Olbers paradox

We are the Borg.
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Why do we not observe any of the obscuring dust ever glowing as bright as the stars the dust obscures?

And yes, this has been splained many times, but never answered
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

It’s this part that has bugged me for like a decade now

While dark clouds could obstruct the light, these clouds would heat up, until they were as hot as the stars, and then radiate the same amount of light.
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

There are no images from the Universe that show any obscuring dust ever glowing as bright as stars

In our own Galaxy the obscuring dust has been absorbing star light for a very very long time, but none of it is glowing with light like the stars behind the dust

I don’t expect you to know the answer, but I enjoy thinking about this sort of thing
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Olbers paradox was explained away by the Big Bang expanding Universe theory

But none of that matters to our local and very bright Milky Way

Why isn’t the Milky Way glowing as bright as the sun?

The answer is the obscuring dust

In the paradox that dust is presumed to glow as bright as the stars it obscures, meaning the dust can’t be the reason for the dark sky

But at the same time the dust is explained as the reason the Milky Way looks dark

It doesn’t add up
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 20599
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 11:46 pm
Title: Bruce of all Bruces
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by Bruce »

Each particulate of dust can only emit a tiny fragment of thiny fragment of light it absorbs, so why would you expect it to be as luminous as a star?

By the same logic, the moon should be a bright as the sun because it's been absorbing and reflecting the light of the sun since its formation, so it should be super hot, right.

Space is could and vast. Plenty of time, distance and emptiness for light to disperse and fade.
Such potential!
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Abdul Alhazred wrote: Sun Sep 13, 2020 4:13 pm Or maybe the universe just plain isn't infinite and is on the average rather sparse?
That may be, but it isn't what is bugging me. Olbers paradox really isn't the issue, it's the assumption contained in it, mentioned in post #2
While dark clouds could obstruct the light, these clouds would heat up, until they were as hot as the stars, and then radiate the same amount of light.
Here's another version of it
obscuration by dust ===> distant stars are blocked out and appear fainter. Turns out this won't work because dust, if it absorbs energy will heat up and re-radiate the energy. This means that the Universe will still be filled with the same amount of radiation, the dust acts simply as a go-between so to speak.
https://web.archive.org/web/19990506085 ... lbers.html

So one reason explaining the dark sky is handwaved away by saying dust can't be the cause of the dark sky, because (see above)
Bruce wrote: Sun Sep 13, 2020 10:23 pm Space is could and vast. Plenty of time, distance and emptiness for light to disperse and fade.
Again, that may be the case, but I am talking about something right here at home, that has nothing to do with vast distances, the expanding Universe, the Big Bang or a lack of stars. The Milky Way is so dense along the plane of it, especially near the center, that it should glow as bright as the sun. It should be visible during the day. Looking along the galactic plane meets the condition of a star at every point of sight, it's literally a wall of solid starlight.

Infrared isn't blocked by dust so here is an image of what I mean
mw in infrared.png
https://www.scientificamerican.com/gall ... -infrared/

It doesn't look like that in the visible, because of dust obscuring the light. In fact there is no dust in the Milky way glowing like starlight, no matter how much light is being absorbed. Dust shows up as dark obscuring matter.

Is it a time thing? Not enough time has passed for any dust to start glowing? (Olbers paradox again)

Of course not. So what is it?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
ed
Posts: 40155
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by ed »

Robinson, you keep this up I'm going to hunt you down and kick you in the nut-sac.

Are we clear?
This space for let
User avatar
Fid
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 3:45 pm
Location: The island of Atlanta

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by Fid »

Goddam bro all your weaponry and all you threaten is a kick in the most likely non-existant ball sack.
Cannons...I'm pretty sure you've got one.
... The stars were suns, but so far away they were just little points of light ... The scale of the universe suddenly opened up to me. It was a kind of religious experience. There was a magnificence to it, a grandeur, a scale which has never left me. Never ever left me.
Carl Sagan
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Ed, if you spent just a tiny amount of your infinite life learning about interstellar dust, you might get an aha!

Instead of raging like an impotent deity
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 20599
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 11:46 pm
Title: Bruce of all Bruces
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by Bruce »

I don't know what else to tell you except maybe that astrophysics doesn't work the way you think it works? Also, Olber lived during a time when everyone thought the universe was static and finite. In fact his paradox was an argument against the thinking of the day.

Do have any other concerns about outdated ideas?

Do you worry about what might happen if Atlas shrugged?
Such potential!
User avatar
ed
Posts: 40155
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by ed »

robinson wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:04 pm Ed, if you spent just a tiny amount of your infinite life learning about interstellar dust, you might get an aha!

Instead of raging like an impotent deity
Let me be crystalline clear on one point ...

I created fucking dust precisely so I COULD ignore it.

That is a divine truth: Ignore the goddamn dust.

And here you go and what do you do?

Start a thread about the dust.

And the nut-sac kick is because it is far more gratifying to make foot to nut-sac contact than it is to shoot someone.
This space for let
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Olber’s paradox is considered one of the most interesting physics problem in science

https://www.gregschool.org/gregschoolle ... 6hj4-pzpcf

No less than Edgar Poe and Lord Kelvin both “solved” it, and it has interested generations of astronomers and philosophers of natural science

All of it, every last bit of the solution involves dismissing the obvious answer, which is the source of the paradox itself

For the barely interested, the obvious answer is the light is dimmed by dust and gas (and ions and cold plasma) that is everywhere in space. That’s why the sky is dark at night, not blazing with the light of 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars, or a "1" with 24 zeros after it (1 septillion in the American numbering system; 1 quadrillion in the European system).

(This is considered a gross underestimate)

That’s just the stars we can see, nobody has any idea how many are out there that the light hasn’t reached us yet
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

The paradox comes from the assumption that “obscuring dust would glow as bright as the stars”, which is the source of the problem. If dust dims the light so the sky is dark, there is no paradox.

Looking at the local galaxy, the one we are in, it’s quite obvious it is dark because dust obscured the light.

If you explain this by saying there hasn’t been time for the dust to be heated up by all the star light it is blocking, this just raises another question.
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Our galaxy is between 10 and 12 billion years old, though the oldest stars in it might be 13 billion years old.

If the obscuring dust is going to glow as bright as the stars, it’s taking it’s sweet time about it
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

When they zoomed in with the Hubble telescope, the center of our galaxy is not only solid with stars, there are so many the stars are blocking the stars behind them. It’s a solid field of stars, no empty spaces at all. (Even if it was only 10% full it doesn’t change the problem, it would be 10% as bright as the sun, which is really bright)

So just 30,000 light years from us is a solid wall of bright stars, no expanding Universe or “the light hasn’t reached us”, or any of the solutions to the paradox proposed are causing it to be very dim

It’s simply dark cold gas and dust blocking the starlight

But the assumption about star light is if it was just obscuring matter, that would glow as bright as the stars, which it doesn’t

No where do we see dust glowing like that, even after 10 billion years

So what’s up with that?
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »



To be crystal clear about it

My wonderment is over the claim “it can’t be dust because it would glow as bright as the starlight”

Which is fucking absurd
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

ed wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 12:01 pm Robinson, you keep this up I'm going to hunt you down and kick you in the nut-sac.

Are we clear?
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Cosmic fart
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Well, I guess nobody cares, which is par for the course

Of course
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
ed
Posts: 40155
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by ed »

welcome to my world
This space for let
User avatar
Fid
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 3:45 pm
Location: The island of Atlanta

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by Fid »

~~Sigh~~Such a waste of cannon. Ya know they filled the barrels of the cannons with concrete.
... The stars were suns, but so far away they were just little points of light ... The scale of the universe suddenly opened up to me. It was a kind of religious experience. There was a magnificence to it, a grandeur, a scale which has never left me. Never ever left me.
Carl Sagan
User avatar
ed
Posts: 40155
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: G_D

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by ed »

Concrete can be removed.
This space for let
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

The answer to my question is actually known. But learning of it changes nothing.
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 20599
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 11:46 pm
Title: Bruce of all Bruces
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by Bruce »

robinson wrote: Thu Sep 17, 2020 10:42 pm
ed wrote: Mon Sep 14, 2020 12:01 pm Robinson, you keep this up I'm going to hunt you down and kick you in the nut-sac.

Are we clear?
Did anyone notice toward the end of the clip, after the particulates started to slow down, the clouds appeared to become gravitationally pulled in by the surrounding stars? Is this an optical illusion? How far away are those stars from each other? How fast was the cloud moving?
Such potential!
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

This might help explain what you are seeing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V838_Monocerotis

Image
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

If it wasn’t for the dust and gas obscuring the light, the center of the andromeda galaxy would be far brighter that the moon
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Dust and gas absorbs visible light, but radiates in infrared

Which is why it will never “glow as bright as the stars”

The claim that the sky is dark because of the expansion of the Universe, or because it is too young, does not explain why our galaxy is so dark
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Dust and gas absorbs visible light, but radiates in infrared

Which is why it will never “glow as bright as the stars”

The claim that the sky is dark because of the expansion of the Universe, or because it is too young, does not explain why our galaxy is so dark
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

If dust and gas did not absorb light the sky would look like this




Except it would blind you instantly
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris
User avatar
robinson
Posts: 12310
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:01 am
Title: Pretty much dead already
Location: USA

Re: Olbers paradox

Post by robinson »

Both the high energy photons, and most of the infrared are absorbed by our atmosphere

Most of the visible from distant stars is absorbed by cosmic dust and gas
still working on Sophrosyne, but I will no doubt end up with Hubris