Roger's Equations Blog

Roger's Equations

This blog is all about science and technology (with occasional math thrown in for fun). The goal of this blog is to try and pass on the sense of excitement and wonder I feel when I read about these topics. I hope you enjoy the posts.

Previous in Blog: 3D Printing Speeds Up   Next in Blog: How To Dock With The International Space Station
Close
Close
Close
13 comments
Rating: Comments: Nested

The Space Between

Posted March 19, 2015 3:30 PM by Bayes

Homo Sapiens

We humans, as a species, tend to view the universe human-centrically (how else?). Yet as we learn more and more about the universe and get more and more adept at manipulating nature, we are increasingly confronted by scales that are far outside of our everyday human experience. When confronted by these scales, we unconsciously tend to make assumptions derived from our human-centric bias.

That's why, when I say something like "atoms are close together and galaxies are far apart", it sounds reasonable. After all, atoms are tiny and there are lots of them all around us. For instance, a gram of hydrogen has 6 x 1023 atoms in it! And from a human standpoint a gram of hydrogen is tiny! The Andromeda galaxy on the other hand is 1.5 x 1019 miles away! That's 15 quintillion miles! That's pretty far!

Or is it?

Notice that we are judging things in terms of our human scale. What if instead we separated ourselves from our human-centric bias and looked at distances another way. Perhaps we would see nature in a different way.

A Different Measure...

To do this, we'll need a different way to measure length. What if, instead of viewing distances in human terms, we instead measured the distances between objects in terms of the size of the primary objects involved. For instance we could measure intergalactic distances in terms of the size of the Milky Way galaxy. We already do something similar to this with driving and "car lengths". What's to stop us from measuring solar system distances in terms of "Earth Lengths" or intergalactic distances in terms of "Milky Way Lengths". Then, with those values in hand, we could convert them back to a human sized scale to help our understanding. [*Note* I assumed a human to be a 6ft tall by 2ft diameter cylinder for this conversion].

Let's see an example of how this might work.

Atoms in a Molecule

The human body is filled with organic molecules. Let's look at a common feature of organic molecules, the carbon-carbon bond. A carbon-carbon bond has an average bond length of around 1.5 Å (1.5 x 10−10 m), This can vary slightly based upon the organic molecule. The diameter of a carbon nucleus is around 2.5 fm (2.5 x 10−15 m). In other words, a carbon-carbon bond is about 60,000 carbon nuclei in length (see what I did there?). That means if a human was shrunk down to the size of a carbon nucleus (2.5 fm), they would have to walk about 22.7 miles before they ran into another carbon atom. That's a pretty long walk!

See how this works? Let's do some more.

Planetary Distances

The diameter of the Earth is roughly 8000 miles. The distance from the Earth to the closest planet to us, Venus, at it's closest approach, is about 24 million miles. in other words Venus, at it's closest approach to us, is about 3000 Earth diameters away. That means if a human was the size of the planet Earth, they'd have to walk 1.1 miles to get to Venus. The Sun would be about a 4.4 mile walk away. Jupiter (at it's closest) would be about 18.5 miles away. Pluto (at it's closest) would be 126 miles away.

Distances Between Stars

The diameter of the Sun is roughly 860,000 miles. The distance to the next closest star, Proxima Centauri is about 4.24 light years away, which is about 25,000,000,000,000 miles. So if we were the size of the Sun, we'd have to walk the equivalent of 1,835.2 miles (Wow!). Wolf 359 (of Star Trek TNG fame) is 7.78 light years away which would be the equivalent of 3,367.4 miles.

Distances Between Galaxies

The diameter of the Milky Way Galaxy is around 100,000 light years (though this measurement has recently been called into question). The closest nearest major galaxy is Andromeda, at approximately 780 kiloparsecs (2.5 million light-years). Or in other words, Andromeda is 25 Milky Way Galaxies away (not bad, right?). If the Milky Way Galaxy was a human, it would only have to walk about 50 feet to get to Andromeda. The Milky Way and Andromeda are both in the Local Group, a collection of over 54 galaxies (most of them dwarf galaxies) of which Andromeda, the Milky Way, and the Triangulum Galaxy are the largest. The local group is only 10 million light-years in diameter (100 Milky Ways). A human the size of our Milky Way would only have to walk 200 feet to walk across our Local Group. (Local indeed!)

Distance Between Galactic Clusters

The next closest galactic cluster is the Virgo Cluster, which is 53.8 Million Light Years away, or around 5 Local Groups away. If we made a human as big as the Local Group, the Virgo Cluster would be only 10 feet away!

If you wanted to, you could apply this way of thinking to the distance between super clusters, the distance between nodes like the Great Attractor. The size of the cosmic voids. I won't go that far in this blog.

Conclusion

Now that we've measured distances in this different way, let's go back and take a look at our earlier statement.

"Atoms are close together and galaxies are far apart"

Obviously from a human-centric point of view this statement is correct. Atoms are tiny and galaxies are huge. On the other hand, if you were to shrink a human to the size of a carbon atom, they'd have to walk 22.7 miles before they got to another carbon atom. Whereas if a human was as big as a galaxy, they'd only have to walk 50 ft to get to another galaxy! That's a staggering difference! We tend to think of the space between galaxies as big and empty, but that space pales in comparison to the lonely emptiness that surrounds an atom!

So there you have it. Sometimes it's helpful to think about things in a different way to gain a new perspective on them. Hopefully you've found all this entertaining. Till next time! -R

Reply

Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive votes to make them "good answers".

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: by the beach in Florida
Posts: 33392
Good Answers: 1817
#1

Re: The Space Between

03/19/2015 4:53 PM

So they legalized pot there did they....

__________________
All living things seek to control their own destiny....this is the purpose of life
Reply
The Engineer
Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Physics... United States - Member - NY Popular Science - Genetics - Organic Chemistry... Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Ingeniería en Español - Nuevo Miembro - New Member

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Albany, New York
Posts: 5060
Good Answers: 129
#6
In reply to #1

Re: The Space Between

03/20/2015 7:09 AM

Lol, not yet.

Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
2
Guru
Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: The 'Space Coast', USA
Posts: 11119
Good Answers: 918
#2

Re: The Space Between

03/19/2015 10:45 PM

I enjoyed your post, as always, but:

"Atoms are close together and galaxies are far apart"

Still holds true as long as the unit of measure is the same for both. When begin to use a relative yardstick, so to speak, then things can either become more confusing or have greater clarity. Which tells us that one must be careful how they wield that relative yardstick. ;-)

Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Out of your mind! Not in sight!
Posts: 4424
Good Answers: 108
#4
In reply to #2

Re: The Space Between

03/20/2015 12:18 AM

(Amen) Einstein!

__________________
Common Sense Dictates
Reply
The Engineer
Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Physics... United States - Member - NY Popular Science - Genetics - Organic Chemistry... Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Ingeniería en Español - Nuevo Miembro - New Member

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Albany, New York
Posts: 5060
Good Answers: 129
#7
In reply to #2

Re: The Space Between

03/20/2015 7:46 AM

I definitely agree.

I think I did a poor job explaining what I was trying to say in this post. I didn't mean to advocate any sort of official change of distance units. I certainly didn't mean to suggest small isn't small and large isn't large. Having reread my post I see how it could come across that way. All I was attempting was to show how thinking about a problem differently can change a (my) perspective on it.

For instance, I was surprised to find that Andromeda and the Milky Way were only 25 Milky Way Galaxies away from each other (I still worry I did that math wrong, though I checked it a couple of times). I expected that to be a much larger number. Further investigation made me realize that galaxies in general are closer to each other than I would have supposed. Indirectly I also learned that all the other galaxies in our local group either orbit us or Andromeda. In the case of Triangulum, they don't know for sure, but they think it probably orbits Andromeda (Future Blog Post: Cataloging the galaxies that are satellites of the Milky Way!).

That's all I meant this to be. An exercise in viewing things differently to see if anything jumps out. A thought experiment, not to find new physics, but to better understand existing physics that we might miss in the haze of meaninglessly large or small units. I hope that makes sense.

P.S.- I do think there are relationships between scale and distance, but that wasn't the purpose of this blog post.

Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: The 'Space Coast', USA
Posts: 11119
Good Answers: 918
#8
In reply to #7

Re: The Space Between

03/20/2015 9:15 AM

Not at all!

I enjoyed the post very much.

Interesting enough, Andromeda would not seem that far away if you could see it in a dark enough place, but our eyes can't resolve it as well as a long exposure camera. Then the distance would seem logical to the mind!

However, that merger is still 2 billion years away. You won't want to be here when that happens! Not that there is any danger from collisions, but more likely the result will initiate a wave of new star formation that will flood the region with X-rays and gamma rays, which will pretty much sterilize the whole region of life. Not entirely, although.

Consider that the seeds for life began to assemble about 15 million years after T0, but the universe was a pretty hostile environment for life and it kept a lid on things for a long, long while.

Our galaxy began to form about 1 billion years after T0 as a large gas disk of hydrogen, helium, with a trace of lithium began to condense. That region around our Milky Way was full of many other dwarf galaxies starting to form. I think the current count now is up to 57, but there were many more early on. Each time one would merge with our disk it initiated a wave of new star formation (Population III stars), which were massive suns that ran through their fuel supplies pretty quickly (in cosmic terms) and catastrophically spewed out their heavier elements for the next generation of stars. The seeds of life were still present, but not able to take root in the violence of the cosmic storm.

That process continued until heavier elements created Population II stars, which led to the Population I stars that have enough heavy metals to form the crucible for life such as our G2 Sun.

Supernova, gamma-ray bursts, galactic tides, and perhaps ill luck did a real number on the prospect of life evolving in the Milky Way and it wasn't until things settled down a good bit that our planet was able to bring forth intelligent life.

The looming merger/collision of the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies will pretty much reset the clock for life in this 3.1 million parsec region of the universe. However, it is doubtful that it will extinguish it completely, for as we have seen life's building blocks must be pretty patient to wait things out billions of years before getting a real toe-hold. ;-)

Reply
The Engineer
Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Physics... United States - Member - NY Popular Science - Genetics - Organic Chemistry... Popular Science - Cosmology - New Member Ingeniería en Español - Nuevo Miembro - New Member

Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Albany, New York
Posts: 5060
Good Answers: 129
#9
In reply to #8

Re: The Space Between

03/20/2015 10:28 AM

That's pretty cool, I didn't realize Andromeda would be so big in the night sky if we could see it.

2 Billion years from now will be bad, but 1.5 billion years from now the night sky should be pretty awesome (if we're still around). Andromeda would be visible to the naked eye then and fill up a large section of the sky!

Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: The 'Space Coast', USA
Posts: 11119
Good Answers: 918
#10
In reply to #9

Re: The Space Between

03/20/2015 10:45 AM

Pretty foreboding sight, no?

Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Engineering Fields - Chemical Engineering - Old Hand

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Lubbock, Texas
Posts: 14331
Good Answers: 162
#13
In reply to #9

Re: The Space Between

03/26/2015 12:05 PM

You mean you can't see it? Ok, yes, well not with the naked Mk.1 eyeball I am equipped with. But with the flint glass clad Mk.2 eyeball (eye + binoculars), out at my buddy's farm Andromeda is readily picked out in the heavens. Warning! Items in binoculars may appear nearer than in actuality!

__________________
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just build a better one.
Reply
Commentator
Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: May 2010
Location: lower mainland british columbia
Posts: 64
#3

Re: The Space Between

03/19/2015 10:54 PM

Hi Roger - that was a very interesting article you wrote. The size - distance scales i believe are boundless into small and large dimensions and will likely remain as such.

__________________
where is my pencil?
Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Phnom Penh
Posts: 4019
Good Answers: 102
#5

Re: The Space Between

03/20/2015 1:45 AM

Nice one Roger.

This relative measure concept is actually used in the real world. The term dBx is a relative measure where the dB bit is the ratio and the x bit is the reference.

Eg 0dBm=1mW a 3dB increase yields 2mW. Handy when making judgement calls on how significant things are relative to each other.

Another eg, 0dBW=1W, a 3db increase yields 2W. Both 3 dB increases but one of these is only a mW the other a whole watt.

So, something that is 3dB smaller is half the size but half of what is the issue.

__________________
Difficulty is not an obstacle it is merely an attribute.
Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 42355
Good Answers: 1693
#11

Re: The Space Between

03/20/2015 5:36 PM

It's all relative.

Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Marine Engineering - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Australia.
Posts: 1642
Good Answers: 81
#12

Re: The Space Between

03/22/2015 9:33 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson

Relative size, a term used to describe the relationship between the observer and an object.

So if we consider an object of mass that owes its existence to the Higgs boson, an unstable positive charged particle that radiates gravity? An effect that reaches out to compress matter. So, does the radiated force of gravity deplete some of the mass? Resulting in continued compression of the mass? Relative size will remain unchanged, but distance will vary? Expanding universe?

When using the term relativity, one thinks of an observed objects in motion, an example used is the train whistle having a higher pitch as it approaches and a lower pitch as it recedes. So, Gamma-rays, X-rays, red shift, intra-red background and radio noise, are they the train whistle of relative size?

Just speculating , regards JD.

Reply
Reply to Blog Entry 13 comments

Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive votes to make them "good answers".

"Almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, vote them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Hero (3); Bayes (3); IdeaSmith (1); James Stewart (1); jdretired (1); lyn (1); rabbit16 (1); SolarEagle (1); Wal (1)

Previous in Blog: 3D Printing Speeds Up   Next in Blog: How To Dock With The International Space Station

Advertisement