Galaxy 5000

We were galaxy-surfing (again), we've surfed over 5000 galaxies, now. But, what exactly is 587739507154812933?















And, just to the left of Object # 587735240100413637, do we see a galactic merger?





















And is 587745539435069715 a galactic merger in the making?















And rarer still, is 587728880340107416 a trio of galaxies merging???




















And another apparent rarity, is 588007003625291956 a "one-armed" clockwise spiral galaxy?





















And what is the ghostly object # 587741489823940758?





















Here is the spectacular (though slightly blurry)
#
587729160049131604.
















How about the lovely counterclockwise spiral # 587736812601737361?



















And here is the lovely clockwise spiral # 587735349647966215.

What is Object # 588017704533491754?

We were galaxy-surfing at again and stumbled on some fairly interesting "finds" today.

How about the lovely "anti-clockwise" spiral galaxy #

588010879845531657?

And what is object # 588017704533491754?

Is object # 587738574607810629 a galactic merger in the making?

What can one make of Image # 587728949052047554? We expect it is just an artifact of the imaging process - but we still found it to be spectacular.

And here is the lovely clockwise spiral galaxy # 587734623237111983.

And what is the "ghostly" image # 587729388226478083?

And here is the spectacular counterclockwise spiral galaxy #
587731512068866080. Too bad its in black and white.

What in the Universe is Object # 587725471208702044?

We were "galaxy-surfing" on Galaxy Zoo again, and came up with this group of finds today... (We have tried to contact the Forum at Galaxy Zoo but can't seem to get the "thread" posted, nor do they even rarely answer their email as "Edd" reported...). It seems like our blogging about it is the only way to make contact...(fearfully so).

So here today is a "lovely" spiral galaxy found under 588017627236401163.

And is 588013382206816309 a galactic merger?

And what the heck is 587724650870538306 ? Is it a galactic cluster?

And what is 587738947733225834?

We found 587725471208702044 to be the strangest image of them all. Is it just a blur? It doesn't appear to be a star. What is it?

And what is the mysterious object # 588017704026702178?

What is the object # 587735236882071689?

And what is the mysterious object # 588017704026702178?

Not to mention 588017703459881024?

Can you see the “face” in 588018054581518473?

Can you see the “face” in 588018054581518473?

Is 587741532228616446 a merger?



587736584967094387 appears to be a lovely spiral galaxy…

What is the Big Red Dot Next to Galaxy/Object # 587725083044085969

What is the Big Red Dot next to Galaxy/Object # 587725083044085969? And, further off, what is the Yellow Dot?

Is it a star, a galaxy...unknown? We found it while doing galaxy analysis on Galaxy Zoo.

You can find the image at

http://cas.sdss.org/astro/en/tools/chart/chart.asp?ra=154.84622004&dec=-2.50184543.

Further still, what the heck is Galaxy/Object # 587741724964421721? You can find the image at http://cas.sdss.org/astro/en/tools/chart/chart.asp?ra=175.88553372&dec=23.86942981.

And how about # 587733605342839088? You can find the image at http://cas.sdss.org/astro/en/tools/chart/chart.asp?ra=250.34541035&dec=37.08601554.

And here is what appears to be a beautiful image of an elliptical galaxy, # 588010136802426997. You can find the image at http://cas.sdss.org/astro/en/tools/chart/chart.asp?ra=134.24073706&dec=51.35422096.

And here is what appears to be "lovely" galaxy with concentric rings, # 587738947740041304. We can't tell if it is a spiral or an elliptical galaxy. Please write a comment if you have answers. You can also find the image at http://cas.sdss.org/astro/en/tools/chart/chart.asp?ra=137.19807203&dec=29.86477578.

Interesting Object (?) # 587744874248929738

We were visiting Galaxy Zoo again, and found what we thought might be an interesting object: # 587744874248929738. It appears to be a star, but what are those concentric rings? Are they Einstein rings? We just don't know... You can find another image at http://cas.sdss.org/astro/en/tools/chart/chart.asp?ra=122.90597071&dec=9.66594358

Object # 588017604139352112

Our second day doing galaxy analysis on Galaxy Zoo produced another interesting result. (Yesterday, Edd replied to us by saying that yesterday's find was a "bright star" - its light is so intense that the camera is overwhelmed by the radiation. You can view Edd's comments at http://newsandinfofilter.blogspot.com/2008/08/galaxyobject-58858801762721923075001762.html ).

Today we found Object # 588017604139352112. We don't quite know what this is...is it a star factory that was reported about a month ago on the internet? (See the story: Rare 'Star-Making Machine' Found In Distant Universe.) We're hoping we can find out. If you want a copy of this image, contact us here and perhaps we can email it to you.

Galaxy Zoo Object # 588588017627219230750017627219230750

We haven't posted in a long time, we apologize for that. Too many projects, too much to do...

However, today we discovered Galaxy Zoo. We registered, took the tutorial, took the trials (we passed the first time, answering 14 of the 15 trials correctly the first time) and then began our Galaxy Analysis.

Our first time we "discovered" this rather bizarre image of Galaxy/Object # 588588017627219230750017627219230750 . It could be a just a blur. So we searched the FAQ and the Blog. Didn't find anything. So we contacted team@galaxyzoo.org and left an email regarding the object 588588017627219230750017627219230750 . We expect that it is a blur and don't expect to be contacted. Still, it is an interesting experience and a great blog.

We apologize for not being able to post the photo/image here. We have asked for permission. The image on the Galaxy Zoo website is much better than that seen on Sky Server Object Explorer. If you would like an email with the Galaxy Zoo photo, contact us here.

How did we find Galaxy Zoo? By reading this story on several websites (Yahoo, MSNBC...) today: Amateur astronomer spies gassy "cosmic ghost". For more info link to: Hanny's Voorwerp (Wikipedia). And: Galaxy Zoo discoveries (Wikipedia). And: Galaxy Zoo (Wikipedia). Note: We did a flickr search for Hanny's Voorwerp - no results.

Life Imitates our Blog?

Is life imitating our Blog? ...

We found this article today on Yahoo!: Greatest Mysteries: Where is the Rest of the Universe?

We talked about this subject late in January of this year...Click here to go back to that original post.

We also found this article today on Yahoo!: Scientist: Calculations Prove Life Began in Comet.

Which we did not predict, but is this the proof for the Panspermia hypothesis?

Updated 10/29/07: Scientists say dark matter doesn't exist

What does Kaon particle decay, neutrino spin, gravitomagnetism, dark energy, universal inflation and the shape of space all have to do with each other? Nothing. Unless you combine the empirical observations combined in the following five articles (cited below, with URL Links). For information regarding Kaon particle decay, you may want to look up Kaons in the Wikipedia. URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-particle

In and of themselves, the first three factors seem to have nothing to do with the other three. Yet, we wondered if dark energy, the shape of space and the universal inflation can be indirectly observed in neutrino spin, Kaon paritcle decay and gravitomagnetism.

Can the apparent permanent left-handed spinning neutrino (no matter the viewpoint of the observer), the apparent CP violations of Kaon decay and gravitomagnetism be explained by things unknown to us such as the ultimate shape of the universe, the cause of universal inflation and dark energy. Are the first three resultant from the latter three - or are the latter three one giant unseen phenomenon - a "super phenomenon"?

Is the left-handed spinning neutrino a descriptor of the shape of space? Is space, at this dimension, ultimately left-handed? And what of the apparent CP violations of Kaon decay? Is this a descriptor for the temporal component of space time continuously moving forward, and never "backward"? Are these combined effects caused by the unknown properties of the shape of the space we and the universe inhabit? As we have said in a previous posting, 95% of the material making up the knowable universe is unknown to us.

Are the spin-components of the left-handed neutrino and the temporal-component of Kaon decay contributors to the so-called gravitomagnetic effect and to the dark energy of the universe? Are there unknown regions of the universe ruled by mind-bending rules which we are virtually unaware of in our locality of the universe? In this way, are the rules of physics "localized" throughout the universe - producing apparently bizarre effects in our neighborhood, but are actually the norm, the rule in other localities in the universe? And, has inflation resulted in the isotropy that has produced these apparently bizarre, but commonplace physical phenomena elsewhere? Or is the reverse equally true? Is inflation a result of the isotropy of non-local bizarre physical phenomena appearing here and there throughout the universe?

New Scientist. V192, N 2581, “Where Does It All End?” http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19225811.300-fold-testament-the-shape-of-the-universe.html.

New Scientist. V192, N2577, “Gravity’s Secret” http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg19225771.800-gravitys-secret.html.

New Scientist.V193, N 2587, “Einstein’s Nemesis” http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg19325871.400-sending-einstein-into-a-spin.html.

New Scientist. V193, N 2593 “Who Put The Bang in The Big Bang?” http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19325931.400-inside-inflation-after-the-big-bang.html.

Scientific American. V296, N 2, “The Cosmic Grip of Dark Energy” .

Distribution of Mass/Dark Matter/Dark Energy in The Universe

If one takes the latest information and percentages of the distribution of mass, dark matter and dark energy in the universe, one sees at once that 95% of the universe is composed of currently undefined material(s) and energy. Only something like 4.83% of the Universe is composed of known materials.

Is this telling us something? Is the known universe in a light cone and the unknown material and energy is beyond our light cone and/or event horizon? Is this some sort of causality violation?

Is the whole universe some sort of causality violation?

Theorema Undecimus Indecium

Taking our image of microscopic "cellular" space, we began "indexing" this image and zooming out through the use of our image program.
As one "zooms out" and increases the scale of the spatial dimensions, one can begin to see the virtual disappearance of the mysterious dimenstions due to loss of resolution.







Until, finally, no further loss of resolution is possible and the mysterious dimensions are "lost" due to the scaling up of space.

Theorema Undecimus (Finally)

THEOREMA UNDECIMUS

The idea for this theorem (hypothesis, really) came to me on the evening of November 11th, 2006 and considers the eleven "mysterious" dimensions "discovered" by the all-but disfavored "String Theory". The editors have no particular adherence to "String Theory", but are very concerned with the shape of space. Particularly, microscopic or "quantum space".(As usual, we are having problems with Blogger posting any images. The degree of difficulty to even logging onto Blogger has become problematic, even diabolical).

The first image depicted here is an illumination of a bitmap image of a subatomic particle, depicted in eleven dimensions. It is, of course, impossible to depict a real particle with something as crude as a 2-dimensional bitmap canvas.The zeroth dimension was not labelled as it would be quite impossible in this depiction. Neither is the 1st dimension, as the linear dimension is obvious and might actually cause confusion later.Remember that this is a sub-atomic particle being depicted and the sub-atomic space it also occupies or (if correct) creates, distorts, etc.

Dimensions 2 and 3 depict the obvious macroscopic dimensions that we're accustomed to.Dimensions 4, 5 and 6 are "wrapped" around the particle and are "observable" only in the sub-atomic dimension.

Dimensions 7 and 8 describe the spin-direction dimensions of the sub-atomic particle and/or space.

Dimensions 9 and 10 describe the "hidden" spatial dimensions contained inside dimensions 4, 5 and 6.

Dimension 11 describes the space surrounding all the other dimensions, which is timelike.

But, how to prove any of this? We are wracking our brains trying to crack this one....sorry, eleven.Is macroscopic space definded by the interactions of microscopic cells defined by the previous description of a subatomic particle/space?

Is macroscopic space defined by the interactions of these proposed microscopic "cells' defined by the previous description of a subatomic particle? (See above image). Is macroscopic space built-up in this way by microscopic space? Do Planck dimensions have an effect on larger spatial dimensions, including the elucidation of time and timelike curvature in spatial dimensions?

And further still, do the "mysterious" dimensions then "cancel out" and disappear into the known dimensions of space and time (see image below)? Is this how the large scale structure of reality is created?

Deletion of Theorema Undecimus

We have had to delete our most recent posting on Blogger due to persistent and insoluble posting and editing problems experienced with Blogger. We have tried to contact the Blogger personnel without success. This has been a serious waste of our valuable time and resources.

Theorema Undecimus

THEOREMA UNDECIMUS

The idea for this theorem (hypothesis, really) came to me on the evening of November 11th, 2006 and considers the eleven "mysterious" dimensions "discovered" by the all-but discarded "String Theory". The editors have no particular adherence to "String Theory", but are very concerned with the shape of space. Particularly, microscopic or "quantum space".

(As usual, we are having problems with Blogger posting any images. The degree of difficulty to even logging onto Blogger has become problematic, even diabolical).

The image to be depicted here was an illumination of a bitmap image of a subatomic particle, depicted in eleven dimensions. It is, of course, impossible to depict a real particle with something as crude as a 2-dimensional bitmap canvas.

The zeroth dimensions was not labelled as it would be quite impossible in this depiction. Neither is the 1st dimension, as the linear dimension is obvious and might actually cause confusion later.

Remember that this is a sub-atomic particle being depicted and the sub-atomic space it also occupies or (if correct) creates, distorts, etc.

Dimensions 2 and 3 depict the obvious macroscopic dimensions that we're accustomed to.

Dimensions 4, 5 and 6 are "wrapped" around the particle and are "observable" only in the sub-atomic dimension.

Dimensions 7 and 8 describe the spin-direction dimensions of the sub-atomic particle and/or space.

Dimensions 9 and 10 describe the "hidden" spatial dimensions contained inside dimensions 4, 5 and 6.

Dimension 11 describes the space surrounding all the other dimensions, which is timelike.

Blogger image of this graphic is to the left? Can't see it? Contact Google - don't even bother trying to contact Blogger.


But, how to prove any of this? We are wracking our brains trying to crack this one....sorry, eleven.

Is macroscopic space definded by the interactions of microscopic cells defined by the previous description of a subatomic particle/space?



(A graphic was to be inserted here, but again, we are anticipating Blogger problems and will attempt to post it%2