Comments on: What Colliding Galaxies Look Like: Photos That Will Amaze http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/colliding-galaxies-photos-amaze/ The official Derren Brown Blog Fri, 10 Feb 2012 11:29:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Raymond http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/colliding-galaxies-photos-amaze/#comment-62911 Raymond Sun, 08 Aug 2010 19:51:11 +0000 http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/?p=13565#comment-62911 @Radu C, you seem to have forgotten the fact that universes are not solid matter. Therefore there's no big-bang, it's matter attracting and merging. It's much like having a bucket of water and dropping in food colouring. The big-bang (still no more than a theory), is different it's more or less an implosion of a tiny solid particle. The smaller the particle the more energy it harvests to keep everything together. The singularity (beyond point zero) is the big complex question. Simply said: "Where on earth..." (wrong choice of words), "did that particle come from". So colliding universes is not comparable with a bigbang. Theoretically in certain parts of the universes you are completely safe (and imagine the spectacular views!) @Radu C, you seem to have forgotten the fact that universes are not solid matter. Therefore there’s no big-bang, it’s matter attracting and merging. It’s much like having a bucket of water and dropping in food colouring.
The big-bang (still no more than a theory), is different it’s more or less an implosion of a tiny solid particle. The smaller the particle the more energy it harvests to keep everything together. The singularity (beyond point zero) is the big complex question. Simply said: “Where on earth…” (wrong choice of words), “did that particle come from”.
So colliding universes is not comparable with a bigbang. Theoretically in certain parts of the universes you are completely safe (and imagine the spectacular views!)

]]> By: chris http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/colliding-galaxies-photos-amaze/#comment-62910 chris Sun, 08 Aug 2010 19:17:44 +0000 http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/?p=13565#comment-62910 wow, so pretty but can you imagine what it must have been like ot have lived in those galaxies? wow, so pretty but can you imagine what it must have been like ot have lived in those galaxies?

]]> By: melika http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/colliding-galaxies-photos-amaze/#comment-62907 melika Sun, 08 Aug 2010 17:49:28 +0000 http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/?p=13565#comment-62907 ooh pretty, and to think it probably only cost a few hundred billion dollars to get... ooh pretty, and to think it probably only cost a few hundred billion dollars to get…

]]> By: Radu C http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/colliding-galaxies-photos-amaze/#comment-62903 Radu C Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:52:38 +0000 http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/?p=13565#comment-62903 OK, last comment assumed one galaxy per path :) Can NASA draw a itinerary for galaxies by any chance? You know, where they've been, where they're going, that kind of stuff. OK, last comment assumed one galaxy per path :) Can NASA draw a itinerary for galaxies by any chance? You know, where they’ve been, where they’re going, that kind of stuff.

]]> By: Radu C http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/colliding-galaxies-photos-amaze/#comment-62902 Radu C Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:50:15 +0000 http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/?p=13565#comment-62902 When I hear about colliding galaxies, I think of the Big Bang. That is, the Big Bang was supposed to start from Point 0, and expand away from that point. That gives me a radial dispersion. In this radial dispersion things just go away from one another. Collision doesn't fit this idea, as for two objects to collide they need to get closer to each other. Even if the primordial soup was spinning around its axis this would happen. Nor if the Big Bang were a collection of a huge number of smaller bangs, since everything would still go away from the centre. The only other idea is that those galaxies slowed down enough for their gravitational fields to attract them into each other, no longer going on radial trajectories. If I'm wrong, it's only because I quote hearsay (aka "popular belief"). When I hear about colliding galaxies, I think of the Big Bang. That is, the Big Bang was supposed to start from Point 0, and expand away from that point. That gives me a radial dispersion. In this radial dispersion things just go away from one another. Collision doesn’t fit this idea, as for two objects to collide they need to get closer to each other. Even if the primordial soup was spinning around its axis this would happen. Nor if the Big Bang were a collection of a huge number of smaller bangs, since everything would still go away from the centre.

The only other idea is that those galaxies slowed down enough for their gravitational fields to attract them into each other, no longer going on radial trajectories.

If I’m wrong, it’s only because I quote hearsay (aka “popular belief”).

]]> By: Wes http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/colliding-galaxies-photos-amaze/#comment-62892 Wes Sun, 08 Aug 2010 11:48:57 +0000 http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/?p=13565#comment-62892 It looks like a big sparkly embryo. The galaxies are mating. It looks like a big sparkly embryo. The galaxies are mating.

]]> By: sarah http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/2010/08/colliding-galaxies-photos-amaze/#comment-62885 sarah Sun, 08 Aug 2010 09:11:25 +0000 http://derrenbrown.co.uk/blog/?p=13565#comment-62885 nature has some of the most beautiful art =) if only they taught us this stuff in science class. nature has some of the most beautiful art =) if only they taught us this stuff in science class.

]]>