Solving the Andromeda Problem: A Newbie's Guide

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Adamchiv
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Andromeda
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Andromeda galaxy and the implications of its distance and motion towards Earth. Participants explore concepts related to light travel time, perception of distance, and the nature of astronomical observations. The conversation includes elements of astrophysics, conceptual reasoning, and personal reflections on learning processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about perceiving Andromeda as being 2.537 million light years away while it is moving towards us, questioning how we can observe it as it was in the past.
  • Another participant asserts that there is no conflict in seeing Andromeda as it was in the past, emphasizing that light travel time means we always observe distant objects as they were, regardless of their motion.
  • A participant calculates the distance Andromeda has moved towards us since the light was emitted, realizing that this distance is negligible compared to the overall distance in light years.
  • Several participants reflect on the learning process that occurs when articulating questions or concepts, noting that writing can lead to new insights.
  • There is a discussion about the importance of using mathematical reasoning over logic in complex scientific questions, with some participants emphasizing the limitations of human intuition in cosmology and quantum mechanics.
  • One participant critiques the use of logic by creationists, suggesting that their reasoning is often flawed and not based on factual evidence.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of light travel time in understanding astronomical observations, but there are differing views on the role of logic versus mathematics in scientific reasoning. The discussion reflects a mix of agreement on learning experiences and disagreement on the application of logic in certain contexts.

Contextual Notes

Some participants acknowledge the limitations of human intuition when dealing with concepts in cosmology and quantum mechanics, suggesting that traditional reasoning may not apply effectively in these areas.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in astrophysics, the nature of light and distance in astronomy, and the learning processes involved in scientific inquiry.

Adamchiv
Messages
48
Reaction score
9
Hi, I am new to this forum and I signed up because I am having difficulty working something out. I am no expert whatsoever when it comes to astrophysics so please be kind.

We can measure the distance of galaxies using the speed of light, so we know that a galaxy 8 billion light years away for example has already moved further away by the time we have seen it, also we are looking at it as it was 8 billion years ago. I don't have any issue with this.

My problem is Andromeda, it is 2.537 million light years away and moving towards us at a rate of about 68 miles per second. So we are ofcourse looking at it as it was 2.537 million years ago, but if that is the case and its moving towards us, surely it must be closer than that. If we look at something in the past that began moving towards is it must be closer to us in the present, because we are now 2.537 million years further into the future than the time in which we percieve it, or receive the photons immited from it. Also surely on that premise, if it is closer to us than we percieve it to be, then surely we would be able to see it as closer? How can we look at something in the past that's moving towards us and not be able to percieve it as closer than it was 2.537 million years ago? because that was ofcourse in the past and not the present. Its almost like if I were to throw a ball to you and your reactions were so slow that you were 3 seconds behind, by the time you see the ball thrown it has already hit you

Hope it makes sense and apologies if its a silly question

Adam
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Your question makes sense but is based on an apparent lack of having thought everything through. Yes, we are seeing it as it was in the past. Yes, it is moving towards us and is closer than we see it as being. There is no conflict here because the speed of light is not instantaneous. I know you realize that but you don't seem to have thought it through. How could we NOT see something in the past (whether it is moving away from us OR towards us) given that by the time the light reaches us, time has passed? And since the object moves WAY slower than light, why would we expect the object to get here before the light?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Adamchiv
Your absolutely correct and believe it or not after I posted it I got the calculator out and worked out by doing 68(mps) x 60 x 24 x 365 x 2537000 and came to 9424224000000 miles, which is how far it will have moved, I then realized that this is a very small fraction of the distance away it is in light years (or actual miles), I forgot that light is traveling at 180000 mps (or whatever it is) compared to the 68 mps that andromeda is moving. So I get it now and you are perfectly correct I hadnt thought it through. Its amazing how fast you think after you post something.
 
Adamchiv said:
Its amazing how fast you think after you post something.
This is an aspect, that often can be observed. To write something down or even better, explain it to others, forces us to view something from a different perspective. I remember a professor, who replied to a remark of mine: "I didn't know you were an expert on ... to give a lecture." with "I am not, but I want to learn it!".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Adamchiv
I just hope I didnt make an idiot of myself but rather learned something new today lol
 
Adamchiv said:
I just hope I didnt make an idiot of myself but rather learned something new today lol
No, you just did something we all do from time to time. I've done it twice in a row in the same thread, which is particularly embarrassing. Glad you learned something new.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Imager, Adamchiv and fresh_42
Adamchiv said:
I just hope I didnt make an idiot of myself but rather learned something new today lol

Please, you should see the first few hundred of my own posts here on PF. Now THOSE are embarrassing...
@phinds can vouch for me on that. :-p
 
Drakkith said:
Please, you should see the first few hundred of my own posts here on PF. Now THOSE are embarrassing...
@phinds can vouch for me on that. :-p
Yes, @Adamchiv Drakkith is a complete idiot actually. I can definitely vouch for that.:oldlaugh:
 
Well I think to be fair one thing I have already learned from all you intellegent people is, do not try to solve complex questions with logic, choose the maths. Dont assume, investigate. I only wanted to use this forum for this question, but as I was met by very thoughtful and intellegent responses I decided to ask other questions about evolution, and learned other new things. This is a great forum!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith and berkeman
  • #10
Adamchiv said:
Well I think to be fair one thing I have already learned from all you intellegent people is, do not try to solve complex questions with logic, choose the maths. Dont assume, investigate.
Well, don't rule out logic entirely, but yes you now have the right approach.

I only wanted to use this forum for this question, but as I was met by very thoughtful and intellegent responses I decided to ask other questions about evolution, and learned other new things. This is a great forum!
Yep, it is :smile:

One other thing just FYI, when you get into cosmology (the very large) and quantum mechanics (the very small), you CANNOT rely on "intuition", "common sense" and so forth. We humans evolved in an incredibly narrow range of physical experience and those two areas are completely outside it so our normal responses are not to be trusted.
 
  • #11
phinds said:
Well, don't rule out logic entirely, but yes you now have the right approach.

Yep, it is :smile:

One other thing just FYI, when you get into cosmology (the very large) and quantum mechanics (the very small), you CANNOT rely on "intuition", "common sense" and so forth. We humans evolved in an incredibly narrow range of physical experience and those two areas are completely outside it so our normal responses are not to be trusted.

Yes ofcourse logic is important, but I think it is used too much by creationists and it doesn't really mirror reality like we think it does, critical scientific analysis is a more productive method and that's what my point was :smile:

#humanlogicisoftenflawed

One other thing just FYI, when you get into cosmology (the very large) and quantum mechanics (the very small), you CANNOT rely on "intuition", "common sense" and so forth. We humans evolved in an incredibly narrow range of physical experience and those two areas are completely outside it so our normal responses are not to be trusted.

Exactly that's a far more eloquent way of putting it, the universe does not care about logic or human reason, it may not even care about maths to a certain hypothetical extent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
Adamchiv said:
... I think it [logic] is used too much by creationists ...
I disagree. I don't think creationists use much logic at all. I mean how logical is it to think that either facts are irrelevant, or facts that clearly are right are wrong because they don't support your point of view. That's not logic, it's religion.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Adamchiv
  • #13
phinds said:
I disagree. I don't think creationists use much logic at all. I mean how logical is it to think that either facts are irrelevant, or facts that clearly are right are wrong because they don't support your point of view. That's not logic, it's religion.

I like this post very much :biggrin:
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Andromeda vs. Milky Way galaxies
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
Stargazing So If Something Happened In Space, Say 350 Million Years Ago....
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Undergrad How fast were distant galaxies moving?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
High School Why does the Andromeda galaxy appear so tiny from our perspective?
  • · Replies 81 ·
3
Replies
81
Views
17K
Undergrad Andromeda and the cosmological redshift
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
5K
High School Can the "Dark Energy" concept be wrong?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
High School Has Andromeda Moved Closer in 2.5 Million Years?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
Undergrad How fast do galaxies 1 billion light-years away move away from us?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Apparent distance to far galaxies
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Undergrad Question of accuracy of galactic collision simulations
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K