This takes a while to load but it's pretty cool.

http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/647/solarsystemiy9.gif

wow, I never realized Uranus was that huge.

*But Seriously*

Yeah, I've seen that or something like that before, it amazes me, and I'm a little bit of a nerd when it comes to space.

I just found out that Pluto might actually be a binary dwarf planet. Wow, learn something new every day.

Oh Canis Majoris you're so big.

Yay the universe
http://www.wikisky.org/

how are they able to see out that far though?

This really gets you thinking doesn't it. The sheer size of the universe and the wonders that are in it. We're but one tiny speck on a planet, that is a speck compared to the sun, which is invisible to the size of other stars. And yet the environment we live in is, with no understatement, perfect. If Earth were merely a few hundred kilometers further from the Sun we would all die. The same goes if we were a little closer.

I think mankind should try to find themselves, rather than look into the universe.

It frightens me every time I try to grasp the size of the universe.

I was disappointed. I thought it was going to be the Gurren Lagann version.
This one's still cool, obviously. And slightly depressing. But mostly cool.
I wanna be a space cowboy!

crap venus was bigger than mars?...

goes to a question, how can a mass the size of canis majoris support itself without imploding on its own gravity?.. shouldn't it be a black hole/hypernova already?

how can a mass the size of canis majoris support itself without imploding on its own gravity?.. shouldn't it be a black hole/hypernova already?

I thought about this for a while and this is what I came up with/found

In addition to being the largest star, it is also one of the most energetic. Its power output is more than enough to sustain its immense gravity. But when its fuel is used up in a few billion years, you can be sure that it will form a good black hole.

and; A fellow named Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington has a theory which relates to Canis Majoris accurately:

The limit on mass arises because stars of greater mass have a higher rate of core energy generation, which is higher far out of proportion to their greater mass. For a sufficiently massive star, the outward pressure of radiant energy generated by nuclear fusion in the star’s core exceeds the inward pull of its own gravity. This is called the Eddington limit. Beyond this limit, a star ought to push itself apart, or at least shed enough mass to reduce its internal energy generation to a lower, maintainable rate. In theory, a more massive star could not hold itself together, because of the mass loss resulting from the outflow of stellar material.


Or, you could just say the finger of God is supporting it.

hm.. interesting, the fickle balance between radiating too much of itself and thus reduce in size or not radiate enough and implode on itself.

I suppose Canis Majoris isn't that massive either, just volumetrically 'massive'. and therefore its gravitational pull isn't as strong as, say the Eta Carinae.

But also remember, they're massive in OUR scale of things. Imagine the stuff, OUTSIDE of that? If there are any more.... probably so =]

But also remember, they're massive in OUR scale of things. Imagine the stuff, OUTSIDE of that? If there are any more.... probably so =]
Indeed, Infinity. If we panned the camera back enough, we'd see that our corner of the universe is actually just God's Penor. Which explains why men are so superior to women, at least in this corner of the universe. =D

Indeed, Infinity. If we panned the camera back enough, we'd see that our corner of the universe is actually just God's Penor. Which explains why men are so superior to women, at least in this corner of the universe. =D

What a weird thing to say lol.I hate to say this being a man in all, but technically women are genetically superior to men, for many reasons but this is not the place to discuss such matters:nono::topic:.
Anyhoo, I find it astonishing at how small we are in the whole scale of the universe( Pram was right T_T). Though I'd really like to see that we the fact that we can't exceed the speed of light proven false, so we can actually travel to these places and mabe find other planets similar to ours!!!! ^_^

What a weird thing to say lol.I hate to say this being a man in all, but technically women are genetically superior to men, for many reasons but this is not the place to discuss such matters:nono::topic:.
Anyhoo, I find it astonishing at how small we are in the whole scale of the universe( Pram was right T_T). Though I'd really like to see that we the fact that we can't exceed the speed of light proven false, so we can actually travel to these places and mabe find other planets similar to ours!!!! ^_^

Um, faster than speed of light, is undoubtedly 100% impossible.
Do you know how we can see the Nebula and the other galxies 7000+ light years away? That's because what we're seeing it at its form 7000 light years ago, because that's how long it'd take for the light to come back to us (we see the reflection of light, at light speed).

Basically if we could travel faster than light, we could catch up to the light that is 1 light year away and use a telescope to look at the Earth's beginnings, dinosaurs or whatever!

From a physics student >.>....

I hate to say this being a man in all, but technically women are genetically superior to men, for many reasons but this is not the place to discuss such matters

Interesting. Perhaps you'll be willing to clarify in a separate thread?

Meh, mabe if I feel like it one day. That topic is destined to get locked, because threads like that tend to bring out the worst in people. Plus I suck at short explanations(as you probably seen in my other posts) , and I type most of my comments on my PS3 which has a character limit in it's text boxes. So until my paraphrasing skills improve,I'd just be boring everybody to death with my rambling. Like I'm doing now :topic:
If anyone has complainants please PM me. Don't expect a quick response though ^_^.

I had a dream once about holding the universe in my hand and being able to observe humans through a microscope.

Since we are so tiny in this universe.. It leads me to thinking how unimportant we are and whether or not an omnipotent god is existent.

Some of the stars look like bacterias on petri dishes.

hm.. interesting, the fickle balance between radiating too much of itself and thus reduce in size or not radiate enough and implode on itself.
It's an interesting point you bring up there. There actually are variable stars that contract and expand periodically. It would go too far to explain it in detail, but you can think of it like this: Somewhere in its development the star gets out of balance, ie. the pressure produced in the core is lower than it's gravity, thus the star contracts. Because of the contraction the core of the star heats up a lot and now the pressure exceeds the gravity. This continues until the pressure produced by nuclear fusion drops again to a level that is lower than the gravitational attraction and everything begins anew.

Those variable stars are very intriguing, they're called Cepheid Variables (after the first star that was discovered of its kind) and because of their periodical nature are excellent tools for distance measurements . Some of them are featured in the OP (even Canis Majoris is a variable, though only semi-periodical). As you can see they're amazingly massive stars. :o

I suppose Canis Majoris isn't that massive either, just volumetrically 'massive'. and therefore its gravitational pull isn't as strong as, say the Eta Carinae.That's right. It's the largest but not the most massive star known. Interestingly though, Eta Carinae is a binary system so they can't really be compared.