What lies beyond the stars?

[Philosophy Explorer]

The telescopes are getting more and more powerful and probably will see out to the farthest star sometime in the next five to ten years. What then? What could the most powerful telescopes pick up beyond the stars? Nothing?

What do you think will happen?

PhilX

[henry quirk]

I predict that intrepid astronomer, the one who 'sees' to, or beyond, the edge, will see the face of God (that is, some kid peering into the ant farm his parents bought him for Christmas).

[Arising_uk]

More galaxies, as we can't see stars beyond our galaxy, just galaxies.

[Philosophy Explorer]

I copied this from a website regarding JWST (James Webb Space Telescope):

"The goal of the JWST is to search for the first stars and galaxies that formed after the Big Bang, and study the formation and evolution of galaxies, stars, and planetary systems."

Based on this, I would say that JWST would be able to see stars that lie far outside of the Milky Way (in fact to the farthest stars from the Earth within our universe) so again the same question, "What lies beyond the stars?"

PhilX

[Obvious Leo]

You're a dingbat, Phil. Our telescopes can already see as far as they're ever going to able to see, which is the very long wavelength radiation of the CMB. This represents a period in the history of our universe only 380,000 of our years after the big bang. Even a billion years from now with any technology you care to imagine we will never be able to see anything closer to the big bang than this because prior to this period our cosmos was a place of Stygian darkness.

[Philosophy Explorer]

You're a dingbat, Phil. Our telescopes can already see as far as they're ever going to able to see, which is the very long wavelength radiation of the CMB. This represents a period in the history of our universe only 380,000 of our years after the big bang. Even a billion years from now with any technology you care to imagine we will never be able to see anything closer to the big bang than this because prior to this period our cosmos was a place of Stygian darkness.

Archie Bunker reincarnated. You're disputing what the article says and I'm sure the scientists are already aware of your objections, but they've gone ahead with the very expensive project because they're aware of things which I don't think you are. So calling me names won't help your cause. Dealing with the issues might.

PhilX

[Obvious Leo]

Are you trying to tell me that there's a scientist out there who claims that they'll one day be able to focus a telescope to a distance further away than the CMB? Are you fucking serious? Name the moron and I'll get an email off to him right away. I don't think you actually understand what the fuck you're talking about, Phil. Further than the CMB is the big bang and nothing else.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Are you trying to tell me that there's a scientist out there who claims that they'll one day be able to focus a telescope to a distance further away than the CMB? Are you fucking serious? Name the moron and I'll get an email off to him right away. I don't think you actually understand what the fuck you're talking about, Phil. Further than the CMB is the big bang and nothing else.

No that's not what I said. Arising said we can't see any stars beyond the Milky Way and the article says with JWST (and other telescopes unmentioned), we will be able to do that, all the way back to the first stars that started after the BB. I can't change what the article says and it's a leading article from a Google search - I quoted exactly and within context. I'll send you a link later and you can contact the site to see what their response is. Maybe they can clarify to everyone's satisfaction.

PhilX

[Obvious Leo]

I've already read that article and it says nothing about seeing any further than we can currently see. All it talks about is attaining a higher resolution of cosmological objects that already lie within range. Surely you can understand that we can't possibly ever see anything from before the big bang.

[Arising_uk]

I copied this from a website regarding JWST (James Webb Space Telescope):

"The goal of the JWST is to search for the first stars and galaxies that formed after the Big Bang, and study the formation and evolution of galaxies, stars, and planetary systems."

Based on this, I would say that JWST would be able to see stars that lie far outside of the Milky Way (in fact to the farthest stars from the Earth within our universe) so again the same question, "What lies beyond the stars?"

PhilX

It might well say this but we pretty much can't see individual stars beyond the milky way, supernovas maybe. So the answer to your question to what lies beyond the stars is, galaxies. Now what lies beyond them is anyone's guess and mine is more galaxies.

[Philosophy Explorer]

I've already read that article and it says nothing about seeing any further than we can currently see. All it talks about is attaining a higher resolution of cosmological objects that already lie within range. Surely you can understand that we can't possibly ever see anything from before the big bang.

Now I never said that and the article hasn't either. I repeat what I quoted:

"The goal of the JWST is to search for the first stars and galaxies that formed after the Big Bang, and study the formation and evolution of galaxies, stars, and planetary systems." "...after the Big Bang...", not before. A goal of the JWST is to search for the first stars that formed after the BB. Clearly it's not talking about the Milky Way stars.

How about stars that went supernova? Some of those were visible to the naked eye. Were these within the Milky Way?

PhilX

[Obvious Leo]

I was answering the question you posed in your OP.

Q. What lies beyond the stars

A. Nothing. There is no beyond the stars.

[JSS]

The telescopes are getting more and more powerful and probably will see out to the farthest star sometime in the next five to ten years. What then?

Disappointment and disillusionment.

[surreptitious57]

Because dark energy is pushing the space between galaxies further apart it means there
will come a time when no stars will actually be visible from the reference point of Earth

[Obvious Leo]

Because dark energy is pushing the space between galaxies further apart it means there
will come a time when no stars will actually be visible from the reference point of Earth

That's what the theory says but it's not what the evidence says. In fact galaxies have been merging with each other for billions of years and there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that they won't continue to do so.

Of all the mathematical constants used in physics the cosmological constant would easily be my favourite. Einstein first invented this constant to explain why the universe wasn't "expanding". When Hubble subsequently discovered that the universe was in fact "expanding" the constant had to be scrapped and Einstein called it the biggest mistake of his career. ( It wasn't, he made far bigger ones.) However his constant wasn't yet dead because it was later discovered that this so-called "expansion" was accelerating and Einstein's little mathematical gadget was about to get a rebirth. You've gotta love these guys. THE VERY SAME CONSTANT could be used to prove two completely opposite propositions. It could prove that the universe was expanding and it could also prove that it wasn't.

"Mathematics can be used to prove ANYTHING".....Albert Einstein.