"Seeing Stars" was a program on PBS tonight, and of all the programs I have seen on science, never have I seen a show in which the program matched my present day thinking. In the past two days I have been discussing distortions of what we see in astronomy and what really exists in astronomy. And this program is about the distortions of the Earth's atmosphere on telescopes.
But in these past few days, I have asked for what distortions does the Oort Cloud impose on astronomy.
In "Seeing Stars" they discuss these topics:
(a) Atacomba (spelling) Desert Telescope to minimize atmospheric distortion. Sadly though, where the two astronomers thought they saw a black hole in the Milky Way (no black holes exist), that the same could be said of the other nearby dots.
(b) telescope on a airplane called (sofia (spelling))
(c) James Webb telescope to be place at L2 in deep space
(d)Infrared telescopes and then sub-millimeter-light telescopes
(e) France's under water Antares Neutrino telescope.
It was an interesting program.
But I would like those astronomers, not the neutrino telescope, but the other telescopes to answer a question, and include the Hubble telescope.
Can any of those telescopes see the Voyager 1 spacecraft as it is exiting the Solar System? Can Hubble, can Atacomba?, can Sofia? can the sub-millimeter light telescope?
Can any telescope actually spot and see the Voyager spacecraft this very moment? And if the answer is "no", then at what distance was the last time that any telescope could spot Voyager?
It is important for the science of astronomy to stop playing this game of not telling what the limits of our instruments are.
Because errors like that of saying "we spotted a black-hole in the Milky Way, when all they really did was have a moment of "delusion of seeing".
Now if the Universe is a plutonium atom and the Observable Universe is the last electron which is shaped like a elongated ellipsoid, a cylinder shape, then the galaxies we can see are only a small fraction of all the galaxies and thus it would be black and void beyond the horizon of the Cosmos.
Suppose Earth had no atmosphere and we trained our telescopes along the surface of Earth. The limit of our telescope would be the horizon, the curvature of Earth would mark the end of what we can see.
Now apply that to astronomy and the curvature of the Cosmos. That at some distance, our telescopes will see a horizon boundary and beyond we see nothing by black dark Space-- Voids.
This means that the Great Wall and Sloan Great Walls are not far away but rather close to the Milky Way.
Now I written enough for one post, but I do realize in this post I have an alternative explanation for the Dark Night Sky problem. In prior editions of this book I explained away the dark night sky, Olbers paradox by saying the Universe is a atom and has cavity, a quantum blackbody cavity and they are black. Now I have another explanation, that the Cosmos is ellipsoid shape with a horizon and so stars and galaxies are visible only up to the horizon and beyond the light never reaches us.
Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a excellent, simple and fair author- archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as seen here: