Perspectives of celestial bodies in space

[Gryffindorian]

I've been thinking about this lately especially when I watch astronomy documentaries or see sci-fi programs on TV.

Sometimes movies or documentaries show a "close up" view of a planet, star, or even a whole galaxy. In fact, at the end of Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, Luke and Leia can be seen looking at a galaxy though the window of a spaceship.

Then I thought, no way, that can't be possible. Galaxies are supposed to be massive; how can they be viewed upclose as a whole? I suppose it's possible to look at very distant galaxies using a telescope, but we're talking about trillions upon trillions of light-years away. Or if we're looking at a small enough object like the Earth or our own sun, it's possible to see "the whole picture." But galaxies?

 

[Gryffindorian]

And before anyone rants on about "no, no, no, those are just computer renderings," I say unto thee, "No shit, Sherlock." But my original point is that, is it really possible to view a super massive cosmic entity as a whole when youre in space? From a spaceship perspective, all you could see are endless fields of stars.

EDIT:

One other thing to consider is that objects in space are spread so far apart that you don't actually see objects squeezed together.

 

[Gepard]

I believe the "galaxy" in ESB was intended to be some kind of accretion disk around a protostar; the early stages of a sloar system, in other words. So the scale (and visible rotation) makes a lot more sense.

The topic of what galaxies would look like has come up before. I recall Christopher had a very informative post on the subject in the Stargate forum, which I'll have to see if I can dig up. The gist, as I recall, was that most of the images we see of nebulas and galaxies in real life are taken with very long exposure times and subsequany processed further to enhance contrast. So in reality, we'd never be able to see most of what's shown in sci-fi movies with the naked eye.

And in reality, you wouldn't even be able to see stars looking out from inside a lit spaceship. The stars are just too dim to be visible if your eyes (or camera) are adjusted to be able to look at a sunlit planet or the interior of your spaceship. It's the same reason you can't see stars if you're standing outside in a big city at night, and why there are no stars visible in NASA photos of the Earth or on the moon.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I've been thinking about this lately especially when I watch astronomy documentaries or see sci-fi programs on TV.

Sometimes movies or documentaries show a "close up" view of a planet, star, or even a whole galaxy. In fact, at the end of Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, Luke and Leia can be seen looking at a galaxy though the window of a spaceship.

Then I thought, no way, that can't be possible. Galaxies are supposed to be massive; how can they be viewed upclose as a whole? I suppose it's possible to look at very distant galaxies using a telescope, but we're talking about trillions upon trillions of light-years away. Or if we're looking at a small enough object like the Earth or our own sun, it's possible to see "the whole picture." But galaxies?

To use one example popularized by Star Trek, if you actually flew up close to or inside a nebula, you wouldn't be able to see anything but "empty" space. They only look so bright and complex when seen from a vast distance through a telescope. So all the times you see the Enterprise hiding out in a dense nebula are just a dramatic conceit.

The "galaxy" seen at the end of 'TESB' was actually a point of contention amongst fans. Those arguing against it being a galaxy made accurate points, but were overruled:

The Empire Strikes Back debate

At the end of Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, a celestial object is seen from several hundred thousand light years away. Some fans have said that it rotates too fast to be a galaxy and at that distance a galaxy would not emit as much light as is portrayed in the film. The Complete Star Wars Trilogy Scrapbook identifies the object as a spinning star formation. The Episode II DVD-ROM Exclusive Content states that the bright object is the cluster known as the Rishi Maze. The film's director, Irvin Kershner, refers to the object as "a galaxy" on the Audio Commentary feature of the 2004 DVD release.

Some sources have said that the Rebel fleet spent some time hiding outside the galactic disk, probably intending to refer to this scene. According to Tales of the Bounty Hunters' story Of Possible Futures: The Tale of Zuckuss and 4-LOM, the object in the film is the galaxy, and the Rebel fleet had journeyed to a point in space well-removed from the galactic plane. This point was not outside of the galactic plane, per se, but rather above the galactic plane. In 2003 Leland Chee confirmed on the StarWars.com Message Boards that the object seen in Episode V is indeed the Star Wars galaxy.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/The_galaxy

 

[Gepard]

Huh. Well that's retarded as all get-out. I think I like my explanation better.

 

[Gryffindorian]

The ESB scene makes sense assuming that was not a galaxy they were looking at, but a smaller object.

As for sci-fi renderings of nebulae and stars, I can see how they would look different, but they're likely close approximations.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Huh. Well that's retarded as all get-out. I think I like my explanation better.

I agree with you. It was visibly rotating from their perspective in the Rebel fleet, which would mean it would have to be spinning incredibly fast. There's no way it could realistically be a galaxy, but then, there's a lot of things that couldn't realistically exist or work the way they do in Star Wars.

 

[Gepard]

I agree with you. It was visibly rotating from their perspective in the Rebel fleet, which would mean it would have to be spinning incredibly fast.

It doesn't help that the way they film the Falcon makes it look like it's flying over and past the "galaxy." The other problem I have with it is there's a star field visible as well. If the fleet is not inside a galaxy at that moment, what are all the little glittering specks?

There's no way it could realistically be a galaxy, but then, there's a lot of things that couldn't realistically exist or work the way they do in Star Wars.

In its defense, though, Star Wars is hardly the only light sci-fi/space fantasy series to have that problem. Not that this board would know anything about that.

OT, but the clip you posted really reminded me how much I miss that old kitbashed model spaceship look. It's any more realistic than CGI, vis a vie looking like actual 300-meter-long ships floating in deep space, but it sure is easy on the eyes.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

In its defense, though, Star Wars is hardly the only light sci-fi/space fantasy series to have that problem. Not that this board would know anything about that.

Of course not. I thought that would have been clear since I pointed out a similar astronomically inaccurate dramatic conceit in Star Trek.

 

[Gepard]

^Good point. I missed that.

 

[B.J.]

The other problem I have with it is there's a star field visible as well. If the fleet is not inside a galaxy at that moment, what are all the little glittering specks?

Not all stars are in a galaxy proper. Also, those stars don't need to be stars at all, they could be other galaxies.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

The Empire Strikes Back debate

At the end of Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, a celestial object is seen from several hundred thousand light years away. Some fans have said that it rotates too fast to be a galaxy and at that distance a galaxy would not emit as much light as is portrayed in the film. The Complete Star Wars Trilogy Scrapbook identifies the object as a spinning star formation. The Episode II DVD-ROM Exclusive Content states that the bright object is the cluster known as the Rishi Maze. The film's director, Irvin Kershner, refers to the object as "a galaxy" on the Audio Commentary feature of the 2004 DVD release.

Some sources have said that the Rebel fleet spent some time hiding outside the galactic disk, probably intending to refer to this scene. According to Tales of the Bounty Hunters' story Of Possible Futures: The Tale of Zuckuss and 4-LOM, the object in the film is the galaxy, and the Rebel fleet had journeyed to a point in space well-removed from the galactic plane. This point was not outside of the galactic plane, per se, but rather above the galactic plane. In 2003 Leland Chee confirmed on the StarWars.com Message Boards that the object seen in Episode V is indeed the Star Wars galaxy.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/The_galaxy

I asked my SW friend about this issue and he replied:

"Chee is the official EU continuity maven so that's the official answer for the EU which, as we all know, sucks.
It just looked cool, that's my answer."

I do think it's rather lame to try and squeeze science reasons into pretty pics in sci fi shows. On par with the warp speed vs light speed debates.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Stuff like Star Wars and Star Trek are Space Opera-- their universes operate under different laws, so I seldom even wonder about stuff like this. Nebulae are like dense cloud banks, asteroids have Earth gravity at the surface, physical objects move faster than light but light can be seen moving slower than light, et cetera.

How about the Firefly universe? That great promoter of scientific literacy, Joss Whedon, described it as a peanut cluster.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

^ Speaking of asteroids, real asteroid fields/belts are nowhere near as dense as those of Star Trek and Star Wars. You'd be lucky to even be able to see one asteroid from another, much less have to dodge them in your spaceship.

I do think it's rather lame to try and squeeze science reasons into pretty pics in sci fi shows.

I don't see the problem as long as it's all done in good fun and not taken too seriously. Plus, it's a good way to be educate people with relatable concepts like the movies and tv shows they enjoy.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

^ Speaking of asteroids, real asteroid fields/belts are nowhere near as dense as those of Star Trek and Star Wars. You'd be lucky to even be able to see one asteroid from another, much less have to dodge them in your spaceship.

I do think it's rather lame to try and squeeze science reasons into pretty pics in sci fi shows.

I don't see the problem as long as it's all done in good fun and not taken too seriously. Plus, it's a good way to be educate people with relatable concepts like the movies and tv shows they enjoy.

True, it's just often taken rather seriously.

 

[Agent Richard07]

The topic of what galaxies would look like has come up before.

I remember this thread... Could we see galaxies while in a spaceship?

And in reality, you wouldn't even be able to see stars looking out from inside a lit spaceship.

Right. On TV, we see outside very clearly, but in real life, when you look out a window at night from a lit room, all you see is a black pane and a faint reflection of the room your in.

 

[B.J.]

^I think everyone understands that you'd be looking out from a darkened room.

As for whether we'd be able to see galaxies with the naked eye, this picture put it to bed for me:

It's the Moon and the Andromeda Galaxy put next to each other with their correct apparent sizes. Since I don't see the Andromeda Galaxy like this every night (and it's only a smudge at best through binoculars and a very clear night), I'd have to conclude that we wouldn't be able to see any but the brightest galaxies. BTW, I found this image and many others like it by just Googling "Andromeda galaxy moon".

 

[Gepard]

The topic of what galaxies would look like has come up before.

I remember this thread... Could we see galaxies while in a spaceship?

That's it. I couldn't for the life of me locate that thread earlier.

 

[Canadave]

Since I don't see the Andromeda Galaxy like this every night (and it's only a smudge at best through binoculars and a very clear night), I'd have to conclude that we wouldn't be able to see any but the brightest galaxies.

Wait... that's not what you see every night?

 

[Hofner]

The other problem I have with it is there's a star field visible as well. If the fleet is not inside a galaxy at that moment, what are all the little glittering specks?

Not all stars are in a galaxy proper. Also, those stars don't need to be stars at all, they could be other galaxies.

Aside from whether that galaxy at the end of ESB could look like it does, our heroes could be in a satellite galaxy 'peering' out from inside it. Our own Milky Way galaxy has a number of close small satellite galaxies including the Magellanic Clouds.

Robert