Two Trillion Galaxies,

[The Starmaker]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/science/two-trillion-galaxies-at-the-very-least.html?_r=0




How long do you think it will take for 'these people' to change the age
of the universe to a trillion years????



first 'they' have to learn how to say the word...trillion.


they might have to look it up on the internet first...


of course the rest of yous are just going to ...wait.

[noTthaTguY]

first of all,
the redshift is just way t00 purple ... I mean,
magenta ... I mean, infrared, goes to microwave goe to radio goes
to audio, I guess

[The Starmaker]

tsbr...@gmail.com wrote:

> The Universe has a lot more living space than we thought!


The Earth has a lot more living space than you are ...told.



Just because you cannot find an apartment in New York City doesn't mean we need to go to Mars...

[The Starmaker]

i mean really..the bottom line is,
the only reason 'these people' come up
with an extra "trillion gallaxies" is because
they want to upgrade their telescopes and
astronomy software...gettin more funding.

Cocaine money. A trip to Hawaii. Disneylad tickets for the stupid kids. Honey money.

These people spend everyday How to get more money/funding from the government.

What comes after ...trillion?

[Poutnik]

Purple/magenta is not a light spectrum colour,
it is perception of mixed red and violet/blue light.

[reber g=emc^2]

We Have finally seen Treb's universe TreBert

[john]

The Universe is unlimited in size.
Our galaxy has a policing force
of advanced individuals that use
things like TRUTH and LOVE and
FORGIVENESS, which is the only way
you can run things. You can't
torture a plant to grow.

[noTthaTguY]

yes!... that is the uncovery of Ed lanD,
misteR Polaroid ... but,
violet is another term for purple,
in hte canonical octaval interval of light perception

[The Starmaker]

TB wrote:

>
> On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 9:09:41 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/science/two-trillion-galaxies-at-the-very-least.html?_r=0
> > >
> > > How long do you think it will take for 'these people' to change the age
> > > of the universe to a trillion years????
> > >
> > > first 'they' have to learn how to say the word...trillion.
> > >
> > > they might have to look it up on the internet first...
> > >
> > > of course the rest of yous are just going to ...wait.
> >
> >
> >
> > i mean really..the bottom line is,
> > the only reason 'these people' come up
> > with an extra "trillion gallaxies" is because
> > they want to upgrade their telescopes and
> > astronomy software...gettin more funding.
>

> What evidence do you have that astronomers are lying about their beliefs that there might be 2 trillion galaxies?

Come on....it's common sense with 'these people'.

They used to say "billions and billions of galaxies", now it's Two trillion????


Did their math get better??


Or did someone fall asleep on their calculator? and woke up and exclaim, "Look! Theres 2 trillion galaxies!!!"



Doesn't that mean there are two trillion Earth-Like planets??? Hasn't reached the news yet...who can think that far ahead today?


Only i can...i'm a fuckin genuis.



The Starmaker

[edpr...@gmail.com]

You do realize that it is a false color image, Right?

BTW Radio is as low as it gets. It just gets longer adjectives.
LF - Low Frequency
VLF - Very Low Frequency in the range of 3 kHz to 30 kHz
ELF - Extremely Low Frequency

The ELF frequencies, 3 to 30 Hz, start to fall below even audio.

Presumably the bottom is a radio wave with wavelength as long
as the diameter of the universe.

[SteveGG]

The unverse obviously has no limits. It doesn't take much sense to
realize this. If this is a supposed bondary, then what's that over
there on the other side ?!

So there's probably no limit at all to the number of galaxies.
Trillions ? Sure why not ? And probably much more or infinite !

[john]

SteveGG
Is
Sensible

[SPQR]

In article <5807B0...@ix.netcom.com>,

The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Only i can...i'm a fuckin genuis.

But not a genius of any sort!

[The Starmaker]

well i certaintly don't fit any of your...categories, and i wouldn't want too.




Three roads diverged in a wood,
and I— I took the one not traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

[The Starmaker]

You might have to wait another ten years for this information to hit the News media...


There are Two Quadrillion Galaxies.


but the real number might be Centillions and Centillions galaxies.


i would have come up with a bigger number..but, i have to invent the word for it first.



Don't forget, there are Centillions and Centillions earth-like planets too...

(if you follow 'these people')


Truth is, there are no "earth-like" planets in existences...


there are none...


But if you want one, you just...'infect' any planet.


in·fect

contaminate (air, water, planets etc.) with earth organisms.



Put a bunch of you guys on Mars and you'll probably try to FUCK the planet.

[noTthaTguY]

ah, what is a false-colored image?

yeah 20 cycles per second is as low as most hearing, goes, but
there is no indication that Universe is finite, even if it is

[SPQR]

In article <5807E7...@ix.netcom.com>,

The Starmaker <star...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Truth is, there are no "earth-like" planets in existences...

There is at least one, this one!

[The Starmaker]

That's true, it appears ...similar to Earth.

Composed of the same materials as Earth....


What's "this one!" called?

[The Starmaker]

pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 at 10:40:52 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
>
> >...i'm a fuckin genuis.
>
> Yeah... one who can't even spell 'genius'... LOL!

I'm 1.75% of the population...



Other users have misspelled genius as:

jenis - 26.64%
genious - 9.83%
genilce - 1.97%
genuis - 1.75%
jenish - 1.31%
genice - 1.09%
Other - 57.41%




and I don't use words like "can't" in my vocabulary because ...I can.

[Robert Bannister]

Well, sua generis, thank goodness.

--
Robert B. born England a long time ago;
Western Australia since 1972

[reber g=emc^2]

What if we are counting galaxies that are only virtual? TreBert

[hanson]

"reber g=emc^2" <herbert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What if we are counting galaxies that are only virtual?
>

Glazier, "virtual galaxies" are made of Glazierola, but in
reality you posted: ***"hanson made me famous"****.
>
So, Glazier, since you haven't posted 1 single objection,
I shall continue with making you, Glazier, famous. You
must like & love being the Face Shitter & the criminal
Graveyard vandal reber g=emc^2" Glazier who does this:
<http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg> [1]
being the <http://tinyurl.com/Recalcitrant-Swine-Glazier> [2]
who always is <http://tinyurl.com/Glazier-the-Lying-Swine>
>
>
Right?....

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

SteveGG wrote:

> The unverse obviously has no limits.

That is not at all obvious.

> It doesn't take much sense to realize this.

It takes sense to realize that paths of infinite length and a space(time) of
infinite size are two separate things. For example, there are paths of
infinite length on the surface of Earth, and still the Earth’s surface has a
finite area.

> If this is a supposed bondary, […]
^^ ^^^^^^^
Ex falso quodlibet.

And learn to write proper English.

F'up2 sci.math

--
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[William December Starr]

In article <vogf0cdkq80ibh567...@4ax.com>,

SteveGG <casagi...@optonline.net> said:

> The unverse obviously has no limits. It doesn't take much sense to
> realize this. If this is a supposed bondary, then what's that over
> there on the other side ?!

A really loud party.

> So there's probably no limit at all to the number of galaxies.
> Trillions ? Sure why not ? And probably much more or infinite !

It'd be limited by how many stars can be built from the finite
and unchanging (I believe) amount of mass-energy in the universe,
wouldn't it?

-- wds

[john]

William said

"
It'd be limited by how many stars can be built from the finite
and unchanging (I believe) amount of mass-energy in the universe,
wouldn't it? "

No.
The Universe is Infinite.

[The Starmaker]

Before the big bang there were no galaxies
http://pw1.netcom.com/~starmaker/before%20and%20after%20the%20big%20bang/untitled1.jpg


all the stars (green stars)
got too overcrowded
and that caused the
universe to get too hot..
and it exploded.

Galaxies were formed to
prevent stars from gettin
too over crowded.

This is what the universe looked like
moments before and after the big bang
http://pw1.netcom.com/~starmaker/before%20and%20after%20the%20big%20bang/untitled1.jpg


The red stars formed the new galaxies..
the new universe...
at least that's what Nature intended.

It fixed it.


Any questions?

[Double-A]

Yes, infinite. Isn't that what I've been saying?

Double-A

[john]

"
Yes- isn't that what I've been saying
Double-A "

Me, too, AA.
But apparently, I'm a schizo with
nothing upstairs.
My 145 IQ maybe slipped a few points
since I've been talking with Odd.
Stupid rubs off

[Double-A]

The minds of these guys are limited, just like their universe!

Double-A

[edpr...@gmail.com]

That is yet to be proven.
Right now we know there appears to be a limit to the observable universe.
So the size of the universe is still a very open question.

[john]

Ed

"
That is yet to be proven.
Right now we know there appears to be a limit to the observable universe.
So the size of the universe is still a very open question. "

And always will be with logic like that.

[edpr...@gmail.com]

Not necessarily. It is just that we do not have the data to
answer the question YET.
There are three possible results:
Finite and Bounded
Infinite and Unbounded
Finite and Unbounded

The new galaxy count did not find new galaxies beyond previous known limits.
These are smaller galaxies that we just could not see before, but within
the limits of the observable portion of the universe.

So even this does not imply the universe is larger then before.
It only shows it is a little more crowded than we thought.

[Thomas Heger]

Am 17.10.2016 20:02, schrieb The Starmaker:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/18/science/two-trillion-galaxies-at-the-very-least.html?_r=0
>
>
>
>
> How long do you think it will take for 'these people' to change the age
> of the universe to a trillion years????
>
>

I personally think, that General Relativity is in fact true, but GR with
complex numbers instead of tensors.

Such a GR describes a cosmological concept, where time behaves like a
real axis, which has a spacelike, imaginary inverse.

What we call 'space' or 'universe' is then the image, we receive from
the past along our own past light cone. This cone is defined by equality
of real and imaginary units, or as 45° from our own axis of time.

If now the axis of time curves, the universe also changes. The former
one shrinks and a new picture ('universe') pops out of nowhere - in a
'big bang'.

We could eventually count galaxies in it. But this is similar to
counting clouds and afterwards saying, this number is the number of
clouds forever.

So galaxies belong to the past and the further away the more remote in
the past. This past could stretch pretty far, if our telescopes get
better. And so we can count galaxies like clouds in the sky and come to
no end.

TH

[SteveGG]

>
>> So there's probably no limit at all to the number of galaxies.
>> Trillions ? Sure why not ? And probably much more or infinite !
>
>It'd be limited by how many stars can be built from the finite
>and unchanging (I believe) amount of mass-energy in the universe,
>wouldn't it?
>

Since the universe is obviously infinite, then total matter is likely
to also be infinite.

[The Starmaker]

I don't understand why the 'scientific community' has not
announced what caused the big bang? I know what caused it.
How could I be the only one??
I know I'm a fuckin genuis but this is gone too far.
You guys are taking too long to catch up.

Before the big bang there was a limit amount of space in
which stars can be born, as there is a limit amount of space today.

Before the big bang...
the universe got so crowded with stars that all it
took is for one more baby star to set off a big bang.

Today the universe might be bigger than it was before the big bang..
but it is still has a bottom, a side, a top..and everything it in.

How big is the ocean to a guppie?

Even the stupid little fish knows the ocean has a bottom.



...and for you math girls...Albert Einstein once said:

"...mathematics, a product of human thought.."

not a discovery.

[edpr...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 9:03:53 AM UTC-4, SteveGG wrote:
[]

> Since the universe is obviously infinite, then total matter is likely
> to also be infinite.

Still no proof of that yet Steve.
ed

[edpr...@gmail.com]

On Saturday, October 22, 2016 at 3:06:57 PM UTC-4, The Starmaker wrote:
[]

>
> Before the big bang...
> the universe got so crowded with stars that all it
> took is for one more baby star to set off a big bang.
>
> Today the universe might be bigger than it was before the big bang..
> but it is still has a bottom, a side, a top..and everything it in.
>
> How big is the ocean to a guppie?
>
> Even the stupid little fish knows the ocean has a bottom.

[]

Such cute fairy tales.

If you were here, I'd give you a cookie and pat you on the head,
saying that's a good little boy, now run along and play with the
other kids. Let the grownups talk.

[The Starmaker]

Now, why do fishes eat other fishes?



If you do a search for the answer you'll find stupid answers like Nature made them that way, or they like fish food.


But the answer they don't give is....the big bang made them that way.


In the big bang ...process, it made sure there isn't a over population of...Stars.


Otherwise, there would be a big bang in the ocean...

[The Starmaker]

The problem is is 'these peope' ask The Wrong Questions.

The wrong question they ask is..."What caused the Big Bang?"

The Right question is..."WHY did the Big Bang happen?"


Once you know Why, then what difference does What caused it?????


It's like the detectives are trying to find the motive for the murder, and the
'scientific community' wants to know What caused the bullet to go from the gun to the body?

I know Why there was a big bang...too mamy fishes in the ocean.

[The Starmaker]

...as someone once said...."...the rest are just details."

[reber g=emc^2]

Now that so much matter in space has been found do you think my age 22 B years is to conservative? Trebert

[reber g=emc^2]

In TIME and SPACE TreBert

[noTthaTguY]

high redshift is fuzzy-definitional