Seeing the earth from light years away?

[Anonymous No.5967619]

We all have unanswered questions regarding our history and the past. The unwritten history of us humans and even our planet.

Now I think of a possible way to see it once again. This is just theoretical but here it goes.

For instance we would like to see Shakespeare when he is still alive. I mean he live roughly 500 years ago. So all we do is spot a planet 500 light years away. Then build a telescope there powerful enough to see earth. If we look at the telescope there we will see all the things happening on earth 500 years in the past because it takes 500 light years for the light of earth to reach the planet.

Of course all this is theoretical and I can't imagine if we can be able to build a telescope that can do that. Not to mention how we can easily travel to a planet 500 light years away. A wormhole perhaps? Or teleportation? Or jump to hyperspace?

Now I am asking if theoretically what I am saying is possible. That if you are in another part of the milky way thousands of light years away from earth, and see earth through a telescope, you will see earth thousands of years ago?

[Anonymous No.5967655]

>>5967619
Since we cannot go faster than the speed of light, the light reflected away from the earth is already in motion away from the earth, you cannot catch up to it, it is already gone.

So no, you cannot go build a telescope on a planet light years away to see the earth's past. It would have had to have been there in the first place.
Perhaps a gigantic mirror and viewing it from earth.

[Talimar No.5967662]

If we found an alien race that was kind enough to use our planet as an experiment to test their multi-thousand mile wide mirror array.... then yes.

Of course, we'd of had to blow their ship out of the sky by that time. Good news is that we'd likely have a few years before their family starts getting worried about their missing offspring.

[Anonymous No.5967663]

>>5967619
>A wormhole perhaps? Or teleportation? Or jump to hyperspace?


Why don't you just build a time machine, you fucking idiot.

[Anonymous No.5967668]

>>5967655
>Since we cannot go faster than the speed of light, the light reflected away from the earth is already in motion away from the earth, you cannot catch up to it, it is already gone.

So what if we have a thing like hyperspace? What I indicated here: >>5967619
>A wormhole perhaps? Or teleportation? Or jump to hyperspace?

>So no, you cannot go build a telescope on a planet light years away to see the earth's past. It would have had to have been there in the first place.

If that's the case then what if there is already a telescope there? Will my theory of being able to see the past through viewing it from another planet light years away be true? That it is possible given that we have hyperspace, a telescope already light years away?

[Anonymous No.5967671]

>>5967663
>Why don't you just build a time machine, you fucking idiot.

OP here. I would prefer a time machine since it could be use to travel to the future.
However, isn't time travel impossible?

[Anonymous No.5967672]

>>5967668
Well in that case, then yeah. You would be doing exactly what we are doing now, from earth, viewing other planets and stars as they were but in the past.

But since large scale teleportation doesn't exist, and wormholes and hyperspace can't yield anything yet, it is currently impossible since we are held back by the speed of light.

[Anonymous No.5967682]

>>5967672
Me here again

Do you >>5967668 at least understand why it's impossible? Sure in theory it's possible, but only when the theory assumes that we can break the laws of physics...

[Anonymous No.5967689]

>>5967682
>Sure in theory it's possible, but only when the theory assumes that we can break the laws of physics...

Will technology in the future give light to this theory and prove it's truth? Or is time travel or a time traveling machine more efficient and likely?

[Anonymous No.5967691]

If you could somehow teleport yourself to a planet 500 light years away and build a truly enormous telescope there, yes, you could do this. Building a telescope that powerful might not even be possible, though. There's a reason we don't have any high-resolution images of distant stars or exoplanets; there's not just practical limits on the power of a telescope, there's theoretical ones as well.

If there are aliens 500 light years away and they have a magical telescope, though, then they are indeed watching the top of Shakespeare's head.

[Anonymous No.5967715]

>>5967691
Ok that's good to know.
Thanks for the explanation.

Anyhow I have a follow up question. what if we built a telescope like the Hubble telescope and look back more than 13 billion years, will we be able to finally see the big bang?

I mean the Hubble Ultra-Deep Field only look back for 13 billion years. I mean it should have looked back more so that we can truly know how the universe came into existence. Not to mention what things exists before the big bang.

[Anonymous No.5967722]

>>5967715
Follow up:

Pic related. The Hubble should have tried to looked back more and into the big bang.

Why didn't it tried to do so? Lack of funding?

[Anonymous No.5967742]

>>5967715

It's impossible to look back more than 400,000-ish years after the Big Bang. Before that point, the universe was still so hot and dense that it was 'opaque', light (and all electromagnetic radiation) was absorbed before it had a chance to travel anywhere.

In practice, yeah, the Hubble just can't look back that far. I didn't know offhand, but I just looked it up and the oldest image it's captured was from some 380 million years after the Big Bang, and that was pushing the Hubble's capabilities. With more powerful telescopes in the future we might be able to look back still farther.

Also, talking about what came before the Big Bang doesn't really make sense, for lots of reasons. The usual analogy, courtesy of Stephen Hawking, is that it's like asking what's north of the north pole. But yeah, getting as close to the Big Bang with the limited tools we have, insofar as it's even possible, is one of the main goals of cosmology.

[Anonymous No.5967752]

>>5967742
>It's impossible to look back more than 400,000-ish years after the Big Bang. Before that point, the universe was still so hot and dense that it was 'opaque', light (and all electromagnetic radiation) was absorbed before it had a chance to travel anywhere.

In that case, is that what they call event horizon?

>Also, talking about what came before the Big Bang doesn't really make sense, for lots of reasons. The usual analogy, courtesy of Stephen Hawking, is that it's like asking what's north of the north pole. But yeah, getting as close to the Big Bang with the limited tools we have, insofar as it's even possible, is one of the main goals of cosmology.

Then we can discover how the Big Bang came about.

[Anonymous No.5967756]

>>5967742

Surely the most important question ever is what came before the Big Bang?

[Anonymous No.5967795]

OP, what you're saying is impossible to do because we can't catch up with and surpass the light as it travels through space so that we're ready and waiting before the light meets us.

However, your post gave me an idea. What if, somehow, we could find a way to reconstruct a reflection of the earth from reflective bodies in space? As in somehow collecting light reflected from a distant solar system with a large enough telescope and analyzing the data to reconstruct an image of the earth. Obviously it would be very hard to do since light loves to scatter when it hits anything that it's a perfect mirror and I really have no ideas beyond this. Can anyone say if this is at least theoretically possible if not technologically?

[Anonymous No.5967809]

>>5967722
That's the limit of it's sensitivity. You can't see the big bang, the best you can do is the first light (CMBR) which is much too redshifted for HST.

[Anonymous No.5969356]

>>5967809
>That's the limit of it's sensitivity. You can't see the big bang, the best you can do is the first light (CMBR) which is much too redshifted for HST.

Why can't we see the Big Bang?
Isn't the Big Bang a big explosion?
Are you saying that the Big Bang has no light?
What if our telescope is so strong that we can illuminate it?

[Anonymous No.5969629]

>>5969356
bump

[Anonymous No.5969648]

With our current theories your proposition is impossible.

[Anonymous No.5969689]

>>5967752
it isnt the event horizon, the event horizon is the point of no return.
if the light eventually escaped then it havent crossed the event horizon.

[Anonymous No.5969722]

>>5969356
Hi anon.

You can, sort of, see the Big Bang, thanks to the Cosmic Background Radiation, infact, if you have an old TV, and if you manage to see static on a channel, you are witnessing the beginning of the cosmos.

The big bang, was not an explosion per se, its more of a big expansion.

no, the big bang had no light, the particles that are light where not available at the moment of the big bang event, light as we perceive it may have come around at the time the first atoms and fusion processes began, sometime around 0.5 million years after the big bang.

if you have a telescope, by definition it can only trap incoming light, if you wanted to shine light back on the big bang... well... you can do so, but it'll take a while to get results, about 15billion years

[Anonymous No.5969734]

>>5967752
Hi anon.

The event horizon is where there is no return before falling into a singularity.

There are theories and ideas about what was before the big bang, some say a big crunch happened.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_crunch

Others say a big bang is where all the matter swallowed by all the black holes in other universes goes to.

Imagination is a really wonderful thing.

I mean, it even came up with God.

[Anonymous No.5969738]

>>5967689
Hi anon.

Sorry to disappoint but thanks to the 2nd law of thermodynamics, Time travel into the past is impossible.

The idea of the arrow of time, or the flow of time has been officially been known since 1927.

A good place to start is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_of_time

However, and this is important, Science is not exact, it may be even you the one that can prove existing theories wrong!

Keep your imagination going. k?