FlyingSpacefrog

FlyingSpacefrog t1_j1lzzg0 wrote

Reply to comment by SamB110 in Is the Milky Way... Normal? by cciccitrixx

I don’t understand what the other guy was saying. But under most commonly accepted models of the universe, there is no center to the universe. The Big Bang happened everywhere all at once, and the universe appears to be infinite in size.

If you’re talking about the observable universe, which is just the portion of it that we can see because light has had time to reach us, then we are at the exact center of the universe simply because light travels at a constant speed and we can see the same distance in all directions.

28

FlyingSpacefrog t1_j1lyuki wrote

Reply to comment by Aarcn in Is the Milky Way... Normal? by cciccitrixx

Yes because the sun will be nearing its end of life at the same time and expanding into a red giant that will stretch out to fill the space currently occupied by the planets Venus and Mercury, and possibly the earth as well.

But the actual galactic merger is unlikely to see stars get close enough to disrupt the orbits of planets around our star. The orbits of stars themselves around the galaxy will change in unexpected ways.

10

FlyingSpacefrog t1_j0gih13 wrote

We do the same thing as what we do with interplanetary travel. You use your knowledge of orbital mechanics to determine how long it takes for you to get there, and model the motion of the target body to predict where it will be after that much time has passed, and then you use this information to plan your flight.

Stars have a much more complex orbit than planets do as they are affected strongly by nearby stars and not just circling a single center of mass like planets do around stars. So you need a lot of computing power, and a lot of data about the initial positions and speeds of each star. Then because with interstellar travel we are often contemplating journeys of many centuries or even longer, you have to worry about any inaccuracies in your initial data compounding on each other. In the FTL case you’re only dealing with decades of travel, so the calculations actually require less precision than those longer slower than light trips would.

1

FlyingSpacefrog t1_ixsrrsr wrote

The total mass of all objects humans have sent into space thus far is insignificant compared to even one of Saturns rings.

Any orbital debris less than 1000 km in altitude is likely to reenter the atmosphere and vaporize itself within the next century, so it has very little chance of forming a permanent planetary ring.

We sort of do have a ring out at geosynchronous orbit already, but it’s very spaced out and consists mostly of intact satellites that are still operational, with another ring right next to it of satellites that are retired and out of fuel which will remain on their current path for millions of years before gravitational interactions from the moon have enough time to significantly impact their orbits. So if we do get a visible ring of debris around earth my bet is it’s going to be near geostationary orbit in altitude

6