Thread: Space image of week.

here goes!

Flaring, active regions of our sun are highlighted in this new image combining observations from several telescopes. High-energy X-rays from NASA's Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array (NuSTAR) are shown in blue; low-energy X-rays from Japan's Hinode spacecraft are green; and extreme ultraviolet light from NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) is yellow and red.

All three telescopes captured their solar images around the same time on April 29, 2015. The NuSTAR image is a mosaic made from combining smaller images.

This pluto stuff is cool - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/07/sc...tion.html?_r=0

I like this thread

Our solar system. Pluto is somewhere in there, just hard to see.

Not actually a space image, but still worth posting.


Another Earth.
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-discovers...192512073.html

NASA astronomers announced Thursday that they had found an Earth-like planet roughly 1,400 light years away.

The newly discovered Kepler-452b, which is in the Cygnus constellation, orbits a star from what is called the habitable zone: the distance at which water can pool on the surface of a planet.

Other planets, such as Kepler-186f, have been discovered in this sweet Goldilocks spot that is neither too close nor too far to potentially sustain life.

But Kepler-452b is different because it circles a G2-type star — just like our sun.

“There’s really one place that we know has life in the universe, and that’s Earth, so finding another planet around a star that’s very similar to our sun is quite exciting,” NASA astronomer Jeff Coughlin said in an interview with Yahoo News.

UR - if this has life on it (which i doubt) how would you feel about how "special" earth is now (from that other thread you posted)

Originally Posted by Valar Morghulis

UR - if this has life on it (which i doubt) how would you feel about how "special" earth is now (from that other thread you posted)

It doesn't. It only has 2 out of the 50.
Earth sized and Goldilocks zone. I think this planet further validates just how impossible the odds are for our planet. Like I said, like winning the lottery every day for the rest of your life while being attacked by a polar bear riding a shark, every day for the rest of your life.


But- to play advocate, should this planet have say 15% of the requirements, or life as you say, then by all means I would switch over to your side. For now, the probability infinitely favors negatory.

Originally Posted by underrated29

It doesn't. It only has 2 out of the 50.
Earth sized and Goldilocks zone. I think this planet further validates just how impossible the odds are for our planet. Like I said, like winning the lottery every day for the rest of your life while being attacked by a polar bear riding a shark, every day for the rest of your life.


But- to play advocate, should this planet have say 15% of the requirements, or life as you say, then by all means I would switch over to your side. For now, the probability infinitely favors negatory.

Haha! I enjoyd your rebuttal.

Has more then 2, look at its year length ,class of star, and mass.

Originally Posted by ShaneFalco

Has more then 2, look at its year length ,class of star, and mass.

Year length has nothing to do with it. That is not a requirement for life. Neither is the type of star I believe either. Life can be found even around a red dwarf for ex, but that is closer. As from what I remember the age of the star is significant. Mass of the planet or star? Star I think is significant but planet, as far as I know is not one of them.

From the same article:

"As there is a multiplicity of creatures on earth, so there may be other beings, intelligent, created by God. This does not conflict with our faith, because we cannot put limits on the creative freedom of God."

Beautifully stated Joe.

Originally Posted by underrated29

Year length has nothing to do with it. That is not a requirement for life. Neither is the type of star I believe either. Life can be found even around a red dwarf for ex, but that is closer. As from what I remember the age of the star is significant. Mass of the planet or star? Star I think is significant but planet, as far as I know is not one of them.

year length is very similar to ours, is what i was talking about, not life per say.

But Kepler-452b is different because it circles a G2-type star — just like our sun.

The class of star does matter somewhat, sure there could be life around a red dwarf, but the more similar to our sun, the better the chance is apparently.


Mass in terms of what you weigh on the planet and how hard it is to move around on the surface.

Originally Posted by ShaneFalco

year length is very similar to ours, is what i was talking about, not life per say.

The class of star does matter somewhat, sure there could be life around a red dwarf, but the more similar to our sun, the better the chance is apparently.


Mass in terms of what you weigh on the planet and how hard it is to move around on the surface.

Ahh got ya. I see what you mean. Thought you were saying it shared more than a couple of the Requirements for life, which it does not. Similarities to earth though it does have many indeed. Which is very exciting. Hopefully they can establish more info on the atmosphere of the planet. That will tell a ton of useful info

So i am wondering if anyone has heard the idea that everything orbits a universal center of mass?

In terms of the moon orbits the earth, the earth orbits the sun, the sun could orbit a group of stars, then the group of stars orbits the galactic center, the Milky Way in its turn revolves around the gravity center of the Local Group which includes Andromeda and the Magellan Clouds. The Local Group in turn orbits some point within the Virgo Supercluster.

Then what could that orbit?

Something so massive and big that we dont really see it? We are currently finding larger and larger known objects in the universe, but are limited by but how far we can see.


With this recent discovery.

http://www.gizmag.com/largest-featur...rse-grb/38778/


Could it be possible that our entire known universe is orbiting something else? If we could actually see that group in the article, it would take up 1/3 of the sky. Think how massive that is in space terms.
Just a theory i found interesting on some science site.