Galaxy News: The Milky Way just got bigger

[Dragonmasterxyz]

hm, hm....Well I still don't see the need for a new tier to be made.

 

[Mand21]

There are lots of galaxy busting feats which are merely high into 4-A, aren't there? This should count for something.

 

[The_Everlasting]

You need to provide examples here.

 

[Kepekley23]

Yeah, I disagree with doing anything to split tiers that already do their job extremely well.

 

[Wokistan]

I was wondering more about why the milky way is baseline when its bigger than most, not splitting the tier. At most the threshold would be lowered a bit.

 

[Kepekley23]

I mean, if this was "SomethingSomething" Wiki from an alien race 100,000,000 light years away who also liked VS debates, they'd likely use their galaxy as the baseline for 3-C too

 

[The_Causality]

So the new value for destroying the galaxy from the epicenter is:

• i'll use the Sphere formula so 100000 ly = 1.12476E+43 m2
• Sun radius = 1.52e18 m2
• E = (1.12476E+43)/(1.52E+18)*(GBE of the sun)
• E = 7,2E+24*(2.27e41 J)
• E = 1,6E+66 for destroying the galaxy from the center

i have made probably an error....

 

[Mand21]

I'm gonna calc Segue 2 as a possible baseline for Low 3-C/High 4-A, using the tips Assaltwife gave me last time, just for kicks and to have something to use in case the idea is accepted.

If I'm allowed to use its Half-light Radius as parameter for size and the Sun as the body at the edge of this tiny 1000-stars galaxy.

4*GBE*(Explosion Radius/Body Radius)^2 becomes 4*6.276e+41*(1.049e+18/6.96e+8)^2 or 5.702633e+60 J.

Cleanly cutting Tier 4-A nearly in half.

 

[Mand21]

So the new value for destroying the galaxy from the epicenter is:

• i'll use the Sphere formula so 100000 ly = 1.12476E+43 m2
• Sun radius = 1.52e18 m2
• E = (1.12476E+43)/(1.52E+18)*(GBE of the sun)
• E = 7,2E+24*(2.27e41 J)
• E = 1,6E+66 for destroying the galaxy from the center

there is probably an error....

Um, I'm pretty sure the solar radius isn't on the several dozen light years range.

 

[The_Causality]

Um, I'm pretty sure the solar radius isn't on the several dozen light years range.

m^2 =/= m

I used a variant

 

[Wokistan]

Yeah, we don't really need a high 4-A/low 3-C tier. It's not that big a deal, and I understood why we use milky way as baseline, I was just wondering if using a more normally sized galaxy would be more accurate. Most fictional authors are probably considering the milky way as an average galaxy, unless they bother to give their own measurements, so it should be fine.

 

[Mand21]

Yeah, okay. Not using the milky way might actually be a better bet. Characters who destroy specifically the milky way or "The Galaxy" (as in our own) should merely get above baseline.

Which galaxy to use, then?

 

[Kepekley23]

Using the Milky Way is good enough.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Wait with any of this until you see whether it establishes itself.

PopSci articles often present research results that don't reach large acceptance in the scientific community.

 

[Mand21]

And thus DT saves the status quo uwu day. If we can see other websites supporting this, I guess it may be reconsidered, though?

 

[DontTalkDT]

And thus DT saves the status quo uwu day. If we can see other websites supporting this, I guess it may be reconsidered, though?

Once the NASA or maybe even just wikipedia update their numbers to "at least 200k ly" updates can be talked about.

 

[Numbersguy]

Yeah, we should wait a bit in-case the calculation was flawed or something.

But if it is true, then damn, we were off by like 100K lightyears

 

[Kepekley23]

I agree 100% with DontTalk. Should appear in a peer reviewed article, at least.

 

[Mariogoods]

Sun Wukong's lifting is depends on the Milky Way.

 

[Numbersguy]

Sun Wukong's lifting is depends on the Milky Way.

True, someone has to fix it

 

[Golden_Void]

Wait with any of this until you see whether it establishes itself.
PopSci articles often present research results that don't reach large acceptance in the scientific community.

This, good find though

 

[ABoogieYesSir]

Yeah no wonder why time or the day is getting faster

 

[Golden_Void]

Yeah no wonder why time or the day is getting faster

wat

 

[ApiesDeathbyLazors]

The Cutting Edge of Science - Confirming just how stupid everybody is every single day.

 

[AlexSoloVaAlFuturo]

Yeah no wonder why time or the day is getting faster

I know that my brain must look like a mushroom because of the college, but wut's this?

 

[Antoniofer]

The same article says that the mass of the Galaxy do not change, what is outside of the spiral, the stars, are just being affected by Milky Way's gravity, the typical spiral has the same size that it ever have.

 

[Soldier_Blue]

- Insert happy comments here that have already been made -

 

[AKM sama]

Looks like the galaxy speed feats will be doubled and AP feats will be quadrupled.

When will we talk about upgrading the size of the universe tho? I mean recent studies (by MIT, I think) have also said that the universe is at least 250x bigger than the observable.

 

[Soldier_Blue]

@AKM sama

250 fold?

Holy crap...

 

[The_Everlasting]

We can't say anything about the size of the full universe with certainty. I'd rather not try and assume it.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

I agree with the majority.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I mean, this isn't really a peer-reviewed widely accepted article, like DontTalk said,and:

"While our galaxy is looking larger, it's not putting on much weight. Because the outer reaches are much less dense than the center of the galaxy, the additional area is only sparsely populated with stars. These few extra stars are only a drop in the bucket compared to the rest of the galaxy, so overall the mass of the Milky Way remains largely unchanged."

It isn't really that our galactic disc is larger than previously thought, but that there sparse quantities of stars outside it, though still held by our galaxy's gravity.

They aren't really part of what we would constitute the galaxy to be.

 

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

so what is the new power gap between baseline Multi-Solar System and Galaxy now?

 

[Azathoth_the_Abyssal_Idiot]

WELCOME NEW GALAXY

 

[Antvasima]

I also agree with DontTalk about that we should wait for scientific consensus before changing our standards.

Perhaps we should remove the highlight for this thread?

 

[Golden_Void]

Yeah.

 

[AKM sama]

@Soldier Blue and Ever

It came out in 2011 and you can find many articles regarding this on the web.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...igger-than-visible-universe-say-cosmologists/

250x is like the lowest end of how much bigger the universe is in comparison to the observable universe. It even says so in the wikipedia.

"that would suggest that at present the entire universe's size is at least 3×1023 times the radius of the observable universe.[22] There are also lower estimates claiming that the entire universe is in excess of 250 times larger than the observable universe[23] and also higher estimates implying that the universe is at least 101010122 times larger than the observable universe.[24]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe

 

[Andytrenom]

@AKM I remember watching a video about something like that.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

@Soldier Blue and Ever

It came out in 2011 and you can find many articles regarding this on the web.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...igger-than-visible-universe-say-cosmologists/

250x is like the lowest end of how much bigger the universe is in comparison to the observable universe. It even says so in the wikipedia.

"that would suggest that at present the entire universe's size is at least 3×1023 times the radius of the observable universe.[22] There are also lower estimates claiming that the entire universe is in excess of 250 times larger than the observable universe[23] and also higher estimates implying that the universe is at least 101010122 times larger than the observable universe.[24]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe

So upgrade for the baseline of universe level? Also 250 times larger in volume or radius?

 

[Andytrenom]

Probably not, I mean it is not exactly new information that there are higher estimates for the universe size.