# A map of the universe



## alte (Sep 4, 2010)

In the most zoomed in picture, each dot represents a star in the neigbourhood of the Sun. Currently, we can't even imagine covering the distance to our closest star, 4.2 light years away. 
Keeping this in mind when zooming out, you can see how big the visible universe really is.

http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/12lys.html


----------



## Same Difference (Aug 26, 2010)

Humanity is the biggest nothing in the Universe.


----------



## Dreamscape (Sep 18, 2010)

Same Difference said:


> Humanity is the biggest nothing in the Universe.


In what way do you mean this? I think sentience is the only _something_ with meaning that arises in the universe, even if it is a very small portion of it.


----------



## Same Difference (Aug 26, 2010)

It has yet to be proven that sentience is sustainable.


----------



## TheGreatPretender (Sep 6, 2010)

Same Difference said:


> It has yet to be proven that sentience is sustainable.


Please elaborate


----------



## Dreamscape (Sep 18, 2010)

Same Difference said:


> It has yet to be proven that sentience is sustainable.


I don't see why that matters. Is that inferring that only something eternal can have any significance? I can accept that my own life and sentience is transitory, yet that doesn't make it any less real or important to me while I'm experiencing it.


----------



## Same Difference (Aug 26, 2010)

Attributing "significance" to something is too subjective to begin with. As sentient beings, we have a strong interest in promoting the idea that somehow sentience is sacred. It's a sort of natural egoism. The whole thing grows out of a completely biased point of view.

I doubt sentience is rare in the Universe, and looking at human sentience in particular, it doesn't appear to be that remarkable anyway. Evolution gave us a little shove in the direction of bigger brains, that's all. And most of the time we behave no differently than our animal cousins. From the perspective of higher beings we're probably looked down upon like bacteria.

And that's assuming sentience is sustainable and doesn't eventually self-destruct. If that's the case, our presence is completely irrelevant in the grand scale of things.


----------



## sarafinanickelbocker (May 16, 2010)

Holy moly! It's amazing what we've managed to map out from our own vantage point so far. Thank you for sharing. That was fun.


----------



## Dreamscape (Sep 18, 2010)

I feel bad going off topic so much but I feel obligated to reply. That is a cool link though alte. It's hard to wrap the mind around the vast size of the universe...



Same Difference said:


> Attributing "significance" to something is too subjective to begin with. As sentient beings, we have a strong interest in promoting the idea that somehow sentience is sacred. It's a sort of natural egoism. The whole thing grows out of a completely biased point of view.


As sentient beings we can experience pain, for one. That has nothing to do with ego or being sacred either. The avoidance of pain is one of the larger things that we contend with on a sentient level as a natural struggle for survival whether we like it or not.



> I doubt sentience is rare in the Universe, and looking at human sentience in particular, it doesn't appear to be that remarkable anyway.


No way of knowing where it is except on Earth, so that's just making an assumption. Human sentience isn't remarkable by what comparison? You say that like like there is some other lens we can look through to classify our sentient experience when there isn't. We can only objectively reference things from a human awareness. Since we do know our brain and nervous system is highly evolved though it isn't a stretch to conclude we can experience a high level of sentience, for better or worse. 


> From the perspective of higher beings we're probably looked down upon like bacteria.


Higher beings? What does that even mean; higher intelligence? No reason to assume this exists either. Intelligence has been quite rare on our own planet and there's nothing to show there is anything higher elsewhere. It doesn't mean we're deserving of it, though. We do act similarly to bacteria destroying the planet and other sentient beings in our own favor. Yet at the same time we are still held responsible as the custodians over the planet in terms of the larger impacts we can have on the environment and the sentience of all beings on Earth because we do have intelligence. This is kind of getting off track though on the point I was trying to make. Even if we were to find and acknowledge higher beings or intelligence in the universe, it's nonsensical to dismiss an evolved sentient experience in general.


----------



## OrbitalResonance (Sep 21, 2010)

Same Difference said:


> I doubt sentience is rare in the Universe, and looking at human sentience in particular, it doesn't appear to be that remarkable anyway.


Compared to What?

Every form of sentience is spectacular.

I mean come on, its the Universe becoming aware of itself..

Anyway, heres a great map.










In fact, EVERYTHING is Spectacular.

In terms of Sustainability it is up to the Sentience to become Sustainable.

Why do you look down on bacteria? Bacteria are awesome. Some are even critical for larger organisms.


----------



## Classified (Dec 7, 2004)

I wonder if they considered that by the time the light hits Earth, the stars have moved?


----------



## OrbitalResonance (Sep 21, 2010)

They Have!


----------



## alte (Sep 4, 2010)

How do you find out how many light years each xRy is? Is there some formula?

If I understand you correctly, 
0R - Oort cloud, 0.25 ly
1R - ? 
2R - nearest star, 4 ly
3R - ?
4R - ?
5R - ?
6R - ?
7R - edge of galaxy, 100,000 ly (?)
8R - ?
9R - to Andromeda, 2 million ly


----------



## LostPancake (Apr 8, 2009)

I like this image from that site - it gives a bit of an idea of how big the visible universe is. This just goes out to 1 billion light years. These are galaxies, not stars. And the universe (what we can see of it) goes out 13 times this far in all directions. That is insane!


----------



## AussiePea (Mar 27, 2007)

The mind boggles.

God really went to a lot of trouble making so many galaxies etc just for us. <3


----------



## Same Difference (Aug 26, 2010)

Possible connection?


----------



## Jnmcda0 (Nov 28, 2003)

Same Difference said:


> Possible connection?


Complex patterns like this can be created by relatively basic mathematical formulas, so I'd say that it is possible that there is a connection in the underlying structure of neurons and the structure of the universe on the macro scale. As the Rush song "Natural Science" goes, there are "wheels within wheels in a spiral array, a pattern so grand and complex". Have you ever seen a Mandelbrot set? If you don't know what it is, look it up on Wikipedia.

Here is a graphical representation of a Mandelbrot set:


----------



## alte (Sep 4, 2010)

^ Ok, I think I got it now. What about micro-wormhole foam hyperdrives? I have read about warpdrives and know that they theoretically work by creating a space-time bubble around a travelling spacecraft. Practically, they are not possible to create though because of energy limitations. 

I have not heard of micro-wormhole foam hyperdrives. Google is of no help either.


----------



## alte (Sep 4, 2010)

max4225 said:


> Google wouldn't have much on that yet. Probably for the best.
> .


Can you provide a link or recommend a source that explains the hyperdrive further? Is the hyperdrive even remotely feasible? Thanks!


----------



## peachclouds (Sep 16, 2010)

this site rules...thanks for sharing.


----------



## alte (Sep 4, 2010)

peachclouds said:


> this site rules...thanks for sharing.


you are welcome! I didn't realize initially that you can scroll down the page at each level of zoom to get more information on objects at that particular level of zoom.


----------

