Posted on 12/08/2010 4:30:43 AM PST by chessplayer
Stars known as red dwarfs might be far more common than previously thought, enough to triple the total number of stars known in the universe, a new study suggests.
These new findings could also boost the number of planets that could harbor life, astronomers announced today (Dec. 1).
(Excerpt) Read more at space.com ...
Ah, who cares. The study was probably done by more lying, pinko, commie scientists trying to get more of our money.
Carl Sagan was wrong? Boy, would he be pissed.
Our universe is never ending.
Carl Sagan was wrong? Boy, would he be pissed.Yup. Now it's "Trillions and trillions!".
Come to think of it, that works for the deficit as well!
I was going to ask the question, how does one triple infinity?
It’s not infinity.
The universe is finite.
So scientists tell us they greatly underestimated the number of stars in the universe.
And guess what?
The new number is most likely a gross underestimation too!
Quite right about the silly headline. Now I wonder what this does to all the folks who natter on about exotic “dark matter” and “dark energy”? Sounds like rather a lot of the ordinary sort of matter has been overlooked heretofore.
Wow an increase of less than 10^1, BFD.
if the universe were infinite in size, then at night night, the sky would be white from the star-light, because there would be an infinite number of photons passing through.
AAAARGH!!!!
What's at the end?
Not necessarily. As Sagan said in one episode of COSMOS:
There's more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on all the beaches of the world.
That would still hold true. And as to his famous "Billions and Billions" comment, that's how Cosmologists and Astrophysicists talk, i.e.: One Thousand Billion, etc. I can't recall one using 'Trillions' or 'Quadrillions' in any program I've ever seen on the Science channel. And that's a lot.
Plus, those *Big Numbers* are reserved for the US Congress when spending OUR money.
The universe is finite.
*** What's at the end? ***
A big U-Turn sign.
;-)
Mathematically, this shouldn't change anything. A dismal search for life-bearing planets about the size of earth, at the right distance from the parent sun, resulting in a ratio near zero will remain the same no matter how many stars are assumed.
The problem they have is what does occupy the life zone are huge gas planets that will preclude the formation of solid planets in that zone.
The smallest of these are around 2.5 times the size of Jupiter.
Early on, a preeminent astrophysicists, commented, having noted the ratio, that we should get used to the idea of the uniqueness of our situation in our solar system.
There you go again.
Still trolling.
Nothing out trolls the chessplayer troll.
Well, I guess that's settled. Thanks.
“Discovery May Triple the Number of Stars In the Universe”
Ridiculous!
Where would the energy and matter come from to create new stars (and a few planets too)? It gotta come from somewhere! It ain’t coming from some humble scientist’s cluttered laboratory.
From NASA’s state appointed Muslim outreach.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.