 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
The attached image uses data from the "6dF Galaxy Survey"
at http://www.aao.gov.au/local/www/6df/ to visualize our
closest neighbours up to about 2 billion light years ;)
Some noteworthy points:
1. Each dot represents a *galaxy*
2. About 100K galaxies are shown. Parsing takes
a few minutes, but render is actually very fast.
3. The empty cones are a result of not being able to
observe through the disk of our own Galaxy
4. The outward thinning is caused by not observing
fainter galaxies at larger distancees.
5. The colors are not very scientific ;)
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'universe.png' (451 KB)
Preview of image 'universe.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfr de> wrote:
> The attached image uses data from the "6dF Galaxy Survey"
> at http://www.aao.gov.au/local/www/6df/ to visualize our
> closest neighbours up to about 2 billion light years ;)
>
> Some noteworthy points:
>
> 1. Each dot represents a *galaxy*
> 2. About 100K galaxies are shown. Parsing takes
> a few minutes, but render is actually very fast.
You know this deserves an animation, right? :)
even a simple rotation will do, please... :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I can see my house.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> You know this deserves an animation, right? :)
hmm ... maybe I'll give it a try someday ;)
But there are already fly-through videos on the site of the
survey itself, which you might find of interest:
http://www.aao.gov.au/local/www/6df/About/index.html
Look at the bottom of the page. In fact, some seem to be
done by P. Bourke who is no stranger to these newgroups ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> You know this deserves an animation, right? :)
>
> even a simple rotation will do, please... :)
Actually that would break so many laws of physics that it hurts.
For the whole group of galaxies to rotate in a short time (or,
alternatively, for the camera to go around them), the speeds involved
would make the speed of light be like the speed of continental drift to
a squirrel. Not to talk that even if they (or the camera) could move
that fast, the resulting image would be... interesting.
Of course you could argue that the animation represents a series of
still photos taken millions of years apart, ie. the video has been "sped
up" by a humongous amount. However, by the billions of years involved in
that process the galaxies would have probably changed locations rather
visibly.
(Yeah, I know, I'm nitpicking really badly here. ;) )
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"St." <dot### [at] dotcom> a écrit dans le message de news:
4a025f03$1@news.povray.org...
>I can see my house.
>
ROTFL
Marc
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
St. wrote:
> I can see my house.
>
In the Total Perspective Vortex? Where's Zaphod Beeblebrox? ;-)
-=- Larry -=-
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Larry Hudson <org### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> St. wrote:
> > I can see my house.
> >
> In the Total Perspective Vortex? Where's Zaphod Beeblebrox? ;-)
Over there, eating the piece of cake that drives the whole thing... :-D
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > You know this deserves an animation, right? :)
> >
> > even a simple rotation will do, please... :)
>
> Actually that would break so many laws of physics that it hurts.
>
> For the whole group of galaxies to rotate in a short time (or,
> alternatively, for the camera to go around them), the speeds involved
> would make the speed of light be like the speed of continental drift to
> a squirrel. Not to talk that even if they (or the camera) could move
> that fast, the resulting image would be... interesting.
This is actually doable, theoretically, thanks to relativistic time dilation.
The challenges will be:
- A propulsion system to get to relativistic speed. It needs to be
long and slow (a year or so) to avoid squashing the equipment (and
astronauts?) with excessive G forces.
- Avoiding massive hull damage from slamming violently into stray
hydrogen atoms.
- Decoding the image. The entire universe will appear confined to a
brilliant speck of gamma radiation in the direction of travel, due
to extreme blue shift and abberation of light.
- Finding the way back home. In the three years aboard the space
craft, billions of years will have elapsed on Earth, during which:
- You will die (unless the space craft is manned, and you're
in it).
- The Sun will have made dozens of orbits around the galaxy.
Gravitational perturbations from dark matter and at least
100,000,000,000 other stars will make this a bear to
calculate.
- The Milky Way will have made at least one pass by the Great
Andromeda Galaxy (M31). Even if the two galaxies don't
merge, the Milky Way will be unrecognizable due to tidal
effects. No telling where old Sol will be; it may even be
ejected from the galaxy, or captured by M31.
- The Sun will have shrunk to a white dwarf.
- Prior to that, the Earth will have long been incinerated by
the Sun.
Bon Voyage!
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'local_affairs.png' (6 KB)
Preview of image 'local_affairs.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Cousin Ricky" <ric### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> > nemesis wrote:
> > > You know this deserves an animation, right? :)
> > >
> > > even a simple rotation will do, please... :)
> >
> > Actually that would break so many laws of physics that it hurts.
> >
> > For the whole group of galaxies to rotate in a short time (or,
> > alternatively, for the camera to go around them), the speeds involved
> > would make the speed of light be like the speed of continental drift to
> > a squirrel. Not to talk that even if they (or the camera) could move
> > that fast, the resulting image would be... interesting.
>
> This is actually doable, theoretically, thanks to relativistic time dilation.
> The challenges will be:
[snip challenges]
> Bon Voyage!
Poor fools. All you need to do is use your hyperdrive to circumnavigate the
universe, dropping out occasionally to take a photo, then return to earth in
time for a cup of tea before lunch.
;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Poor fools. All you need to do is use your hyperdrive to circumnavigate the
> universe, dropping out occasionally to take a photo, then return to earth in
> time for a cup of tea before lunch.
Wouldn't this break the fundamental law that information cannot be
transported between two points faster than c?
In other words, you would have to travel from Earth to an extreme
point in the visible Universe, then to the other extreme, and then back
to Earth, all the while taking photos along the way. This would mean
that you are transporting information between humongous distances in a
short period of time.
Even if "hyperdrive" would be based on warping space, would this
warping happen faster than c? Wouldn't it break the fundamental principle?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Actually that would break so many laws of physics that it hurts.
only if you think of it as rotating the universe, and not
as rotating a 3d map of the universe, as I understood it ;)
Also, this view is *not* a snapshot of the universe at any given
time, as the galaxies at the center are current and the galaxies
at the border are seen as they were *two billion years* ago.
I toyed with the idea of compensating at least for the expansion
of the universe but it doesn't really make sense because that also
doesn't show you how the universe looks now with all their proper
motion, interaction, starforming and whatever.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Christian Froeschlin <chr### [at] chrfrde> wrote:
> Also, this view is *not* a snapshot of the universe at any given
> time, as the galaxies at the center are current and the galaxies
> at the border are seen as they were *two billion years* ago.
Oooh, this reminds me of the delicate task of backing up an Oracle database
while customers are still using it. (My professor's definition of a "large"
database: one which, if you shut it down to do a backup, your company would go
out of business in the time it takes to do the backup.)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Among other things, Warp saw fit to write:
> Wouldn't this break the fundamental law that information cannot be
> transported between two points faster than c?
Fundamental laws are made to be broken. :D
Or rather, we never know how fundamental the laws we know now really are.
--
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Bill Pragnell wrote:
> > Poor fools. All you need to do is use your hyperdrive to circumnavigate the
> > universe, dropping out occasionally to take a photo, then return to earth in
> > time for a cup of tea before lunch.
>
> Wouldn't this break the fundamental law that information cannot be
> transported between two points faster than c?
Oh, you're no fun. :-)
> Even if "hyperdrive" would be based on warping space, would this
> warping happen faster than c? Wouldn't it break the fundamental principle?
Leaving aside popular notions of 'hyperdrive', which usually seems to involve
travel in some other domain with higher speed limits... I thought spacetime
wormholes were permitted by general relativity (provided you can find some
exotic matter)? Or is that an outdated idea these days?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Bill Pragnell" <bil### [at] hotmailcom> schreef in bericht
news:web.4a04a8f881e9769969f956610@news.povray.org...
>
> Leaving aside popular notions of 'hyperdrive', which usually seems to
> involve
> travel in some other domain with higher speed limits... I thought
> spacetime
> wormholes were permitted by general relativity (provided you can find some
> exotic matter)? Or is that an outdated idea these days?
If I have understood things correctly, you can travel instantaneously by
wormhole from one 'side' of the universe to the other....
Thomas
ps I do that all the time in my dreams....
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> Leaving aside popular notions of 'hyperdrive', which usually seems to involve
> travel in some other domain with higher speed limits... I thought spacetime
> wormholes were permitted by general relativity (provided you can find some
> exotic matter)? Or is that an outdated idea these days?
A "wormhole" requires that space is already shaped in a certain way
that allows a "shortcut" to be created. What if space is *not* shaped
that way? How do you create the wormhole?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Bill Pragnell wrote:
> > Leaving aside popular notions of 'hyperdrive', which usually seems to involve
> > travel in some other domain with higher speed limits... I thought spacetime
> > wormholes were permitted by general relativity (provided you can find some
> > exotic matter)? Or is that an outdated idea these days?
>
> A "wormhole" requires that space is already shaped in a certain way
> that allows a "shortcut" to be created. What if space is *not* shaped
> that way? How do you create the wormhole?
I'm (definitely) no expert, but most things I've read on this appear to favour
taking a naturally-occurring quantum wormhole and somehow 'growing' it. The
energy and mass this would appear to require (especially if you want tidal
forces benign enough to make it traversible) are stunning, and of course should
be exotic.
As for making your wormhole an actual shortcut, well, it all depends on where
the other end comes out and how long (locally) the throat is.
I would say that, at least for now, all bets are off. :)
This list is interesting, although I have no idea what credentials the author
has:
https://webfiles.uci.edu/erodrigo/www/WormholeFAQ.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> You know this deserves an animation, right? :)
>
> even a simple rotation will do, please... :)
Better late than never ;)
http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.animations/thread/%3C4ab01be4%40news.povray.org%3E/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
