How the Hubble Deep Field Was Taken

IWannabeJew Says:

Jul 15, 2009 - It looks like fastpony did a hack-job on the "Book of Moses" 1:33,37 of the Mormon "Pearl of Great Price".

sassyy01 Says:

Jul 19, 2009 - Anything is possible, they are billions of trillions of galaxies out there. It is stupid to think that each tiny planet needs water and oxygen. Just because WE need that, it doesnt make it right to think that every single planet that are surounding those billions of stars which are inside trillions of galaxies need it because most likely, they dont. We need it, of course, that is OUR science. Dont be so closed minded - i bet you somewhere out there.. they dont need water or oxygen to survive.

ikkuj Says:

Jul 20, 2009 - It's not stupid it is just logical. In fact if you study mathematics and the derivatives of physics equations you will discover that spacetime represents a fractal curve in which everything is self similar with slight variation.

1776isBACK Says:

Jul 21, 2009 - NASA one small step for mankind one large step for fraud

seb2455 Says:

Jul 25, 2009 - Even if only 1 planet per galaxy there is 1 to 100 billions stars per galaxy can harbor life and there is billions of galaxy the odds are there is lifeform on others planets. Nasa need to explore Mars more and prove that life was once there so the argument about life on other planet be close. There no way something this big dont harbor life

ThePhotoshopGuy1 Says:

Jul 26, 2009 - I agree, but given the size of the universe it seems it would be very rare to have two planets so close to eachother capable of hosting life. I don't know if they ever found out how Mars lost it's atmosphere, but the polar ice cap and ice clouds on the planet today are interesting

kel2corkey Says:

Jul 27, 2009 - Its amazing what they can do now so imagine what the future holds.

daviddeath11 Says:

Jul 30, 2009 - its amazing what they could do 50 years ago, look at it all now, imagine it in another 50 years!

ScarcityJ Says:

Aug 2, 2009 - space is such an interesting subject and this guy is a genius figuring out that

pacificguitarist Says:

Aug 3, 2009 - I think the point he's trying to make is that perhaps life is abundant in the universe.

blinbaad Says:

Aug 4, 2009 - yes! I had this thought several years ago! when I had these thoughts, it crossed my mind that there could be life on the sun (not our sun ofcourse) and freezing gas planets, because they could be constructed of substances completely unknown to us which works where they live. and they are thinking the same thing about us. "life could never be sustained with water and oxygen, thats impossible". I wish more people would think like us.

directorwvp2 Says:

Aug 8, 2009 - 12 billion lighy years away .. about as far as Tiger hits a knock down 2 iron stinger.

didjabringadidjalong Says:

Aug 8, 2009 - Mars lost it's atmosphere when the planet's core 'died'. Mars has no volcanic or tectonic activity and the core has cooled down, essentially stopping the dynamo that generated the EM-field. Once the electromagnetic field dissipated, most of it's original atmosphere was blown away by the solarwind. This happened approx. 4 billion years ago. The ice-caps, the seasons, Mars is very interesting.

josz7z Says:

Aug 12, 2009 - why is she whispering ? o_0 anyway, pretty interesting, thanks :)

BooteyMasta Says:

Aug 20, 2009 - The funny part is there could be and probably are "elements" not on our periodic table, yet to be discovered! Think of a new element on some planet light as a feather with the strength of titanium plus you can see thru it! Food for thought.

DjGisME Says:

Sep 4, 2009 - Out of date that was like ten years ago!

eddie2042 Says:

Sep 24, 2009 - there are no other elements found in nature. the atom is made of protons, neutrons, electrons. every time you change the # of protons, you change the element type. thus hydrogen has 1, helium has 2, lithium has 3, etc. we keep adding 1 proton at a time, and we get all the elements. so far, only about 105 elements are found in nature. we manage to forge some elements with 106+ protons in lab; not found in nature. so there is "other" elements. and you can't add half a proton :P

AltAirPilot517 Says:

Oct 3, 2009 - Those galaxies probably don't even exist anymore that's how far away they were. That light is from several billions of years ago.

17masonry Says:

Oct 12, 2009 - thank you for posting! I enjoyed the most important image video and this is a great follow up. there is no doubt in my mind that we are not alone in the universe. i believe that in the coming years we will have the proof we need....even though we have the Disclosure Project and the like....

gudavtorden Says:

Nov 1, 2009 - It's fascinating!! But i have one doubt: If the ultra deep field picture that was taken it's 47 billion light years far away, how the universe is 13 billions years old, if nothing is faster than light? I mean, how those galaxies are 47 billion light years distant if the edge of the universe couldn't be farthest than 13 billion years? How?

Tomkaten Says:

Nov 12, 2009 - Guda, it's because the fabric of spacetime expands faster than the speed of light. At least that's what the redshift of the most distant galaxies in the visible universe indicates. Some of the farthest objects in the Universe will never be visible to us, since light can't match the speed at which the source distances itself from us and will never be able to travel the required distance.

HVYMETL Says:

Nov 23, 2009 - so Tomkaten, are you basically saying that the galaxies were 13B LY away when the photons left (the photons which we're seeing now) and that, after all this time, now they are 47B LY away?

Tomkaten Says:

Nov 24, 2009 - You got it. Quote from a very know encyclopedia: "The age of the Universe is about 13.7 billion years, but due to the expansion of space we are now observing objects that are now considerably farther away than a static 13.7 billion light-years distance. The edge of the observable universe is now located about 46.5 billion light-years away". All a bit beyond human comprehension, I know, since we're used to much smaller scales. It's the expansion that's making it hard to process.

Tomkaten Says:

Nov 24, 2009 - And if the expansion in indeed accelerating, our fate is pretty grim. A couple of billion years from now, we won't be seeing a thing in the sky. Anywhere... Nothing... For eternity... On our way to the big freeze or big rip, whichever comes first. I know it's a bit of a cliche, but it's a pretty dreadful perspective. But since other things will get us, as a species, much sooner, there's really no point in worrying about that at this time :P

eskizonet Says:

Nov 25, 2009 - Today we have technology to make new elements. Just changing the number of the atoms components.