Comments on: Milky Way is Twice as Thick as Previously Believed

By: Dalee

Dalee — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 06:13:24 +0000

So, How many stars does our milky way galaxy contain after these modifications?

By: Astrofiend

Astrofiend — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 22:15:15 +0000

"eileen Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 8:24 am

Re: 'checking those basic assumptions'

Last week, the Astronomical Unit, this week, the Milky Way, next week, Theory of Evolution?"

There is no doubt at all that, like your examples given, the T.O.E will undergo some modification and refinement over the years based on fresh evidence and refined research approaches. That very freedom to refine ideas based on evidence and not get tied down to todays 'truths' is where science derives its strength from.

The likely fact that almost all of these future observations and evidence will fit perfectly within Evolution's existing framework, and the rest with only minor modification to it is testament to the power, elegance and profoundity of The Theory.

By: Tony Trenton`

Tony Trenton` — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:53:04 +0000

Yes Eileen.
Nothing is absolutely right or wrong but everything is necessary.

By: RedLIADA No. 407: InfoLIADA con “Ligados” por la Luna…y su eclipse… « Blog do Boock

Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:21:39 +0000

[...] LA VÃ?A LÃ?CTEA ES MÃ?S ANCHA DE LO ESPERADO. 22 de febrero de 2008. AstrÃ³nomos australianos han calculado que nuestra galaxia, la VÃa LÃ¡ctea, es realmente dos veces mÃ¡s gruesa de lo que anteriormente se creÃa. Sus trabajos arrojan que el ancho pasa ahora de 6.000 a 12.000 aÃ±os-luz. MÃ¡s informaciÃ³n en: http://www.universetoday.com/2008/02/22/milky-way-is-twice-as-thick-as-previously-believed/ [...]

By: jerry

jerry — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 23:52:34 +0000

There is much to learn.

By: eileen

eileen — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 15:24:55 +0000

Re: 'checking those basic assumptions'

Last week, the Astronomical Unit, this week, the Milky Way, next week, Theory of Evolution?

By: Stan Allen

Stan Allen — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 11:07:31 +0000

For years I've been told that size doesn't matter.

Oh well….

By: Matt

Matt — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:41:16 +0000

Does this calculation have implications for the "Dark Matter" theory? Or will calculations simply adjust down the amount of dark matter assumed (sounds sort of like fudging on your homework)

By: dollhopf

dollhopf — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 08:02:24 +0000

Does this "new geometry" of our Galaxy have any impact on the guess of how many stars our Galaxy contains?

By: tacitus

tacitus — Sat, 23 Feb 2008 04:54:47 +0000

I assume that the new calculation doesn't change the mass of the Milky Way much, if at all, just by how much it is spread out?