Galactic collision imminent!

  • Thread starter Thread starter TorontoReign
  • Start date Start date
T

TorontoReign

Guest
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/06/01...will-look-like-over-the-next-7-billion-years/


0_mini.jpg



3_mini.jpg




So the Milky Way will begin to collide with Andromeda about 3 billion years from now. Over time our night sky will drastically change, so if anyone is still alive on Earth, it will be a sight to behold. Stuff like this really amazes me. Check the link out to see the projected end result of this cosmic merger. I really wonder if anyone will be alive to enjoy it? I am also curious what kind of religious fervor it might arouse in people. Apparently the collision won't effect Earth in any negative way, but who knows really? A primitive culture would probably worship the two "Gods" union.


Apologies if this has been discussed already.



Edit: Actually, I think that view will not be possible because our Sun will have swallowed the Earth. Still cool though.
 
I can't wait!

TorontRayne said:
So the Milky Way will begin to collide with Andromeda about 3 billion years from now. I really wonder if anyone will be alive to enjoy it?
Click to expand...

No.

:D
 
The_Noob said:
The collision won't effect Earth because it'll be a charred asteroid by then.
Click to expand...


Yes. Which I noted in the edit.



I think by that time we will have started colonizing other planets, so someone could witness this happening somewhere in the Galaxy.
 
If anything, we'll probably slaughter eachother or be put down by aliens before we ever leave Earth.
 
Planetary colonization is almost as unrealistic as the prospect of Ragnarôk coming true.

We allready know that we need to traverse space at superluminar speeds to get anywhere at all, and we don't even have the slightest idea of where to go.
Even if we could traverse superluminar speeds - not just traverse - but multiply it many times - which we can't, we still would have a hard time finding anywhere to definitely settle.
Even a planet "almost identical" to earth would not be earth, and would thus not be habitable - not even a little.

The idea of colonizing space is mostly so prevalent in our thinking, because of inherent psychological needs to put a narrative into our existence.
It's the same reason people struggle to fully comprehend evolution, and other scientific concepts that tend to span over long periods of time.
Mentally - we "need" "our story" to "continue" in a narratively comfortable manner. We therefore _prefer_ to imagine a future where we endure past the end of our planet, even though most likely, we will never get anywhere outside our solar system. Ever.

(And no, we can't use wormholes. It's lethal.)
 
zegh8578 said:
Planetary colonization is almost as unrealistic as the prospect of Ragnarôk coming true.

We allready know that we need to traverse space at superluminar speeds to get anywhere at all, and we don't even have the slightest idea of where to go.
Even if we could traverse superluminar speeds - not just traverse - but multiply it many times - which we can't, we still would have a hard time finding anywhere to definitely settle.
Even a planet "almost identical" to earth would not be earth, and would thus not be habitable - not even a little.

The idea of colonizing space is mostly so prevalent in our thinking, because of inherent psychological needs to put a narrative into our existence.
It's the same reason people struggle to fully comprehend evolution, and other scientific concepts that tend to span over long periods of time.
Mentally - we "need" "our story" to "continue" in a narratively comfortable manner. We therefore _prefer_ to imagine a future where we endure past the end of our planet, even though most likely, we will never get anywhere outside our solar system. Ever.

(And no, we can't use wormholes. It's lethal.)
Click to expand...


Sure, I understand that, but if we do exist 3 billion years from now, I think we stand a chance of at least leaving the fucking solar system. Give us a little credit at least. Visiting the closest planets is the first place to start. Then we go from there. You also have to take into account that we know these events will occur. If humanity is to survive as a species, we eventually have to find another planet to colonize. Long term anyway. Yeah we stand a good chance of eradicating all life on the planet by then, along with ourselves, but strictly from a theoretical standpoint, we might find a way to survive. If not....well it won't matter I guess. The universe won't even notice.
 
their picture of the 7 bil years with the white center, we know that wont happen.

the center of both galaxies are SMBH. it wont be a white center.

there could be a white ring around the center or a white sphere, but the center would not be white or full of light.

especially once the 2 SMBH combine, although that would be a sight to behold let me tell you.
 
If only I could observe 4C+37.11 and OJ 287 in real time... I would no longer need pr0n.
 
zegh8578 said:
Planetary colonization is almost as unrealistic as the prospect of Ragnarôk coming true.

We allready know that we need to traverse space at superluminar speeds to get anywhere at all, and we don't even have the slightest idea of where to go.
Even if we could traverse superluminar speeds - not just traverse - but multiply it many times - which we can't, we still would have a hard time finding anywhere to definitely settle.
Even a planet "almost identical" to earth would not be earth, and would thus not be habitable - not even a little.

The idea of colonizing space is mostly so prevalent in our thinking, because of inherent psychological needs to put a narrative into our existence.
It's the same reason people struggle to fully comprehend evolution, and other scientific concepts that tend to span over long periods of time.
Mentally - we "need" "our story" to "continue" in a narratively comfortable manner. We therefore _prefer_ to imagine a future where we endure past the end of our planet, even though most likely, we will never get anywhere outside our solar system. Ever.

(And no, we can't use wormholes. It's lethal.)
Click to expand...

I'm much more optimistic. Think of how long we as humans have used the horse as a method of travel. Then in the past 150 years we have gone from steam engines to combustion, combustion to electric, electric to nuclear. If you were to make a line graph of the evolution of human technology, it would be a very flat, steadily rising line up untill about 150 years ago. After, that line is just taking an elevator in the upward direction. In other words, the growth of technology today is exponential. While I'm not saying every fantasy imagined by man is going to come true, I believe that even in my lifetime our understanding of the limits of our technology will still not be realized for many, many years to come.
 
mobucks said:
zegh8578 said:
Planetary colonization is almost as unrealistic as the prospect of Ragnarôk coming true.

We allready know that we need to traverse space at superluminar speeds to get anywhere at all, and we don't even have the slightest idea of where to go.
Even if we could traverse superluminar speeds - not just traverse - but multiply it many times - which we can't, we still would have a hard time finding anywhere to definitely settle.
Even a planet "almost identical" to earth would not be earth, and would thus not be habitable - not even a little.

The idea of colonizing space is mostly so prevalent in our thinking, because of inherent psychological needs to put a narrative into our existence.
It's the same reason people struggle to fully comprehend evolution, and other scientific concepts that tend to span over long periods of time.
Mentally - we "need" "our story" to "continue" in a narratively comfortable manner. We therefore _prefer_ to imagine a future where we endure past the end of our planet, even though most likely, we will never get anywhere outside our solar system. Ever.

(And no, we can't use wormholes. It's lethal.)
Click to expand...

I'm much more optimistic. Think of how long we as humans have used the horse as a method of travel. Then in the past 150 years we have gone from steam engines to combustion, combustion to electric, electric to nuclear. If you were to make a line graph of the evolution of human technology, it would be a very flat, steadily rising line up untill about 150 years ago. After, that line is just taking an elevator in the upward direction. In other words, the growth of technology today is exponential. While I'm not saying every fantasy imagined by man is going to come true, I believe that even in my lifetime our understanding of the limits of our technology will still not be realized for many, many years to come.
Click to expand...

I am open to the possibility that sciences unthinkable today will be discovered in the future -
but I am always reluctant to lean on hypothetical future discoveries, when setting a prognosis for a likely future, if you know what I mean - that's why I mentioned worm-holes. As of now, there is no goddamn way anybody can just jump into a wormhole, pop out the other side, and report back over a walkie-talkie "Guys! It's all pink and turqoise over here!" - but whenever worm-hole-travel is brought up - it is always assumed that it will be in a future when such travel is obviously - somehow - surviveable.
But that's like making head-diving into bubbling magma surviveable. Not saying it will never happen, I just cannot imagine how it could ever be done, so I'm not gonna lean on it as a possibility.
I get what you mean tho.
 
Eh...some (un)lucky bastard out there in space might see it. Should I be jealous?

In 3 million years humans definitely won't exist, homo sapiens won't, that is. As for some next evolutionary step...maybe? Maybe a step after? Or a step after? Who knows? 3 million years is too much.

Though if I were to throw some super-awesome sci-fi hypothesis, it is that humans will eventually evolve* from organic creatures to machines or such who will have far less problems traversing space and far less needs, and because of that, could potentially colonize distant worlds which would never be able to sustain a pure-blooded homo sapiens.

* This is a very loose term here. It may not be an actual evolution, where those creatures, to call them that way, would be any sort of our biological offspring. Better call it just the survival of the fittest, as in machines take over, exterminate/enslave humans, go to space etc.
They are still our 'children'.
 
Well, at least someone in 3 billion years from now will die a awesome death. Me? I'll probably die in my sleep in a totally un-epic manner... :(
 
For NCR said:
Well, at least someone in 3 billion years from now will die a awesome death. Me? I'll probably die in my sleep in a totally un-epic manner... :(
Click to expand...

Hahaha, that's the curse of death, you only get one shot at it. What a dilemma tho, die comfortably, peacefully, surrounded by loved ones? Or in an epic heroic shootout, perhaps, while resqueing 100 babies from the whims of a madman :0 A statue would surely be raised in your honor

Or - my personal favorite, staring with shock and awe, at the blinding burning flaming rock ripping the sky in half, before it plunges into the horizon, raising a wall of molten earth towards me. I would come I think. It would be fuckin spectacular.
 
Colonization is possible. In fact, it's almost real. Only a few decades ago we were dreaming about space. Now, we send out satellites and drones into space so often nobody cares to cover it in the news anymore.

Oh and yeah, there's a space station. And people live there. You think we can't colonize some stupid planet? Possible within the next two-three centuries.

In 3 billion years we'll either be dead, or travelling from one end of the universe to the other in the click of a finger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top