Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (25753)	5/25/1999 2:31:00 AM
From: JF Quinnelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71178

What about Black holes, wouldn't they throw off the calculation, by interfering in the stream of light? Nah. They would only swallow the light immediately around them. The proper name for Gaugie's thought piece is: Olber's Paradox If there is a uniform distribution of stars throughout an infinite, static, Euclidean space, then a line of sight in any direction will eventually reach the surface of a star. Therefore, the night sky should be as bright as the surface of an average star. Extinction will not solve the problem, since radiation would heat the interstellar medium to an equilibrium temperature equal to that of a star. Explanations are 1. The radius of the universe is finite. 2. The universe has a finite age. 3. The distribution of stars throughout space is not uniform. 4. The wavelength of radiation increases with time. treasure-troves.com