Baseline 3-A tiering system question.

[TheUnshakableOne]

So according to some websites astronomers have a thing called "Future visibility limit" which predicts that we will see another 33% of the observable universe. Currently the observable universe is at a radius of 46.5 billion light-years. The "future visibility limit" predicts that we'll eventually get to a radius of 61 billion light-years.

Apparently this prediction is very well accepted in the scientific community.

How much more information, or acceptance, would be needed to use it to revise baseline 3-A?

Link to source here https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...624..463G/abstract

---

Here is some underlying information behind this thingy'ma'bob


This reply is about the credibility of the AAS

https://vsbattles.com/threads/baseline-3-a-tiering-system-question.145658/post-5276308

The current 3-A baseline uses a radius range of 4.4087x10^26 meters (46.508 billion light years)

The study i dropped bumps that up to 5.86281467386e+26 meters (~61.97 billion light years)

that is about ~33.2459% increase in the radius/range

This is what "Future Visibility Limit" means.

Assuming dark energy remains constant (an unchanging cosmological constant), so that the expansion rate of the universe continues to accelerate, there is a "future visibility limit" beyond which objects will never enter the observable universe at any time in the infinite future, because light emitted by objects outside that limit could never reach the Earth. (A subtlety is that, because the Hubble parameter is decreasing with time, there can be cases where a galaxy that is receding from the Earth just a bit faster than light does emit a signal that reaches the Earth eventually.[14][21]) This future visibility limit is calculated at a comoving distance of 19 billion parsecs (62 billion light-years), assuming the universe will keep expanding forever, which implies the number of galaxies that we can ever theoretically observe in the infinite future (leaving aside the issue that some may be impossible to observe in practice due to redshift, as discussed in the following paragraph) is only larger than the number currently observable by a factor of 2.36.[note 3]

Though, in principle, more galaxies will become observable in the future, in practice, an increasing number of galaxies will become extremely redshifted due to ongoing expansion; so much so that they will seem to disappear from view and become invisible.[22][23][24] An additional subtlety is that a galaxy at a given comoving distance is defined to lie within the "observable universe" if we can receive signals emitted by the galaxy at any age in its past history (say, a signal sent from the galaxy only 500 million years after the Big Bang), but because of the universe's expansion, there may be some later age at which a signal sent from the same galaxy can never reach the Earth at any point in the infinite future (so, for example, we might never see what the galaxy looked like 10 billion years after the Big Bang),[25] even though it remains at the same comoving distance (comoving distance is defined to be constant with time—unlike proper distance, which is used to define recession velocity due to the expansion of space), which is less than the comoving radius of the observable universe.[clarification needed] This fact can be used to define a type of cosmic event horizon whose distance from the Earth changes over time. For example, the current distance to this horizon is about 16 billion light-years, meaning that a signal from an event happening at present can eventually reach the Earth in the future if the event is less than 16 billion light-years away, but the signal will never reach the Earth if the event is more than 16 billion light-years away.[14]

The article that got the 61 billion light years as the future visibility limit was published in an article owned by AAS (The American Astronmers association)

The AAS maintains an active program in public policy to influence policy decisions that impact our science, while actively engaging and informing our community about what is going on and how they can take positive steps to participate in the policy process.

Impact | American Astronomical Society

The mission of the AAS is to enhance and share humanity's scientific understanding of the universe, which it achieves through publishing, meeting organization, education and outreach, and training and professional development.

aas.org

This entire article in the link below is about their peer review process

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/scholarly-pubs-%28%23240%29%20AAS.pdf

Their Director of Public Policy & Deputy Executive Officer Joel Parriott is currently on assingment to the white house with OSTP stuff

Policy Talks | American Astronomical Society

aas.org

AAS journal received it on 2003 of November 18; but accepted it in 2005 on January 3 then later published in May of 2005. So it had almost 2 years of being reviewed.

The AAS has decades of experience with the White House

What's Happening Inside the Beltway and Why You Should Care • Events Calendar • Iowa State University

[b]Joel Parriott[/b] American Astronomical Society

www.event.iastate.edu

and this is the reason why they take an active role in politics

Public policy forms the foundation upon which we practice our science. Through policy, we answer questions about the importance of science among other national concerns, what science should be funded and at what level, and how government-supported science should be carried out.

For astronomy, public policy determines:

• Budgets and funding for building telescopes and supporting researchers through grants
• The structure and authorities of NASA, NSF, and other science agencies
• How universities can support and educate students in STEM
• How we collaborate internationally through immigration and research security laws
• Regulatory measures that impact use of the radio spectrum or protect from light pollution
• Open data access, support for diversity in STEM, prevention of harassment, and much more

Advocacy | American Astronomical Society

Public policy is a catchall phrase that includes actions of and interactions with both Congress and the Executive branch. The government has other impacts on astronomy beyond providing funds for research and research facilities. Policies on education, such as stipend levels allowed under...

aas.org

The AAS has many members from Nasa. Here is one example out of... many actually..

AAS Fellows Program | American Astronomical Society

The AAS Fellows program was established in 2019 (read our press release) to recognize AAS members for their contributions toward the Society's mission of enhancing and sharing humanity's scientific understanding of the universe.

aas.org

Alan Boss (Earth and Planets Laboratory, Carnegie Institution for Science) For innovative theoretical investigations of the formation of stars and exoplanets, particularly for advancing the theory of gravitational instability in the rapid formation of gas giants planets. For great commitment to confronting exoplanet formation theory with observations, including his work on the Kepler Mission Science Team, and for his tireless leadership within the exoplanet exploration community in ensuring that NASA executes a credible and successful exoplanet program.

 

[LeylinFarlier01]

what really needs to be changed about baseline 3A?

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

what really needs to be changed about baseline 3A?

The future visibility limit increases the size of the observable universe thud changing the size in the 3-A calc used fo estanlish the baseline

 

[It_is_i_wyatt]

hm, interesting

 

[Thelastmlg]

yeah, if there is nothing "wrong" with this, this might changed stuff significantly

though perhaps the wiki would prefer sticking with currently proved sizes

 

[KLOL506]

If this isn't approved by the major astronomy bodies like NASA, ESA, MIT, Harvard, Caltech, CERN and the like, then you cannot say for certain that majority of the scientific community accepts this.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

If this isn't approved by the major astronomy bodies like NASA, ESA, MIT, Harvard, Caltech, CERN and the like, then you cannot say for certain that majority of the scientific community accepts this.

The information came from here

The American Astronomical Society.

Radware Bot Manager Captcha

 

[KLOL506]

The information came from here

The American Astronomical Society.

Radware Bot Manager Captcha

Has it been peer-reviewed and approved by the above astronomical bodies?

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Has it been peer-reviewed and approved by the above astronomical bodies?

It does appear to be nasa approved

A Map of the Universe

We have produced a new conformal map of the universe illustrating recent discoveries, ranging from Kuiper Belt objects in the solar system to the galaxies and quasars from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. This map projection, based on the logarithm map of the complex plane, preserves shapes locally...

ui.adsabs.harvard.edu

© The SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System
adshelp[at]cfa.harvard.edu

The ADS is operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory under NASA Cooperative Agreement 80NSSC21M0056

NASA logo Smithsonian logo Harvard Center for Astrophysics logo
Resources

Also Max Tegmark is involved with the calculations

Some more background information of the website

ADS Awards and Recognition

All your questions will be answered here.

ui.adsabs.harvard.edu

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Some more information after doing some digging around

the astronomers and researchers who collaborated together for that equation first posted it to "The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 624, Issue 2, pp. 463-484."
Which The Astrophysical Journal is a peer-reviewed Journal

Phys.org - News and Articles on Science and Technology

Daily science news on research developments, technological breakthroughs and the latest scientific innovations

phys.org

The American Astronomical Society also had a hand in this whom also peer review everything submitted to them

Instructions for Posting | American Astronomical Society

aas.org

it was Received on 2003 of November 18; but accepted in 2005 on January 3 the later published in May of 2005. So there is a gap there perhaps for it to be reviewed?

Additionally Nasa is very affifilated with The American Astronimcal Society and thinks of them highly

NASA Scientists Named AAS 2022 Fellows - NASA

Four individuals with NASA affiliations have been named 2022 Fellows by the American Astronomical Society (AAS). AAS is a major international organization of

www.nasa.gov

Within that article it appears some NASA members are also apart of the TAAS

TAAS also hold events with Nasa

Join NASA Astrophysics at AAS January Meeting | American Astronomical Society

Get involved with NASA at the upcoming 237th AAS meeting in January! In addition, the Exoplanet Exploration ExoPAG meeting will take place on 5-6 January, outside the AAS meeting program.

aas.org

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Has it been peer-reviewed and approved by the above astronomical bodies?

he AAS publishes the leading international journals in the disciplines of astronomy & astrophysics, heliophysics, and planetary sciences. Our recently established highlights journal, AAS Nova, and short results journal, Research Notes, represent innovative new ways we highlight the research results of the community. https://aas.org/about/impact

NASA awardees from NASA’s Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland and NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California are among the 23 members being recognized for extraordinary achievement and service. They are being recognized for original research and publications, innovative contributions to astronomical techniques or instrumentation, significant contributions to education and public outreach, and noteworthy service to astronomy and to the Society itself.

Farid Salama of NASA Ames was recognized for his significant contributions to scientific advances in astrophysics and astrochemistry, and for his service to the community through the creation of the Laboratory Astrophysics Division of the AAS.

NASA Scientists Named AAS 2022 Fellows - NASA

Four individuals with NASA affiliations have been named 2022 Fellows by the American Astronomical Society (AAS). AAS is a major international organization of

www.nasa.gov

NASA scientists will present exciting new findings on a wide range of topics in the field of astrophysics next week at the American Astronomical Society’s (AAS) 223rd annual meeting in National Harbor, Md.

Solar System Exploration Research Institute (SSERVI) - SSERVI

SSERVI advances lunar and planetary science through cross-disciplinary research and collaborations, providing technical analyses for NASA programs and missions.

sservi.nasa.gov

Thirteen scientists working at or affiliated with NASA have been recently named Fellows of the American Astronomical Society (AAS), the major organization of professional astronomers in North America.

The AAS Board of Trustees in 2020 designated an initial group of more than 200 Legacy Fellows.

AAS Names New NASA-Affiliated Fellows, Legacy Fellows - NASA

Thirteen scientists working at or affiliated with NASA have been recently named Fellows of the American Astronomical Society (AAS), the major organization of

www.nasa.gov

he AAS Fellows program was established in 2019 (read our press release) to recognize AAS members for their contributions toward the Society's mission of enhancing and sharing humanity's scientific understanding of the universe. Fellows may be cited for original research and publication, innovative contributions to astronomical techniques or instrumentation, significant contributions to education and public outreach, and noteworthy service to astronomy and to the Society itself

AAS Fellows Program | American Astronomical Society

The AAS Fellows program was established in 2019 (read our press release) to recognize AAS members for their contributions toward the Society's mission of enhancing and sharing humanity's scientific understanding of the universe.

aas.org

This is to show a link between Nasa and AAS and to show the prestigious/reputable legitimacy of AAS as a community/society of professional physicist, astronomers and mathematicians.

and the equation and results for, as well as their explanation, for the "Future Visibility limit" was published into a Journal that is owned by AAS

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Bump

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Bump

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Bump

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

bump

 

[Maitreya12]

I agree.

Updating the values for baseline universal level seems appropriate.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

I agree.

Updating the values for baseline universal level seems appropriate.

This isn't a crt lol

Edit: I just wanted to know of this information I provided is usable for the possibility lf a revising it

 

[ImmortalDread]

Seems fine, tho, but what is the significant difference between current and the study you dropped?

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Seems fine, tho, but what is the significant difference between current and the study you dropped?

Its the predicted absolute limit of what the human race could feasibly see of the Universe. It is our max observable limit of the Universe

Based on the expansion rate, the amount of dark energy we have, and the present cosmological parameters of the Universe, we can calculate what we call the future visibility limit: the maximum distance we'll ever be able to observe. https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...ll-we-someday-be-able-to-see/?sh=4a54f44f8273

 

[ImmortalDread]

Ya but the value that differs our current standard and the new one?

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Ya but the value that differs our current standard and the new one?

I don't think im understnading your question right... but if i am..

The current 3-A baseline uses a radius range of 4.4087x10^26 meters (46.508 billion light years)

The study i dropped bumps that up to 5.86281467386e+26 meters (~61.97 billion light years)

that is about ~33.2459% increase in the radius/range

also the link i sent above within this reply is what i believe to be what remains of the rough draft of the Tier 4 and higher revisions years ago.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Ya, this is what I was asking for. Thanks

 

[Romeu08]

I agree, but should this not be a staff only thread since its about the tiering system?

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

i will say it isn't anywhere close to the proposals in the past which attempted to get that number way higher lmao

I think the lowest end estimate then was like 20 trillion light years or something like that

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

I agree, but should this not be a staff only thread since its about the tiering system?

its not a crt. its a Q&A thread about if it actually has reasonable enough ground to possibly become a CRT

 

[ImmortalDread]

It should be staff thread tho, I mean if they are revised by NASA or Microsoft or any company that are reputable for precise information.
It seems we need to create ST (staff thread), for it.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Honestly with all the other staff threads staff probably feel overwhelmed with revisions atm lol

and AAS is very reputable. enough so that Max tegmark, MIT, Harvard, Nasa and many other agencies and stuff associate with hem regularly.

They do peer review things, and they also have a descritpion of their methods of peer review before an article is published.

additionally, they have Nasa agents as members in their ranks.

also The Future Visibility limit calc im talking was in review for almost 2 years by the AAS before being published to the public

 

[ImmortalDread]

Honestly with all the other staff threads staff probably feel overwhelmed with revisions atm lol

Agreed

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

just now read an Article that the AAS (the publishers of the article and also the ones who reviewed it) take an active role in shaping the politics of Astronomy in the US Goverment adovacting for higher spending limits for agencies like NASA and NSF

Their Director of Public Policy & Deputy Executive Officer is actually in talks with the white house currently according to the AAS website
Hes labled as "(Temporarily on-assignment to White House OSTP)"

Edit: AAS has decades of white house experience.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Agreed

imagine a tier 3-A Change on top of everything else... the sheer amount of calcs that will need to be redone...

 

[KLOL506]

@DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 What do you think of this?

 

[DontTalkDT]

Assuming dark energy remains constant (an unchanging cosmological constant), so that the expansion rate of the universe continues to accelerate

Yeah, I'm gonna stop you right there.
This is basically a prediction based on a prediction on how physics might work, that is unconfirmed. (and not universally accepted, as heat death scenarios are considered too)

So it goes into the long line of predictions of how much larger than the observable universe is, if you apply certain plausible and unproven assumptions.
We had lots of those before and decided to stick to the observable universe as the low end of what one can call proper universe destruction.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Yeah, I'm gonna stop you right there.
This is basically a prediction based on a prediction on how physics might work, that is unconfirmed. (and not universally accepted, as heat death scenarios are considered too)

So it goes into the long line of predictions of how much larger than the observable universe is, if you apply certain plausible and unproven assumptions.
We had lots of those before and decided to stick to the observable universe as the low end of what one can call proper universe destruction.

It's a prediction using currently accepted astronomical numbers to predict the maximum extent Humanity will see. A prediction of humanities cap limit on the most we'll ever be able to observe.

Hopefully I phrased that right

Edit: its the the maximum cap on the "observed" of the "universe"

 

[DontTalkDT]

Under specific assumptions on dark energy, which we barely understand.
In other words, it's an educated guess and not universally agreed upon.

So yeah, keep it at the parts we can currently see.

 

[ImmortalDread]

DT makes sense tbh

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Under specific assumptions on dark energy, which we barely understand.

In other words, it's an educated guess and not universally agreed upon.

So yeah, keep it at the parts we can currently see.

The current observable universe size is the same as it assumes a constant rate of expansion

How inflation is changing is also a mystery. While the estimate of 92 billion light-years comes from the idea of a constant rate of inflation, many scientists think that the rate is slowing down. If the universe expanded at the speed of light during inflation, it should be 10^23, or 100 sextillion. One explanation for this, outlined by NASA(opens in new tab) in 2019, is that dark energy events may have impacted the expansion of the universe in the moments after the Big Bang.

How Big is the Universe?

How big is the universe around us? What we can observe gives us an answer, but it's likely much bigger than that.

www.space.com

The first one has to do with universal expansion. We know that the universe is expanding, and it’s expanding at an accelerating rate. Assuming that it’s expanding similarly in all parts of the universe (which most scientists agree), all the objects in the universe are moving apart from one another at a similar pace.

Hundreds of amphibian species all over the world killed by fungus infection, but there may yet be hope

Since the 1990s, biologists have witnessed a sudden demise of amphibian species. So far, hundreds of species have become extinct after becoming plagued by a wretched fungus. From mountain lakes to meadow puddles, no matter the continent,

www.google.com

Simply enough, due to a process, we don’t yet understand, the universe is expanding, and the further away an object is, the faster it recedes from the observer.

We currently refer to the phenomenon as being driven by Dark Energy and Dark Matter which are terms we created as placeholders until we have an explanation for the process. No one has ever seen Dark Matter or measured Dark Energy.

What we do know is that something causes the universe to expand and at the farthest reaches, space expands so quickly that it exceeds the ability of light to cross that space.

How Big is the Universe? | The Observable Universe & Beyond

How Big is the Universe? The actual spatial size of the universe is unknown. However, by measuring the observable universe, the current size of the universe is approximately 95 billion light-years in diameter.

astrobackyard.com

Dark energy is the hypothetical energy causing the expansion of the universe. But we only know that universe is expanding

I'm typing this on phone and it's giving me problrms

 

[ImmortalDread]

I don't think dark energy exists, what you mean is void that cause the expansion.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Although the expansion rate is constant in all directions at any given time, this rate changes with time throughout the life of the universe.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1424299112

This is to say that the even the current size of the universe uses a constant rate

Also dark energy is considered into its calculations as the cause of expansion

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

I'd edit my previous comment to add this is but I have to use my phone due irl issues and the wiki is being buggy fir mobile when I hit edit

But..

Comoving distance factors out the expansion of the universe, giving a distance that does not change in time due to the expansion of space (though this may change due to other, local factors, such as the motion of a galaxy within a cluster).

Comoving and proper distances - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

According to calculations, the current comoving distance—proper distance, which takes into account that the universe has expanded since the light was emitted—to particles from which the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) was emitted, which represents the radius of the visible universe, is about 14.0 billion parsecs (about 45.7 billion light-years), while the comoving distance to the edge of the observable universe is about 14.3 billion parsecs (about 46.6 billion light-years),[12] about 2% larger. The radius of the observable universe is therefore estimated to be about 46.5 billion light-years[13][14] and its diameter about 28.5 gigaparsecs (93 billion light-years, or 8.8×1026 metres or 2.89×1027 feet), which equals 880 yottametres.[15] Using the critical density and the diameter of the observable universe, the total mass of ordinary matter in the universe can be calculated to be about 1.5 × 1053 kg.[16] In November 2018, astronomers reported that the extragalactic background light (EBL) amounted to 4 × 1084 photons.[17][18]

Observable universe - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

2. COMOVING COORDINATES

Our objective here is to produce a conformal map of the universe that will show the wide range of scales encountered while still showing shapes that are locally correct.

Consider the general Friedmann metrics



where t is the cosmic time since the big bang, a(t) is the expansion parameter, and individual galaxies participating in the cosmic expansion follow geodesics with constant values of χ, &thetas;, and &phis;. These three are called comoving coordinates. Neglecting peculiar velocities, galaxies remain at constant positions in comoving coordinates as the universe expands. Now a(t) obeys Friedmann's equations,

Both use the same method of calculation