Sharon asks…
how would history played out had the soviet union put yuri gagarin on the moon by 1968?
can anyone imagine the american president being above a tank in washington on august 19, 1991 with soldiers in what seems to be a coup? let’s try to imagine america losing the cold war to russia…. does anyone have any suggestions? anyone? anyone in the universe picturing world history playing out differently than what it is?
Astronomy answers:
The Soviet Union’s lunar project was never seriously invested in. They didn’t think that the Scientific benefits were worth the investment, and could only see a prestige victory.
The idea of the USA winning a ‘space race’ is one of the biggest falsehoods held in popular history. In reality it was the only contender in the race, its benefits (aside from the advances in semiconductor devices) were poor considering the enormous investment of resources.
It was a big morale booster for the western hemisphere after seeing the USSR ‘beat them’ putting first a satellite and then a man into space. This was a shock to the system given the common (correct) perception that the west was technologically more advanced and the large amount of science fiction published 1945-58 in the west painting the USA as space pioneers. The Apollo program served the purpose of reassuring the western hoi polloi.
But in the scheme of things it really changed little. The Chernobyl debacle and the Afghanistan quagmire affected the public confidence of the USSR far more, and neither was anywhere near as important as the blatant economic collapse of the USSR due to its poor policies and practices.
Chris asks…
The universe might be pulsating?
I know about the expansion of the universe, i picture it like a balloon that is inflating, but some people say that the universe might stop expanding or continue to expand forever, or even contract at one point.
But what if its more of a pulsating process that is taking place, what if the universe expands to a certain point and then contracts back to a certain point over and over again, kind of like a heart beat?
Astronomy answers:
That’s called the Big Bounce model of the Universe. Basically, our Big Bang was not the first or last. Some theorize that the Universe oscillates between Big Bangs and Big Crunches; it begins with a bang, expands, then collapses, then bangs again, so on and so forth.
There are some problems with the theory. We now know that our Universe is accelerating in its expansion, which seems to imply that it will not end in a Big Crunch, but rather will end in a Big Freeze (in which the Universe has reached maximum entropy and energy can therefore no longer flow and no work can be done). But this acceleration can come to an end according to some. Basically, we doubt the universe is pulsating as you think, but don’t know enough to say that for sure.
Thomas asks…
What was the one important advantage of Kepler’s model over that of Copernicus?
A) It did not have epicycles and deferents.
B) It explained retrograde motion in a natural way.
C) It pictured the universe as finite.
D) It predicted planetary positions with greater accuracy.
E) It was geocentric.
Astronomy answers:
D because it correctly plotted the orbits of planets onto elliptical instead of circular paths, while also correctly determining orbital speeds for each point in that path.
James asks…
If god was not created why can’t the universe also be the same in other words without a creator?
Why can’t you picture a universe without a creator?
If God didn’t have a creator why should the universe have one?
Astronomy answers:
I can picture a universe without a creator.
Carol asks…
Is the universe spherical? Yup…?
I theorize that the universe is not only spherical, but that there are multiple universes that surround ours. When another universe is in contact with ours (think of two spheres overlapping), then beings of this universe would be able to travel to the parallel universe directly. Otherwise, dimension jumping would be required to literally “hop” to another universe, and coordinates would be required for this as the universes are constantly in motion.
If you picture the “multiverse” as a bunch of billiard balls on a pool table, then say that the cue ball is OUR universe and then scatter the other balls across the table in a random order. Now the 8 ball would be a non-parallel universe within the same dimension as ours. If you push the cue ball and 8 ball together so they’re touching, then now they’re parallel universes and in theory you’d be able to go from one to the other. Now if you pick the 8 ball up and hold it over the cue ball, this is an example of a non-parallel universe in a different dimension.
The pool table itself represents a single dimension that all, some, or none of the universes (billiard balls in example) could be in. The empty space on the pool table (dead space between our universes) is dark matter, and nothing can exist there except another universe, and any and all biological life is contained within that universe.
In my same theory, it’s also speculated that some of these universes are made up of antimatter. Like my pool table example above, picture our universe as the cue ball again, but this time imagine that the 8 ball is an antimatter universe. If it were to collide with our universe, the resulting explosion would be so massive that it would not only destroy both universes but also knock nearby universes out of our dimension.
Astronomy answers:
For the properties that you describe about ‘your universe’, i see no reason why it also has to be ‘spherical’ (other than that it is more difficult to imagine it on a pooltable)
When discussing, talking and reasoning about something, it is necessary to have a common definition about that something. In the wikipedia article below, you will find a few definitions of ‘universe’, nicely listed. What is your definition of a universe?
In my understanding, ‘black matter’ needs a universe (in any definition) to exist in, it cannot be between universes… So at least there we are not agreeing already…
A spherical universe is ok, but for other properties than you mention. It is a shape that emerges the most easy when something expands equally in all directions. But that only describes the space dimensions, and it is ignoring the time dimension(s?). To get that also included I recommend something like a ‘hyper-icecream-cone’ as a good shape for ‘our universe’
Mandy asks…
Where in the universe is this picture?
http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/where-in-the-universe-155-523×580.jpg
An with what spacecraft/telescope?
thanks
Astronomy answers:
Thank Poldi, because it IS Victoria Crater, Mars.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
