Why is space black?

From

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

wayneD.L.Rabon
7,063,766,385,525,516,418,859,244,396,771,000,000,000,000 light years earth
that's 7 x 10^42 light years
1,402,000,680,455,559,359,032,626,322,793,970,000,000,000,000 light years, Sun
that's 1.4 x 10^45 light years

At these distances the Sun and Earth attract photons, past this point they can not attract a photon.
Therorically these bodies attract every photon in this range, but as there are other bodies in the universe, the photons of the universe are attracted to other bodies. the earth and sun attract the photons of the universe in unision with the rest of the bodies in the universe, there fore only a % of photons are avialable for the earth to attract. So we only see a given percentage of the photons.

The Earth, Sun and the Galaxy floating in the universe like they where a boat

DwayneD.L.Rabon

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

There's too much distance inbetween Light sources, thus it's black...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I tried to figure it out again, and I think you're probably right. Maybe even worse. The volume of space encompassed by any thickness of a shell increases faster than the light received from any one star drops off.

Even so, even if all the stars were evenly distributed, the amount of energy available in any given space would have a sharp upward limit. You can figure so much energy per volume of space. Guesstimates are that a lightyear away from any star, a cubic kilometer doesn't contain a whole lot of energy, dividing volume of space by number of stars.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thread like this, I read word by word.

 

do objects "attract" photons?? that would be kinda neat.
i too am almost surprised that the sky isn't a blinding white. i wonder if someone could measure the brightness of space and determine if it is getting brighter or darker. i know stuff might be expanding, but the galaxies are not travelling @ the speed of light.

anyway.
HELLO!!! Space is blue, not black! hydrogen comes off as blue. there is a ton of hydrogen all over the universe. (not saying that space is full of hydrogen) but if space has any color at all, it is blue, but too close to black to see a difference.

 

<<< but if space has any color at all

experts conjecture that space is beige in colour

 

Go to a mirror. Look into your eyes, at your pupils. They're black. Now flash a lite into your eyes [like say from a camera], your pupils are red. Why do they normally appear black? Because it's dark inside of your eyes! It's also dark in space. Also, no one can hear you scream.

 

White or brightness is caused by light, black is from a lack of light. There's simply not enough light sources to completely light space up. In some ways this lends to the idea that space is infinite doesn it?

 

20,136,295,059,504,027,390,708 lightyears
That's 2 x 10^22 light years

At this distance the earth forms or attracts a shell of photons,or would form a shell of photons, but does not as the remaining bodies in the universe still attract light at a greater rate. If we are to see a back ground in the universe this is how far it would be, we could see every thing with in the shell of photons as a background. it is at this point as well that images start to take form, or it is at this point we will become able to view a object.

but it was at this point that earth can attract a photon, and past this point it can not attract a photon. this is beyond the backgorund that we will be able to see.
7,063,766,385,525,516,418,859,244,396,771,000,000, 000,000 light years earth
that's 7 x 10^42 light years.

from 2 x 10^22 light years to 7 x 10^42 light years, the view would appear to look as does the normal night sky, untill it was completely black just past 7 x 10^42LY as the earth could not attract a photon, where the photons that the earth where able to attract at thic distance over the forces of the other bodies in the unvierse would appear bright spots in the back ground of the 2 x 10^22LY distance, these would be a small stream of photons that could be from a wide area, and they would appear and disappear most likly as the earth loses the source of photon to another body in the universe and regains it.

if astronomers where looking at this distance, it would appear probaaly as bodies of the universe but would actually be illusions. as they are only photons.

I call it the visual photon background

DwayneD.L.Rabon

 

And now it's the Earth "attracting" photons, eh? Well, Rabon, at least you've added something new to your usual list of nonsense.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

So tell me - when will you have another moment of "temporary sanity" and delete all this junk just as you have in many of the other threads? I find it very interesting that you present all these long pages of convoluted, twisted illogic only to return later and completely remove them. What's the point in the first place?

 

Yeah well, i guess that is over shooting it a little given the practices of current observation, under current thought and mecahnical proccess i suppose that they might about 1% of that or less

So then 201,362,950,595,040,273,907 lightyears
That's 2 x 10^20 light years under current practice. even so i guess what astronomers are saying is that they can see about 20 to 50 million ligth years, thats considerablly less than what they could see , so there must be problems with the equipment and current designs, it maybe however that light does not travel as exspected in space and the light year is considerably less than thought.

 

Of course Dinosaur is right (the star light from uniform density of star in a relatively thin spherical shell, T thick, is proportional to the volume or distance to that shell, R, squared (R^2) and from each star it is decreased by inverse square (R^-2) so regardless of distance, each shell gives the same amount of light to us.

Another way to think about this is less mathematical. Shine a laser beam into the heavens. If the universe is infinite, it will eventually hit a star. - That is, at every spot in the heavens there is a star - we live inside a shining sphere.

All this was a powerful argument for a finite universe "pre big bang" & "pre Hubble" - before man learned that the more distant the star the fast it was receding from us, and "red shifted" so at sufficient distance the photons of light have red shifted into the infra red, IR heat, and we do not see them.

But this is not a perfect explanation of Obler's paradox. The question only changes from: “Why is the night sky not filled with star light?” to: "Why are we not being cooked?"

The true answer to Obler, as it appears now, is two fold (1) By big bang theory the universe is finite. (2) also by BB theory, universe is only around 15 billion years old, so even if there is another universe near by (say 20 billion LY away) making it own expanding space that will some day contact ours, it has not yet, and light can only come from 15 billion light years away, at present.

I hate to even suggest that another universe is "just over the hill" about to merge with our expanding space (in part because this simple mined view of space is wrong) but also because:

I don't want Paul Dixon to drop his vital efforts to save the local part of space from NRL etc.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Well here is a interesting note, because earth can attract a photon from 7 x 10^42 light years it may become possible to date the formation of the earth more accuratly by the use of light years. if astronomers can only see 20 to 50 milion light years, than light has only been focused to earth for that period in time.

Radio carbon dating meathods give the date of the earth at some 4 billion years, if this where so then we should see light from that near period of time, or a distance of 4 billion light years.

what do you think? about light dateing meathod?

20 to 50 million ligth years

 

HA!

Rabon, if you even had a hint of a clue as to what you're taking about, you'd shoot yourself for saying that!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Four billion years, phooey! C-14 dating is limited to about 40,000 - 60,000 years and by the use of linear
accelerators you MIGHT be able to get back to 100,000 years - but the accuracy drops off sharply.

In case you cannot see what's obvious here, about the absolute best that can be done is 1/10 of a single billion. FAR, FAR from your FOUR billion!

Do you realize that is really pretty dumb for a "genius?"

 

Oh you lovely mathematical eggheads - poor EmptyForceOfChi hasn´t a chance in H.
to understand you !!
I am the Paraclete , so let me tell you a secret , EmptyForceofChi :
Actually our fishbowl is NOT covered by a black sheet !!
All of the sky is filled with light from my stars - more bright the closer they are - EXCEPT where there is black holes (very,very,very ......very dense stars, that have a gravity so big that they absorp lightrays ).
The closer a shining star is to you the brighter it is !!
HOWEVER - when I created mankind (some say it was through evolution ) - I adjusted
the human eye and the brains perception, to the bright light of the sun - which meant that your little eyes and brain can NOT perceive faint light - that it why it APPEARS
black to you !!
But as Paraclete, I promise you, that ALL of my universe is filled with light (except for those darned black holes ) - all you need is a big telescope and a light amplifier , and you will see the light !!
In other words the black is NOT in the universe (except for the black holes)
The black is from your eyes and brain`s inability to perceive the light - it is simply a biological thing -when I created you all , I forgot to build in a lightamplifier into your brain - sorry !!
This theory of why the night sky appears black, is not known as the theory of Paraclete - it is the truth of Paraclete .

 

Billy T: I hadn't thought the volume rule through to completion. You have to slice Obler's shells extremely thin for their energy to add up in a meaningful way. A light-second is 300,000 kilometers, far less than the diameter of our sun. What we see is a fraction of that light-second at a time, considering that the human eye can see a flicker of light a small fraction of a second long. Anything outside that window is visually not there. It's been here, interacted, reflected, absorbed, re-emitted, and gone again.

A light year is about 1.68*10^24 kilometers. Even if you post your hypothetical stars one light year apart, a lot closer than our average, they aren't that close together compared to the largest window of time that is open for our eyes to integrate their light or for all of their radiations to contribute to the heating of the Earth. I'm trying to come up with a quick and easy way to estimate how far apart they would be on a shell a tenth of a light-second thick. This shell would be less than a 40th the diameter of a typical star, if Sol is typical. A Sol-size sun is 4 to 5 light-seconds in diameter. A light year is 31.5 million seconds. A square light year is 9.94*10^15 square light seconds. A cubic light year is 3.14 * 10^22 cubic light seconds. If we say that a given star occupies about 125 cubic light seconds, the off-the-cuff estimate is that only 1 in 7.95 * 10^13 times will the star be anywhere on a shell that is five light-seconds thick. That is not my final answer for anything like a precise number, but this is where the volume versus surface area comes in.

 

What I understand you to be saying is true if all stars flashed once, but they last billion of years. That is the light from dying star F (for Far away) that left 5 billion years befor the light fromstar N (for Near) which is 5 billion lightyears closer to Earth and happen to be within the narrow field of view of my fovea so I can look at both F & N at the same time is arriving just now, together. I don't understand what you are talking about. This is so obvious that I must be misunderstanding you.

Star light can make one humble, but is a good cure for depression and also: If you look up on a clear dark night and understand what you see - you can feel very insignificant, but then just step to the side and look down. Then some poor photons have traveled 5 billion lightyears to slighly warm a rock, which cannot appreciate their beauty - all at your whim decision to step to the side and look down!

 

the answer came from an unconventional source. dark poet Edgar Alan Poe answered " ...because the light from dark corner of space has not reached to Earth. " according to him, if spave is eternal, in infinity we should the sky bright at night time.
according to another approach, as tree full of forest blocks the view, so should the stars in the sky. in fact, each tree trunk blocks the view far from larger than space.
just because the space is infinite, that doesn't mean that there are infinite number of stars out there.

 

*sighs* this is a very very very simple question to answer it is black body radiation

 

i do not trust a poet over a scientist..... first off space hasnt been proven to be infinite, also the space vacuum pushes all molecules out of the way making the stars visible with nothing in the way. But the space vacuum does allow waves to pass through it like UV, X-Ray, Radio, well all of them but in particular it is filled with black-body radiation which is a radiation that becomes transparent when somthing like a star heats it up, allowing light to be seen in outerspace.......