# This is the most detailed map yet of our place in the universe



## Wrigleyvillain (Sep 5, 2014)

> In a fascinating new study for _Nature_, a team of scientists mapped thousands of galaxies in our immediate vicinity, and discovered that the Milky Way is part of a jaw-droppingly massive "supercluster" of galaxies that they named Laniakea.
> 
> This structure is much, much, _much_ bigger than astronomers had previously realized. Laniakea contains more than 100,000 galaxies, stretches 500 million light years across, and looks something like this (the Milky Way is just a speck located on one of its fringes on the right):
> 
> ...


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Sep 5, 2014)

How can there _not_ be abundant life out there?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 5, 2014)

They got this map how?


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Sep 5, 2014)

> The team of scientists, led by R. Brent Tully of the University of Hawaii, first studied the motion of some 8,000 galaxies in our neighborhood. By doing so, they could map out certain patterns. The universe overall has been expanding ever since the Big Bang. But the team also found that gravity was pulling some galaxies_toward_ each other.
> 
> That helped them build the graph below, where galaxies moving away from us are shown in red, and the galaxies moving toward us in blue.



(See article for graph)


----------



## Bow (Sep 5, 2014)

Wrigleyvillain said:


> How can there not be abundant life out there?


There is, we just have not found them yet



TheMailMan78 said:


> They got this map how?


AAA,


----------



## WhiteLotus (Sep 5, 2014)

It makes you feel so small...


----------



## Tallencor (Sep 5, 2014)

We are always thinking of the idea of being born at the right interval in time to see what is to be inc life on other planets. From what I am to understand unless we learn to bend space we will never be able to travel fast enough (light) to know in a single lifetime.


----------



## Nordic (Sep 5, 2014)

I imagine this map to be similar to old world maps in that we hardly know what is really out there yet.


----------



## Sasqui (Sep 5, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> They got this map how?



If you are unable to read, watch the video.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Sep 5, 2014)

Wrigleyvillain said:


> How can there _not_ be abundant life out there?



Its out there. Its impossible that there isn't. If there wasn't, that's an awfully big waste of space. (Contact)


----------



## droopyRO (Sep 5, 2014)

> There is, we just have not found them yet


Am i the only average brain to think that we might be the only ones alive at the moment ? i best think that the number of equal or higher development species than ours is in the range of 0 to infinity. And in other news people keep killing each other for food, power, religion or territory.


----------



## Countryside (Sep 5, 2014)

Galaxy map very beautiful, Astrophysics is very interesting, Respect Neil deGrasse Tyson



james888 said:


> I imagine this map to be similar to old world maps in that we hardly know what is really out there yet.



Excellent Old World map


----------



## Tallencor (Sep 5, 2014)

droopyRO said:


> Am i the only average brain to think that we might be the only ones alive at the moment ? i best think that the number of equal or higher development species than ours is in the range of 0 to infinity. And in other news people keep killing each other for food, power, religion or territory.


Nope I have often thought that we may be the first. It is a possibility after all. I am not religious but "Made in his image comes to mind" I  also saw a doc that asked the question if xtremeophiles may exist on other planets. If that is the case it still counts as life. Are we the higher form of life? The most rational? It's just to hard to make an informed decision on the subject right now.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Sep 5, 2014)

I think the possibility of us being considered intelligent by a race that's capable of galactic travel is somewhat laughable....
It is likely other races have also evolved within our perceived quantum range...


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 5, 2014)

Scientist can't even predict the path of a Hurricane on Earth with 100% accuracy yet you guys buy into they mapped the universe. Totally legit.


----------



## Nordic (Sep 5, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Scientist can't even predict the path of a Hurricane on Earth with 100% accuracy yet you guys buy into they mapped the universe. Totally legit.





james888 said:


> I imagine this map to be similar to old world maps in that we hardly know what is really out there yet.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Sep 5, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Scientist can't even predict the path of a Hurricane on Earth with 100% accuracy yet you guys buy into they mapped the universe. Totally legit.


Ahhh Thank you!
Coming from someone that believes a book of fairy tales, that's actually a compliment.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 5, 2014)

jmcslob said:


> Ahhh Thank you!
> Coming from someone that believes a book of fairy tales, that's actually a compliment.


Doesn't matter what I believe in morally. Simple deductive thinking pretty much chalks that map up to really expensive guessing and artistic interpretation. Sorry but that's a torpedo of truth and you know what the best part is? ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE ME WRONG.

@ james888 That map is too kind. I was thing more of a cave painting at this point in our real knowledge of the universe.


----------



## The Von Matrices (Sep 5, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Scientist can't even predict the path of a Hurricane on Earth with 100% accuracy yet you guys buy into they mapped the universe. Totally legit.



You're arguing that we shouldn't make predictions (or maps) until we're 100% confident they're accurate, which is a silly philosophy.  Maps that are mostly right are very useful; just consider that old map in this thread.  If someone had never seen a map of the earth before, they could plan a mostly correct route for a ship to circumnavigate the planet using that map.  You would be much worse off just guessing where to go.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 5, 2014)

That can't be happenstance.  Assuming the rendering is accurate, there is clearly an unknown force at work.


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Sep 5, 2014)

One can't _prove_ that God as depicted in the Bible (or that of any religion of man) doesn't exist either but that doesn't mean I could ever actually believe any of it as fact for a second.

And as for other life out there, yes it is probably only a matter of time but the real question is do we actually *want *them to be aware of us?

Though, also, when I say "life" I don't necessarily mean highly-evolved.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 5, 2014)

_No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong._  --Albert Einstein


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 5, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> You're arguing that we shouldn't make predictions (or maps) until we're 100% confident they're accurate, which is a silly philosophy.  Maps that are mostly right are very useful; just consider that old map in this thread.  If someone had never seen a map of the earth before, they could plan a mostly correct route for a ship to circumnavigate the planet using that map.  You would be much worse off just guessing where to go.


No of course not. I'm saying that old map posted above was from travels and exploring. It was a rough, but still an educated map based off of "boot on the ground" so to speak. Is it accurate? not 100% no but you could use it to sail. The space map above is like trying to map a million New York City's under cloud cover with the naked eye from the moon. Until we get "out there" and see how light bends over time and distance its all guessing from a non-controlled environment. Hell our own sun effects how we receive light. Looking at the stars and making little fictional maps is useless. Money would be better spent getting OUT THERE......instead we have to support a welfare state.......but that's a different argument.



Wrigleyvillain said:


> One can't _prove_ that God as depicted in the Bible (or that of any religion of man) doesn't exist either but that doesn't mean I could ever actually believe any of it as fact for a second.
> And as for other life out there, yes it is probably only a matter of time but the real question is do we actually *want *them to be aware of us?
> Though, also, when I say "life" I don't necessarily mean highly-evolved.


I always love how when someone questions science they are immediately attacked as some close minded religious fanatic. How dare anyone question science. Its never been wrong.......oh wait. Remember when philosophers and artists were as respected as Scientists? Do you know why? Because philosophers questioned Science and made it prove itself. Science in turned advanced and made philosophers question themselves which was all recorded by the artist. It used to be a valuable trade off to civilization. It advanced us leaps and bounds in a very short time. Now if you question the "establishment" its become heresy. The scientific community as a whole has become what its strived against for centuries. A religion that is close minded to open thought and is subject to only internal review. Just like the Roman Catholic Church of days past.

Just for the record I do believe in a divine creator. However I also believe in evolution, mans relative small place in the universe and most of science as a whole. I just as an artist question everything to common sense facts based off decades of study of artistic history. Instead of attacking people with contrasting views with insults of inferior education you might want to question what you are really arguing for.

Jus sayin.


----------



## Countryside (Sep 5, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Scientist can't even predict the path of a Hurricane on Earth with 100% accuracy yet you guys buy into they mapped the universe. Totally legit.


----------



## Mindweaver (Sep 5, 2014)

How far did they have to stand back to get all the stars/galaxies in to take that picture?

*EDIT: At this point I think we have a better chance of something finding us then us finding them...*


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 5, 2014)

There's enough UFO and USO cases with physical evidence to prove that they already have found us and did so long ago.  It is statistically impossible for life to only exist on Earth.  The question isn't whether or not there is life on other planets, it is how abundant is it?  The reason why we can't definitely answer that question is because planets are really hard to spot, let alone analyze for the ability to support life.


----------



## Countryside (Sep 6, 2014)

I do not feel obliged to believe the the same God who endowed us with Sense, Reason, and Intellect had also intended us to forego their use.

Galileo Galilei


----------



## 64K (Sep 6, 2014)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It is statistically impossible for life to only exist on Earth.



Herein lies the problem. We have no statistics. We have no data. We can only postulate. We have no data as to the ratio of probable life on any other planets. We can't say that in a sample of one trillion planets on average it produces X percentage of life and Z percentage of intelligent life. We have no basis of data to make any statistics. imo the Universe was teeming with life in the past and also is in the present but that's just my opinion.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 6, 2014)

Kepler got the data.

Astronomers Estimate One in Five Sol-Like Stars Have Planets Conducive to Life


> How many of the 200 billion stars in our galaxy have potentially habitable planets?
> 
> Based on a statistical analysis of all the Kepler observations, astronomers at UC Berkeley and University of Hawaii, Manoa now estimate that one in five stars like the sun have planets about the size of Earth and a surface temperature conducive to life.
> 
> Given that about 20 percent of stars are sun-like, the researchers say, that amounts to *several tens of billions of potentially habitable, Earth-size planets in the Milky Way* Galaxy.


As per the original post, we now know that the Milky Way is a tiny part of the Laniakea supercluster and that is a tiny part of the universe.  There are trillions of planets capable of sustaining life in Laniakea alone--never mind the rest of the universe.

And this is only looking at life of Sol-like planets.  Red dwarfs and other stars can also have planets in orbit that could sustain life.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 6, 2014)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Kepler got the data.
> 
> Astronomers Estimate One in Five Sol-Like Stars Have Planets Conducive to Life
> As per the original post, we now know that the Milky Way is a tiny part of the Laniakea supercluster and that is a tiny part of the universe.  There are trillions of planets capable of sustaining life in Laniakea alone--never mind the rest of the universe.
> ...



I don't understand why people think that the other planets need to be EXACTLY like Earth to support life? Just because we cannot survive in let's say temperatures of 100°C+ doesn't mean something else can't. 
If humans can't survive on the bottom of the ocean because of extreme pressure that doesn't mean something else can't (and we all know there is life down there).

So what exactly is potentially habitable? Are we looking at it from our perspective, where the "habitable" is ~20°C, correct oxygen % etc.?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 6, 2014)

If you really want the details, read up on the Kepler program.  In short, they're looking for liquid water.  Evolutionary biology on Earth suggests all life came from the oceans.  Because of this, their focus for establishing whether or not life can exist on whether or not there is an abundance of liquid surface water.  As the article says, just because a planet is habitable doesn't mean it is inhabited.


----------



## Countryside (Sep 6, 2014)

64K said:


> Herein lies the problem. We have no statistics. We have no data. We can only postulate. We have no data as to the ratio of probable life on any other planets. We can't say that in a sample of one trillion planets on average it produces X percentage of life and Z percentage of intelligent life. We have no basis of data to make any statistics. imo the Universe was teeming with life in the past and also is in the present but that's just my opinion.



Are We Alone in the Universe Something to think about.

We have something called periodic table it took modern astrophysics to determine the origin of chemical elements (the elements of the periodic table which we are made of)

When you look at the ingredients of the universe the nr 1 ingredient is hydrogen next is helium, oxygen, carbon and nitrogen those are the top ingredients in the universe. And then we look at earth because we like to think that we are special  but what are we made of so whats the nr 1 molecule in the body its Water and whats water made of H2O hydrogen and oxygen in fact when you rank the elements in the human body with the exception of helium witch is chemically inert useless to you for any reason other then to inhale and sound like a little child, so nr 1 in the human body is hydrogen nr 2 oxygen nr 3 carbon nr 4 nitrogen so we learned in the last 50 years that not only do we exist in this universe It is the universe itself that exist in us. Have we been made of some rare isotope of wulalala you would have arguments that we are something special. *And now Are we alone in the universe? We are made of the most common ingredients there are *and our chemistry is based on carbon, Carbon is the most chemically active ingredient in the entire periodic table if you would to find chemistry on witch to base something really complex called Life you would base it on carbon , Carbon is like the fourth most abundant ingredient in the Universe, its not rare you can make more molecules out of carbon then you can all other kinds of molecules combined *so if we asks ourselves are we alone in the universe i will tell you it would be inexcusably egocentric to suggest that we are alone in the cosmos, the chemistry is too rich to declare that, the universe to big, there are more stars in the universe then grains of sand in all the beaches in the world. *To say we are alone in the universe, no we havent found life outside of earth yet but we are looking havet looked very far yet  galaxy is so big we have looked only a tiny bit but we are looking. So given that information Life may be inevitable.


----------



## Mindweaver (Sep 6, 2014)

Let's say out of that 500 million light years of galaxies that make up the supercluster, the closest thing to us is only one light year away... That is still nearly 6 trillion miles away!  I believe there is something else out there, but it's beyond our reach.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 6, 2014)

And remember, the light and other radiation we are receiving from distant places in the universe likely doesn't even exist any more today but we have no way of knowing that until it reaches us.  If the sun went lights out, we wouldn't even know it for over 8 minutes.


----------



## 64K (Sep 6, 2014)

FordGT90Concept said:


> And remember, the light and other radiation we are receiving from distant places in the universe likely doesn't even exist any more today but we have no way of knowing that until it reaches us.  If the sun went lights out, we wouldn't even know it for over 8 minutes.



That's a problem too. Say we did pick up a transmission from an intelligent species tomorrow that is 1 million light years from us. There is no way to answer without another 1 million year pause. Did they stop listening for a reply in our area? Probably, but 2 million years goes by and anything could have happened to that species to prevent a reply. War, disease, an asteroid impact that obliterated life there etc.


----------



## Tallencor (Sep 6, 2014)

64K said:


> That's a problem too. Say we did pick up a transmission from an intelligent species tomorrow that is 1 million light years from us. There is no way to answer without another 1 million year pause. Did they stop listening for a reply in our area? Probably, but 2 million years goes by and anything could have happened to that species to prevent a reply. War, disease, an asteroid impact that obliterated life there etc.


Or they just don't care anymore


----------



## Locksmith (Sep 12, 2014)

or maybe its all a illusion in the mind..

just found the science room I've only been here 2 years..  edit oops 5yrs

nice map op.

maybe the aliens are us from the future..


----------



## Countryside (Sep 25, 2014)




----------



## newconroer (Sep 25, 2014)

Wrigleyvillain said:


> How can there _not_ be abundant life out there?





MxPhenom 216 said:


> Its out there. Its impossible that there isn't. If there wasn't, that's an awfully big waste of space. (Contact)





FordGT90Concept said:


> There's enough UFO and USO cases with physical evidence to prove that they already have found us and did so long ago.  It is statistically impossible for life to only exist on Earth.  The question isn't whether or not there is life on other planets, it is how abundant is it?  The reason why we can't definitely answer that question is because planets are really hard to spot, let alone analyze for the ability to support life.



Unfortunately personal desire and and a disregard for true mathematical probability, does not allow us to conclude that life does exist anywhere but right here.


Besides how come 'visitors' always crash land into Earth?





Awesome picture, but isn't the shape a bit convenient?


----------



## Countryside (Sep 25, 2014)

As i described in my previous post will give you all something to think about, and yeah we live in a monetary system and most of the worlds people are raising their children to to the same thing over and over again which is truly sad


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 25, 2014)

Mindweaver said:


> Let's say out of that 500 million light years of galaxies that make up the supercluster, the closest thing to us is only one light year away... That is still nearly 6 trillion miles away!  I believe there is something else out there, but it's beyond our reach.


 
Unless NASA is successful in their "Warp drive" technology research they actually have a division working on.      I couldn't stop laughing at the ludicrousness of that venture when I read it a couple months back!  Everyone knows we have to wait for the Vulcans to give us the Warp technology first.


----------



## Countryside (Sep 25, 2014)

I just wanted to say that im truly happy that i became a member of this forum because there are some really smart people here and its good that people discuss these topics so i salute you 
Thank you OP for this topic.


----------



## krusha03 (Sep 25, 2014)

rtwjunkie said:


> Unless NASA is successful in their "Warp drive" technology research they actually have a division working on.      I couldn't stop laughing at the ludicrousness of that venture when I read it a couple months back!  Everyone knows we have to wait for the Vulcans to give us the Warp technology first.


Actually I find that warp drive research by Dr. White amazing. I really hope if not interstellar travel at least we will have more effective travel within our solar system than chemical rockets with specific impulse of few hundred seconds. Also found some info that a Japanese company is seriously considering building a space elevator within 20 - 30 years. The technology is there (nano tubes) it just needs to be improved from few cm to few hundreds of kms  This to raise the parts in orbit + electric propulsion would make space travel much more efficient and cheaper.

@on topic

The maps looks amazing and while initial communication on large distances may be a problem using quantum entanglement communication devices would in theory work far in the fugure


----------



## Hilux SSRG (Sep 25, 2014)

Thanks for sharing, this is really fascinating.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Sep 25, 2014)

krusha03 said:


> Actually I find that warp drive research by Dr. White amazing. I really hope if not interstellar travel at least we will have more effective travel within our solar system than chemical rockets with specific impulse of few hundred seconds. Also found some info that a Japanese company is seriously considering building a space elevator within 20 - 30 years. The technology is there (nano tubes) it just needs to be improved from few cm to few hundreds of kms  This to raise the parts in orbit + electric propulsion would make space travel much more efficient and cheaper.
> 
> @on topic
> 
> The maps looks amazing and while initial communication on large distances may be a problem using quantum entanglement communication devices would in theory work far in the fugure


 
I actually agree, all of this is fascinating!  I just saw an opportunity to lighten the mood a little.


----------



## Mindweaver (Sep 25, 2014)

rtwjunkie said:


> Unless NASA is successful in their "Warp drive" technology research they actually have a division working on.      I couldn't stop laughing at the ludicrousness of that venture when I read it a couple months back!  Everyone knows we have to wait for the Vulcans to give us the Warp technology first.



Yea, I remember seeing something about that as well... Let's hope someone is working on building a Flux capacitor. :d So, we can see it in our life time. lol and I have to agree it all is very interesting.


----------



## jboydgolfer (Sep 26, 2014)

***Speaking on the matter of other lifeforms aside from the ones on Our planet***

IMO....the Human race is a infection, an "aggressive cancer". In our defense, the way we treat this planet COULD be explained by our ignorance , or Our immaturity as a Species, but If we [as a species] continue on our current path ,i.e. destroying the planet,[AND the surrounding space], reproducing faster than we can sustain ourselves, etc...We SHOULD look @ being discovered by an "alien" species as a danger. We pose a threat to any other planet We might populate, IF our treatment of this planet is a sign of future trends. And We SHOULD at-least entertain the possibility that we COULD be viewed as such by another "alien" species. This could mean a slew of things, and could be handled in Just as many ways, by another species that is.They could be benevolent, and see us as "child like" and understand our treatment of our planet could be due to this. They could be Less than understanding, and just decide it isn't worth the risk, and destroy us. They COULD do any number of things, Assuming that They WOULD even contact us if They were aware of our presence. My point is simply this, We as a species, should be MORE concerned with growing as a species, and Learning how to Live on this planet SUSTAINABLY, rather than to Instinctively trying to "escape" it, Driven by an Almost instinctive Urge to spread our species throughout the galaxy, it concerns Me that the More I consider Humans, and they're behavior, The more I find it difficult to ignore the fact that We resemble a plague. I am of the opinion that unless our current behavior is adjusted in a positive direction, another species will have No reason to WANT to reach out to us, at-least in a positive way. On the other side of the Coin, We COULD have done Worse as a species as well, meaning I guess we could all be dead by now, due to War, pollution EVEN worse than We are already inflicting, etc. I DO feel like We have some Very considerable positive attributes, and that we are "Worthy" of our existence, I just hope we make some positive progress in treating our home better before concerning ourselves with finding another, and the same goes with treating our friends better, before We try to find More.

This is not an argument, or in rebuttal to anything anyone here has said, it is simply My opinion.


----------



## Solaris17 (Sep 26, 2014)

This is some crazy shit.


----------



## Ahhzz (Sep 26, 2014)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Kepler got the data.
> 
> Astronomers Estimate One in Five Sol-Like Stars Have Planets Conducive to Life
> As per the original post, we now know that the Milky Way is a tiny part of the Laniakea supercluster and that is a tiny part of the universe.  There are trillions of planets capable of sustaining life in Laniakea alone--never mind the rest of the universe.
> ...


I've just one question. In an infinite universe, how much is 20% of infinity?

edited to add the quote from astronomers


----------



## Solaris17 (Sep 26, 2014)

Ahhzz said:


> I've just one question. In an infinite universe, how much is 20% of infinity?



considering infinite is a ridiculous amount then it only stands to reason 20% is almost completely unfathomable. Jesus dude seriously.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Sep 26, 2014)

[QUOTE="rtwjunkie, post: 3169826, member: 56774"  Everyone knows we have to wait for the Vulcans to give us the Warp technology first.   [/QUOTE]
Uhm...NO!
We developed warp on our own and the Vulcans found us because the very first warp test...Lucky for us as they were just about to leave...
But yes they then held us back 90 years...still our tech tho


just sayin


----------



## Mindweaver (Sep 26, 2014)

Ahhzz said:


> I've just one question. In an infinite universe, how much is 20% of infinity?



That's a hard one.. to explain, but I'll try.. let's see it's something like this (_in_) much of infinity is a little over 20% of (in)finity, but more like (ir) would be a true 20% of infinity by splitting both "n"'s. [_I'll use *|* as the other part of the "n" to show you_] (ir)(|f)(ir)(|i)(ty). Essentially any of the 5 broken out in () of infinity would be 20%....  and boom goes the dynamite!


----------



## 64K (Sep 26, 2014)

Ahhzz said:


> I've just one question. In an infinite universe, how much is 20% of infinity?
> 
> edited to add the quote from astronomers



Well, the number of stars and planets isn't infinite. It's an impossibly hard number for me to grasp but it's not infinite. You can't have 20% of infinity because infinity isn't a number. It's a concept.


----------



## Ahhzz (Sep 26, 2014)

We could dance that one. Since, in an infinite universe, there is infinite space, there _is _the potential for an infinite number of stars an planets. QED


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 26, 2014)

64K said:


> Well, the number of stars and planets isn't infinite. It's an impossibly hard number for me to grasp but it's not infinite. You can't have 20% of infinity because infinity isn't a number. It's a concept.


How do you know its not infinite? Been there yet? I've tasted sound. Doesn't mean sound has taste. Just means my mind came up with the concept in an altered state.


----------



## 64K (Sep 26, 2014)

TheMailMan78 said:


> How do you know its not infinite? Been there yet? I've tasted sound. Doesn't mean sound has taste. Just means my mind came up with the concept in an altered state.



Space itself may be infinite but I don't think the number of stars and planets is infinite. That would mean the Big Bang produced an infinite amount of matter or that matter is constantly being created out of seemingly nothing on an infinite scale but even if that is true there is a finite number of stars and planets at any given moment.


----------



## Ahhzz (Sep 26, 2014)

Olber's paradox   Meh, the jury is still out on an infinite Universe at this point (altho, being a Heinlen follower, I do enjoy the Multiverse theory), but I think by definition, in an Infinite Universe, with unlimited space/time, there would be an infinite number of stars and planets. There could potentially be a space that we could "theoretically" reach, given an infinite amount of time to get there, where we would no longer see any stars or planets, but since, by this hypothesis, the universe is infinite, we could also just be unable to see far enough to determine for fact that there were no other cosmic bodies. 

Conversely, in a finite universe, there may be too many to count (as in "how many grains of sand on the beach"), but could be mathematically defined by formula, if not by actual number. 

*cheers*   Always enjoy these discussions   too bad we'll all be micro-dust before an answer is ever determined


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Sep 26, 2014)

Ahhzz said:


> Olber's paradox   Meh, the jury is still out on an infinite Universe at this point (altho, being a Heinlen follower, I do enjoy the Multiverse theory), but I think by definition, in an Infinite Universe, with unlimited space/time, there would be an infinite number of stars and planets. There could potentially be a space that we could "theoretically" reach, given an infinite amount of time to get there, where we would no longer see any stars or planets, but since, by this hypothesis, the universe is infinite, we could also just be unable to see far enough to determine for fact that there were no other cosmic bodies.
> 
> Conversely, in a finite universe, there may be too many to count (as in "how many grains of sand on the beach"), but could be mathematically defined by formula, if not by actual number.
> 
> *cheers*   Always enjoy these discussions   too bad we'll all be micro-dust before an answer is ever determined


If there is an infinite amount of Multiverse and dimensions then in theory there is a universe and dimension were there is no Multiverse and dimension. Your move.


----------



## Countryside (Sep 27, 2014)




----------

