Post removed at user’s request.
6 Likes
How can it be void of dark matter as, by definition, dark matter is something yet to be defined and directly detected with current physics theories?
I’m curious as to where this comes from.
1 Like
That’s a picture of a dark nebula. It’s chock full of normal matter (enough so that it blocks the light from the background stars), and it emits lots of radiation at infrared and microwave frequencies.
6 Likes
Note that voids do exist, but that image is an absurd sensationalist version of known/speculated voids. The known voids all have galaxies in them, but are definitely under-populated relative to the rest of the known universe.
In increasing size:
.
(note that this is “extremely huge”, which is more than “very huge” and less than “humongously huge” - sometimes I wonder about Wikipedia)
5 Likes
One day we’ll have the Very Huge Telescope and the Extremely Huge Telescope and everything will be clear again.
2 Likes
And that’s why scientist shouldn’t be allowed to name things.
1 Like
Well, let’s see their choices… You have numbers, letters, numbers and letters, descriptive names, puns and otherwise opposites of descriptive names, lyrical names, descriptive Latin names, descriptive Greek names, pop culture references, sci-fi references… And I think that’s it.
And really, when you’re taking about holes, you probably want to stay clear of references because of the possible negative connotations. Vacuus Magnus sounds a bit pretentious or like a name from a Monty Python sketch. Not really sure what else they could had called it. They could make it a contest. “Name that void.” I’m sure the internet will come up with many fine names like “The emotional void” or “Yo mama’s last known location”
It’s not much better in the RF world.
Extremely Low Frequency
Super Low Frequency
Ultra Low Frequency
Very Low Frequency
Low Frequency
Medium Frequency
High Frequency
Very High Frequency
Ultra High Frequency
Super High Frequency
Extremely High Frequency
3 Likes
What, no “even higher frequency”?
Actually, the Big Bang theory got its current name not by the people who discovered it, but by one of its opponents. If I remember the story correctly, the guy was talking in a radio show (which were a big deal at the time) and trying to make the big bang theory sound ridiculous he called it the big bang theory. I think he said something like “it is ridiculous to consider everything came from a giant explosion, a big bang”. The name was catchy and easy to say and so it stuck, getting used both by opponents and proponents of the theory. The original name was something larger and much blander, I think.
1 Like
So before it was called the Big Bang, it was called the Giant Explosion? 
2 Likes
I don’t remember. It’s been a long time since I read that book. But Wikipedia suggests “hypothesis of the primeval atom” as its original name.
1 Like
That’s correct…I think it was goldman or goldstein or something…the man had gold in his name and was arguing with Lemaitre in Europe. Gold whoever was from oxford if I’m remembering correctly as well. It’s been awhile…I know I learned it from “The Big Bang” by Simon Singh in an astronomy class. Great book I really enjoyed it!
1 Like
Is there a version of the string theory where our big bang is the free of a singularity formed in a black hole on a universe wher our universe is only a little string ? If not does it sounds possible scientifically ?
Lemaître also called it the “Cosmic Egg” (well, the original singularity at least), which is kind of poetic. “Big Bang” is catchier, though. It may be because I’m not a native English speaker, but I can’t really see what’s wrong with it.
1 Like
I remember reading something similar to that in “A Universe from Nothing”. In it, Laurence M. Krauss gives a very good synopsis of our knowledge of astronomy and cosmology, evidence that led us to those theories, as well as a hypothesis about how the universe can be affected and even created through inflation, the expansion of the void. It’s worth reading, if you have time for it.
1 Like
Yeah, that’s the book I’m taking about. Read it when I was still in school and I think it taught me more about physics than school did at the time. Also a good book that is worth the read, if you have the time for it.
2 Likes