*** The Official Astronomy & Universe Thread ***

Trig said:
If the Universe is expanding, what is it expanding into?
Click to expand...

Also in the same vein, I heard Brian Cox talking about the fact that the universe could eventually stop expanding and start contracting back into itself destroying everything in its wake until it is just the size of an atom.

So what would that atom be contained in if there was no universe? The universe itself has to be in something, surely. I should stop thinking about it. It hurts my brain.
 
Sleeve88 said:
Also in the same vein, I heard Brian Cox talking about the fact that the universe could eventually stop expanding and start contracting back into itself destroying everything in its wake until it is just the size of an atom.

So what would that atom be contained in if there was no universe? The universe itself has to be in something, surely. I should stop thinking about it. It hurts my brain.
Click to expand...

Our minds only allow us to understand things we can, not beyond :p
 
Just the size of an atom doesnt work in my head, an atom that contains all the atoms of everything in the universe, surely even compressed the amount of stuff would still be pretty big.
I cant see it collapsing as such, I would think that it would expand to a point where its expansion runs out of energy or meets another force that has more energy and then would start to distort or push it back but not in a uniform manner, think air bubbles in the ocean, they have pretty random shapes on the way to the surface as they interact with things on the way up..
 
Another M42 / Orion nebula. This was taken on Tuesday with 112 subs at 30 seconds each.



The scope and camera were covered in frost by the end of the night and my toes got very cold, but for me it shows progress so I'm quite pleased.
 
Thanks :) Yeah, it's 112 individual images, so 56 minutes of exposure in all. The images were combined using a program called deep sky stacker.

The setup for any one interested was
Telsecope: Skywatcher 200p
Mount: EQ5 goto
Camera: Canon 1100D @ ISO 800

A couple more images from a few months back :)

Andromeda
8206996804_014e3281bf_b.jpg


M57 - A planetary nebula with darks frames applied.
8206991508_56cc4db282_b.jpg


M57 - The same image as above but without the dark frames
8205902225_a87a74dc84_b.jpg


The dark frames are just images taken by the camera while the lens cap on.
Because the lens cap is on all that is recorded by the camera is the noise that it generates, which can then be subtracted when the real images are stacked in deep skystacker.
The difference it made blew me away when I made this image, so many more stars in the first image.
 
Very nice Pictures! How long were the exposures for andromeda? I managed to find it the other night but my motors decided to have a hissy fit at me so I couldn't reliably get it without having huge star trails :(
 
Great images :cool: Would love to get into Astrophotography but I lack the skill and money atm! :p

Anyway I think if I get some work in the holidays that are upcoming I could find myself with enough money for a scope upgrade (£300-£400 maybe), but I have no idea what to get if I can :(
 
I managed to get alittle data this week, its been cloudly for almost 2 months now :mad:

This is 6x400s before the clouds rolled in again.

8FzzqdL.jpg

Went over my M42 data again and made this.

8LTKaZj.jpg
 
Just spent a week doing AP :D

Pentax 105SDP with ATIK 383L (@-15degC) and Baader LRGB filters.


HDR by Nick and Sandrine, on Flickr

Core

M42 core by Nick and Sandrine, on Flickr

Still need to finish it as it's WIP- no darks subtracted etc, fixing misalignment etc.

LRGB subs of the core above:
L: 9x600 sec, 15x10 sec, 27x4 sec
R: 9x600 sec, 13x30 sec, 15x4 sec
G: 9x600 sec, 9x10 sec, 9x4 sec
B: 9x600 sec, 9x30sec, 9x10 sec, 9x4 sec

Flats: for each L,R,G,B filter 20x 4 second
Darks: 20x600sec, 20x30sec, 20x10sec, 20x4sec..

I was going to add more green & red but ran out of time..
 
Last edited:
Sleeve said:
Also in the same vein, I heard Brian Cox talking about the fact that the universe could eventually stop expanding and start contracting back into itself destroying everything in its wake until it is just the size of an atom.

So what would that atom be contained in if there was no universe? The universe itself has to be in something, surely. I should stop thinking about it. It hurts my brain.
Click to expand...

I started reading Brian Greene's "The hidden reality" this weekend http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hidden-Reality-Parallel-Universes-Cosmos/dp/0141029811

The first few chapters make a good attempt at answering your questions. Certainly worth £7 anyway :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom