Structure of the Milky Way?

I and a few friends thought about the oort cloud...
If it has 2 light years in lenght, thats half way to Alpha Centauri...
What would stop our near neighbor Alpha Centauri to have its own oort cloud...
And if this is wright couldn't the galaxy be filled with dwarf planets, asteroids and comets rather than empty space between the stars as usual sci-fi movies like to show?
 
Yes the galaxy is filled with asteroids, comets and dwarf planets, but that doesn't mean that you would bump into one celestial body after another when passing through it. The distances between these objects are so enormous that you would have to carefully aim in order to hit something. The sci-fi movies actually got it right. The space is mostly empty.
 
Could we actually Colonize some of those wild planets... if they are big enaugh?
i mean i think they can get to the size of earth or biogger, no?
 
^ Spell check.

It's not very easy to answer speculative questions. The Kepler satellite is searching for Earth-sized planets, so if we were to ever colonize a planet, it would more than likely be a planet similarly sized to earth (obviously).
 

Chalnoth

Science Advisor
6,192
442
Could we actually Colonize some of those wild planets... if they are big enaugh?
i mean i think they can get to the size of earth or biogger, no?
Do you mean a rogue planet? As in a planet-sized object not anywhere near a star? They'd be far, far too cold to colonize.
 
Do you mean a rogue planet? As in a planet-sized object not anywhere near a star? They'd be far, far too cold to colonize.
Oke...
Cold let it be, we could have hitting systems inside huge metropolises covered by some kind a dome but not made of glass as it is too fragile...
or we could make a strong enaugh glass so we could also se the galaxy trough it...
eeeeeh... this kind a colonization is more for fun... imagine this small scene: in the darkness of space in a huge cluster of planets, Dwarf and partially borken planets, dwarf planets, comets and asteroids surrounded by a shinning blue nebula but thin enaugh to se the galaxy trough the glass domes of our colonies... wouldn't that be nice:approve: even spectacular if i say so...:tongue:
man this chat is more because i'm REAAAAAAALLY bored
 
Last edited:

Drakkith

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2018 Award
20,556
4,267
Oke...
Cold let it be, we could have hitting systems inside huge metropolises covered by some kind a dome but not made of glass as it is too fragile...
or we could make a strong enaugh glass so we could also se the galaxy trough it...
eeeeeh... this kind a colonization is more for fun... imagine this small scene: in the darkness of space in a huge cluster of planets, Dwarf and partially borken planets, dwarf planets, comets and asteroids surrounded by a shinning blue nebula but thin enaugh to se the galaxy trough the glass domes of our colonies... wouldn't that be nice:approve: even spectacular if i say so...:tongue:
man this chat is more because i'm REAAAAAAALLY bored
Did you have a specific question?
 

Chalnoth

Science Advisor
6,192
442
Oke...
Cold let it be, we could have hitting systems inside huge metropolises covered by some kind a dome but not made of glass as it is too fragile...
or we could make a strong enaugh glass so we could also se the galaxy trough it...
It's more a problem of having the energy to actually do anything.

Maybe if we solve the problem of getting nuclear fusion reactors off the ground, maybe it will be possible. But why bother with that when there are likely to be billions of candidate planets in our galaxy within the habitable zones of stars?
 
It's more a problem of having the energy to actually do anything.

Maybe if we solve the problem of getting nuclear fusion reactors off the ground, maybe it will be possible. But why bother with that when there are likely to be billions of candidate planets in our galaxy within the habitable zones of stars?
True, but the majority of those candidates are planets found in the solar system of a red dwarf, which means that the habitable zone of these planets is required to be a lot closer than the earth is to our sun, which opens up complications like harmful radiation.

Then again, once we get to the point where we can colonize other planets, I doubt we would want to be too picky :)
 

Chalnoth

Science Advisor
6,192
442
True, but the majority of those candidates are planets found in the solar system of a red dwarf, which means that the habitable zone of these planets is required to be a lot closer than the earth is to our sun, which opens up complications like harmful radiation.

Then again, once we get to the point where we can colonize other planets, I doubt we would want to be too picky :)
Well, that's more a feature of the fact that it is technically more difficult to detect planets which have orbits closer to one year here on Earth than it is to detect these closer-in planets. I doubt that there is any real bias towards red dwarfs where habitable-zone planets are concerned.

Of course, most stars out there are red dwarfs, but there are one heck of a lot of yellow dwarfs around as well.
 
It's more a problem of having the energy to actually do anything.

Maybe if we solve the problem of getting nuclear fusion reactors off the ground, maybe it will be possible. But why bother with that when there are likely to be billions of candidate planets in our galaxy within the habitable zones of stars?
For posterity man!:biggrin:
To show the galaxy how kool can we get:approve:

I agree with you, Chalnoth,
But couldn't we colonize a few planets that orbit around Blue giant stars???
If there are any solid ones... or...:confused:
 

Chalnoth

Science Advisor
6,192
442
For posterity man!:biggrin:
To show the galaxy how kool can we get:approve:

I agree with you, Chalnoth,
But couldn't we colonize a few planets that orbit around Blue giant stars???
If there are any solid ones... or...:confused:
Well, blue giants tend to have rather short lifetimes, and when they die they explode in massive supernovas. So they would be rather hazardous places to live.

Yellow dwarfs, like our own sun, are pretty much ideal. Much smaller, and they are quite volatile when young and the habitable zone is in very close to the star, making it unlikely that they have genuinely habitable planets. Much larger, and the lifetime of the star shortens significantly, often with many rather violent episodes before the final supernova. Yellow dwarf stars, though, last quite a long time (billions of years) and are relatively quiescent.
 
Well, blue giants tend to have rather short lifetimes, and when they die they explode in massive supernovas. So they would be rather hazardous places to live.
Posterity, remember let's harvest some adrenaline...:biggrin:
Till the time comes when we could even control a supernova or just live trough the exploding giant we are most surely going to search for planets orbiting yellow dwarf and red dwarf stars...

But hey... a small imaginary jump in the future jus may feed our will to explore space and get us a bit a fun!:approve:

(In the future we would have colonized planets that have close orbits to black holes...:tongue:)
 
one thing that i don't understand... Why are there more red dwarfs than any other type of stars?
 
one thing that i don't understand... Why are there more red dwarfs than any other type of stars?
because they spend a very long time as red dwarfs, whereas giant stars don't last very long
 

Drakkith

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
2018 Award
20,556
4,267
one thing that i don't understand... Why are there more red dwarfs than any other type of stars?
because they spend a very long time as red dwarfs, whereas giant stars don't last very long
That plus red dwarfs are very easily made as they require much less material than larger more massive stars. When stars form from a collapsing gas cloud you typically have many more small stars created than larger stars.
 
Posterity, remember let's harvest some adrenaline...:biggrin:
Till the time comes when we could even control a supernova or just live trough the exploding giant we are most surely going to search for planets orbiting yellow dwarf and red dwarf stars...

But hey... a small imaginary jump in the future jus may feed our will to explore space and get us a bit a fun!:approve:

(In the future we would have colonized planets that have close orbits to black holes...:tongue:)
I don't understand your reasoning at all. Isn't the idea of colonizing other planets far-fetched enough for now? Let alone colonizing unfavorable and unforgiving planets near black holes?

It's good to be excited about these things, but you need to stay slightly realistic. If the only reason to inhabit certain areas of the universe is just for the hell of it, or just to show that we can, then I think we would need to question the intelligence of the people authorizing those missions.
 

Chalnoth

Science Advisor
6,192
442
one thing that i don't understand... Why are there more red dwarfs than any other type of stars?
Smaller objects tend to be far, far more numerous than larger ones.
 
We should never colonize planets outside our own solar system. Expansionism unavoidably leads to war. And war with a high technology level likely leads to extinction for all sides involved.
I know that doesn't sound good for SF movies and for people's imagination, but it's closer to reality.

On the other hand, small outposts can be built anywhere. But why on a rogue planet in the middle of nowhere ?
 

Chalnoth

Science Advisor
6,192
442
We should never colonize planets outside our own solar system. Expansionism unavoidably leads to war. And war with a high technology level likely leads to extinction for all sides involved.
I don't quite see why. It's highly unlikely that we'd ever run into another space-faring civilization, if it is even technically possible to expand beyond our own solar system. Because if such civilizations were that common, they'd probably already be here.
 
I don't quite see why. It's highly unlikely that we'd ever run into another space-faring civilization, if it is even technically possible to expand beyond our own solar system. Because if such civilizations were that common, they'd probably already be here.
Not only they would probably be here already, but if they had the same thinking the humans do, we would have been extinct and Earth would have been an alien colony. The same reasoning applies to having contacts with aliens at any point in our future. Expansionism unavoidably leads to confrontation.
 
We should never colonize planets outside our own solar system. Expansionism unavoidably leads to war. And war with a high technology level likely leads to extinction for all sides involved.
I know that doesn't sound good for SF movies and for people's imagination, but it's closer to reality.

On the other hand, small outposts can be built anywhere. But why on a rogue planet in the middle of nowhere ?
And that would leave us with, what? Mars and maybe some moons to colonize?

Hopefully by the time we're advanced enough to colonize other planets or solar systems, war would have become a thing of the past. Probably not, but one can dream.
 
Do Red Dwarf Systems tend to have more solid planets?
And can there start evolving life in any of these systems?
And another question: If a nebula has about 100 or more light years in diameter and if it is very thick and mostly composed out of H2 what type of stars tend to take birth in there?
And can they have solid planets rather than gas giants?
 
Last edited:
646
3
I don't understand your reasoning at all. Isn't the idea of colonizing other planets far-fetched enough for now? Let alone colonizing unfavorable and unforgiving planets near black holes?
How would they be unforgiving? The only dangerous situation would be if the accretion disc or the jets gets to be a problem (only valid if it's swallowing something) or if someone flies a spaceship directly into a black hole, or if the minor time dilation from being a bit closer to the black hole might throw people out of whack. GR says that a freefalling observer is locally inertial (right?)
 
On the other hand, small outposts can be built anywhere. But why on a rogue planet in the middle of nowhere ?
For fun!
And for the beauty of it...
Imagine... One can look up the glass dome of a city build on the surface of a rogue planet in a cluster of those planets surounded by a thin blueish nebula and the sky allways filled with tousands of stars cause of the lack of atmosphere...
Wouldn't that be epic?:rolleyes:
 

Related Threads for: Structure of the Milky Way?

  • Posted
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • Posted
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • Posted
Replies
1
Views
586

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving
Top