Русский New site

Advanced search

[ New messages · Forum rules · Members ]
Page 46 of 64«1244454647486364»
Forum » SpaceEngine » Science and Astronomy Discussions » Science and Astronomy Questions
Science and Astronomy Questions
apenpaapDate: Friday, 12.08.2016, 14:27 | Message # 676
World Builder
Group: Users
Antarctica
Messages: 1063
Status: Offline
That's a systematic name, which all minor planets get. 2011 is the date of the first observation, the K means it was in the first half of June (A being first half of January, X second half of December if I remember correctly). T19 refers to its order of discovery within that half of June (Going from A to Z, then A1 to Z1, then A2 to Z2, etc).




I occasionally stream at http://www.twitch.tv/magistermystax. Sometimes SE, sometimes other games.
 
steeljaw354Date: Friday, 12.08.2016, 14:30 | Message # 677
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
2011? Why didn't they reveal the object back then?
 
apenpaapDate: Friday, 12.08.2016, 15:07 | Message # 678
World Builder
Group: Users
Antarctica
Messages: 1063
Status: Offline
It's pretty common for there to be a few years between observations and 'discovery' due to the sheer number of observations done. Eris, for example, is 2003 UB313, even though it was discovered in 2005. In this case, it's because apparently the 2011 observations were mistakenly catalogued as a prograde centaur, which was then lost.




I occasionally stream at http://www.twitch.tv/magistermystax. Sometimes SE, sometimes other games.
 
steeljaw354Date: Friday, 12.08.2016, 15:11 | Message # 679
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
Well they also did pre-recovery dates or something and Eris was first spotted in 1954 but nobody noticed, along with the other objects at later dates. They actually discovered the first exoplanet in 1917 but it wasn't noticed http://www.seeker.com/100-yea....88.html

Edited by steeljaw354 - Friday, 12.08.2016, 15:18
 
midtskogenDate: Friday, 12.08.2016, 19:32 | Message # 680
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Norway
Messages: 1668
Status: Offline
And where is all the dark matter?




NIL DIFFICILE VOLENTI
 
WatsisnameDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 04:42 | Message # 681
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2610
Status: Offline
Whoever invented the universe really likes to make us work hard to figure out how it works. tongue




 
DoctorOfSpaceDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 04:57 | Message # 682
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
Pirate
Messages: 3599
Status: Offline
If the universe is a simulation it could be setup in a way that prevents those within the simulation from figuring it out. That would be utterly depressing.




Intel Core i7-5820K 4.2GHz 6-Core Processor
G.Skill Ripjaws V Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4-2400 Memory
EVGA GTX 980 Ti SC 6GB
 
spacerDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 05:59 | Message # 683
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Israel
Messages: 1257
Status: Offline
DoctorOfSpace, ohhh sound like metrix!! pls universe!! dont be like that!!




"we began as wanderers, and we are wanderers still"
-carl sagan

-space engine photographer
 
JackDoleDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 12:15 | Message # 684
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1735
Status: Online
The reason why no dark matter is found could simply be that there is no dark matter. biggrin

Previously, people have invented gods to explain things that they did not understand. For example, lightning and thunder.

Today people invent dark matter and dark energy, when they realize that nature does not behave as their theories predicted.

Just as formerly simply new epicycles were added to the Ptolemaic system when observations showed that something is wrong! dry





Don't forget to look here.

 
WatsisnameDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 12:21 | Message # 685
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2610
Status: Offline
Either there is dark matter, or our understanding of gravity is very broken, and we are pretty sure it is not the latter. smile

I talk about more of the details here.





 
JackDoleDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 12:44 | Message # 686
Star Engineer
Group: Local Moderators
Germany
Messages: 1735
Status: Online
Quote Watsisname ()
Either there is dark matter, or our understanding of gravity is very broken,

More broken than the geocentric model? dry





Don't forget to look here.

 
WatsisnameDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 13:17 | Message # 687
Galaxy Architect
Group: Global Moderators
United States
Messages: 2610
Status: Offline
Broken in the sense that it disagrees with:

-Galactic rotation curves
-Velocity dispersion
-Gravitational lensing
-Cosmic web formation
-Angular size of CMB fluctuations
-Gravity of the Bullet Cluster vs. where most of the visible matter is.

And we don't know of any unique fix to gravity to make it work with all of those simultaneously. This isn't like "oh, orbits are ellipses around the sun instead of circles around the Earth". This is like something is so wrong with gravity that you need a bunch of different and contrived modifications to get it to work.

Or you could just suppose there's actually more matter there and always has been from the Big Bang. And that works beautifully.





 
steeljaw354Date: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 13:50 | Message # 688
World Builder
Group: Users
Pirate
Messages: 862
Status: Offline
Think about this for a second, think about what we could be inside of

 
midtskogenDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 14:01 | Message # 689
Star Engineer
Group: Users
Norway
Messages: 1668
Status: Offline
Quote Watsisname ()
Either there is dark matter, or our understanding of gravity is very broken, and we are pretty sure it is not the latter.

Or we could just say that dark matter exists, but we can't say what it is, whether it's made up of particles, is some obscure force or something else, as long as we have laws accounting for all the observations we make.

This is similar to Newton's take on gravity. He refused to speculate about its nature:

Quote Newton
"Hactenus phænomena cœlorum & maris nostri per vim gravitatis exposui, sed causam gravitatis nondum assignavi. [...] Satis est quod gravitas revera detur et agat secundum leges a nobis expositas, & ad corporum cœlestium et maris nostri motus omnes sufficiat.


"So far I've explained the phenomena of the skies and the sea through the force of gravity, but I have not yet assigned the cause of gravity. [...] It is sufficient that gravity actually exists and acts according to the laws presented, and is sufficient for all motions of heavenly bodies and our sea".





NIL DIFFICILE VOLENTI
 
HuesudoDate: Saturday, 13.08.2016, 14:17 | Message # 690
Observer
Group: Users
Spain
Messages: 11
Status: Offline
My money is on lots of black holes, neutron stars, white dwarves, quadrillions of brown dwarves, and a ludicrous ammount of neutrinos.
 
Forum » SpaceEngine » Science and Astronomy Discussions » Science and Astronomy Questions
Page 46 of 64«1244454647486364»
Search: