical and chemical impulses, why not.

I'm not the guy arguing for relativity, I'm just devil's advocate.

>>7325923
Because there isn't any evidence for it. You can choose to BELIEVE it, but it's no more or less likely to be true than any other religion, and science can't operate like that.

>>7325929
This. Predicting human behavior perfectly doesn't diminish free will, it just makes you crazy-sagacious.

>>7325929
Isn't that acting more on instinct than will?

It's not like you freely decide to remove your hand from a hot pan, your body goes "DON'T BE SUCH A RETARD" and makes that choice for you.

>>7325952
a quantum state is when something is two things at once (shröedingers cat)
something that can not be predicted with 100% certainty
thus if something is in a quantum state, we could not predict what how it would behave
your brain however, have no quantum states that are needed to function
thus, if we knew everything about your brain, we could predict everything that you would choose

>>7325983
The point remains that there's nothing non-causal. The way you react is the result of the sum total of all the smallest minutia of every experience you've ever had.

The way you duck away from a hurled brick is just the result of a long, vastly complicated chain of causality that stretches back to the big bang.

>>7325929
Every circumstance he'd been through would condition him to react to certain things a certain way, and every event that occurred before those circumstances was responsible for said circumstances.

Predicting the "decisions" a human mind will "make" is near infinitely more complex than determining what face of a d6 will be up when it stops tumbling, but it is the same principle. Every decision you ever make could be predicted if every circumstance leading up to it were known by the predictor.

He "made" the decision whether or not to try and duck, but you knew what decision he would make.

>>7326014
I see your point, "Wat." rescinded.

And you could always decide to just let it hit you.

But that would be predetermined too. Doesn't mean it's not stupid.

I sometimes have the thought that there are infinite universes where terrible things happen, from my disfigurement/death to that of those I hold most dear. Through some fate or determination, I only experience the fate that steers me away from the more terrible possible outcomes, leading to the life I currently lead, the memories I look back upon. Like a perfect game of Dragon's Lair where all I remember are the correct presses, not being killed all those other times. I'm not the type to test it out by chopping my dick off, but I ponder this idea a bit more then needed.

>>7325961
>>7325929
Basically: Lelouche and Light Yagami don't override freewill, they just tend to predict it.

Well, actually, they could override it with magic but that's... magic.

I've come to the conclusion that free will as people wost often describe it no longer works. In a snap decision, such as rather to duck a brick, you don't have much choice, but I do think that we have the freedom to change our beliefs, which in turn influence our snap actions. My circumstances may push me toward a certain perspective, but through my own thought processes (creativity and such) I can work to a conclusion that would not be predictable just knowing the inputs. So, how does a lack of free will play into SCIENCE and ART for those advocating the position?

I never said free will wasn't real, I just said that it wasn't what people wanted it to be.

Thread's gone off the first page, so shall we make another?

>>7325956
Not everything has to be provable by deductive science. A majority of the scientific community believes in the Many Worlds interpretation, in fact, even if it is only based on inductive science.

And I think you'd agree there's a little more to this than just mere religion. Especially as some scientists have claimed there are not-so-distant technologies that will allow us to definitely prove/disprove the Many Worlds theorem.

>>7326120
Might as well, this is one of the few worthwhile threads on /tg/ 'sides Elfslayer.

For the first three minutes of the universe, there were no atoms. It was just elementary particles. Prior to that, the entire universe was too hot for nuclear fusion to take place.

Read that again. The entire universe was too hot for nuclear fusion.

In fact, for the first twenty or so minutes after the big bang, the universe was hotter than the inside of the hottest star that exists today.

>>7326120
I would certainly follow along if there were another.

>>7326071
Calling it free will seems misleading, to me, when you have no choice in the choices you make. They're determined long before you exist by causality.

>>7325944
Though it has been theorized that the mind functions in a manner comparable to quantum computing, or at the very least fall into the nondeterministic finite state machine category.

The interesting thing to me about the pro and anti free will debate is that both sides use the exact same evidence. It's really not an actual scientific debate as much as a question of what the definition of free will is (whether or not a choice is "yours" if it's chosen based on previously existing events and materials)

>>7326175
welcome to philosophy
quasi-pseudo-science for all!

>>7326194

Check it.

>>7325768
I had those same problems with it for a long time too, but the Uncertainty Principle states that at subatomic scales, any method of measuring either the position or velocity of a particle, alters the position or velocity, thus we know where the particle was and how it was moving BEFORE the measurement, but have no idea what its doing now. Take visual measurements for example. We have some ligh-emitting thing we are using to measure the distance to another object. Because the lightsource is vibrating, we can never know at exactly what phase the light wave will strike the measured object, thus we can measure with a margine of error no smaller than the wavelength of light used.

>>7324045
There are natural forms of FTL travel, but they involve funky things like artificial wormholes and shoop-de-woop blackholes being harnessed to punch energy beyond a million. And I guess Mass Effect is kind of close o hard science FTL. Sort of. Just has FANTASY ELEMENT ZERO.

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/7323541/ For great justice