1 million never before seen Galaxies

Amateurs and professionals alike can now contribute to SDSS (Sloan Digital Sky Survey) science by participating in an internet galaxy classification project. There are one million galaxies in this project to classify. By taking part, you'll not only be contributing to scientific research, but you'll view parts of the Universe that literally no-one has ever seen before and get a sense of the glorious diversity of galaxies that pepper the sky.

If you are going to take part, please study the "How to Take Part - Tutorial" and "FAQ page" carefully!

I personally find the grading not an easy task. If you find yourself unclear of the right decision. Stop and review the tutorial or Faq again.

Many photos are blurry, so it will be difficult to judge. Try not to spend too much time on one image, mark star/don't know or edge-on/unclear (if your sure it's a galaxy) You can even practise a bit w/o logging in.

***TIP*** You may come across a (ring galaxy)or other bizzare galaxies. These should be put into the (edge-on/unclear) bin. Also Irregular galaxies go into the (star/don't know) bin. Maybe they will have a button for these soon?

Happy Hunting!

www.galaxyzoo.org

Songs -
1. Joe Satriani - Baroque
2. Joe Satriani - Clouds race across the sky

http://www.satriani.com

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Galaxy
• Galaxies
• galaxyzoo
• Sloan
• Digital
• Sky
• Survey
• SDSS
• Science
• Astronomy
• classification
• Universe
• Redshift40
• aviation
• space

[ewack77]

If I am not mistaken these are photos of a dark spot in the sky about the size of a dime held at arms length by hubble that are 78 billion light years away! It's hard to believe that we can see unobtruded without nothing in the way for that far. There's a paradox that implies if the universe is infinite and if every point in the sky is occupied by a star then shouldn't the night sky be as bright as the sun? I believe it isn't because of all the nonluminesent bodies blocking the light.

[redshift40]

@ewack77 - These photos are not from the Hubble deep field, and are no where near 78 billion ly away. Our universe is only approx. 13.73 billion years, plus or minus 120 million years. The paradox is also mostly incorrect. Even if dust and other dark non-luminescent bodies were not there, the sky would still not be as bright as the sun at night. It is the great distances light has to travel. It is the same as holding a candle at arms length, and then 100 yards away. What would seem brighter?

[ewack77]

@redshift40 Yes, sorry about the incorrect l.y. reference. However, do you know how far away these galaxies are? As far as your answer to the paradox, If every point in space was occupied by a candle it wouldn't make any difference how far away the candles were. Candle brightness is directly proportional to it's distance (in a vacuum). The reason is because of it's observed surface area not it's distance. If its surface area at arms length was the same as at 100 yds then brightness would be =.

[redshift40]

@ewack77 -Each galaxy is at a different distance, I can't say how far for each one. All stars (except ours) are observed as a point of light and can't be resolved no matter how much you magnify it. Most stars are unseen because of dust and other solid bodies blocking it's light path.

"If its surface area at arms length was the same as at 100 yds then brightness would be =." But it isn't the same surface area from the observer at 100 yds.

[ewack77]

@redshift40 Brightness is directly proportional to it's distance away from us and so is observed surface area. Both are proportionally the same (in a vacuum).

[redshift40]

@ewack77 -You are correct. There is a bit more to why the night sky is not as bright as daylight, but I can't explain it all in 500 char. Hey if you like stuff like this, have a look at A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009. I am also perplexed that the universe is expanding at such an incredible speed.

[KarbineKyle]

Whenever I see the INCREDIBLE deep space pictures of the Universe, my answer to life is already answered, and has been: "Are we alone in the Universe?" No Way! To think that not even a microbe exists on some planet? I just don't believe it. The Universe just has to be blooming with life. Some haven't started evolving yet, some don't even exist yet, but some are evolving as we speak, and others are being wiped out by asteroids, war, disease, etc... Some are thriving. I believe life is EVERYWHERE!

[Longview06]

I want to relive a life in every galaxy! Hope my next voyage isn't shitty like earth where the master race destroys its own planet, ignorant fucks! High hopes.

[gwendance]

The more views people make, the more times theses galaxies have been seen.

[claufallen]

@ewack77 soo cold.



[fullofstarz]

@ewack77 I am not a scientist but just thought I would mention that scientists know there is dark matter and dark energy that exists but they cannot see it with their eyes. Remember too that stars are actually light years away from one another so there are areas that are not filled with stars. Just a thought! Any comments?

[gjgjkg]

@ewack77 why cant stars be resolved no matter how much you magnify one? Are you talking about resolution problems of a telescope or not enough possible magnification or both?

[merveil3979]

What's the word in the lower left side of the screen at frame 4:01?

[ewack77]

@redshift40 I try not to subscribe to the idea of creation such as the big bang theory. The big bang theory was first suggested by a priest. I am not religious in any sense. I do however subscribe to the idea of science in all its forms. The notion that the universe was created at a specific point in time invalidates the whole theory. Why then? And what was it before the b.b.? Nothing? And if nothing existed then so must it's opposite. Everything. If both existed then why the need for a b.b.?

[ewack77]

@redshift40 Yes. i've thought about the exanding stuff. I've come up with the theory that matter is shrinking instead of space expanding. It is a more logical theory.