[Psyborg] Size of the Star Wars Galixy?

[Surlethe]

Why don't you prove that the average galixy is larger than 10,000LY across.

Burden of proof, genius.

For ever astronimy web site it lists at least some info on the size distribution of galixies. For every one of 100,000LY there are 100 less than 10,000LY across. For every one of 10,000 there are 100 of ~1,000LY. You do any kind of analysis you like but the numbers will show that the average is less than 10,000LY across.

You're question-begging and making unsupported claims. And I was even nice to you. Imagine that!

[SirNitram]

SPIRAL GALAXIES, ASSHOLE. NOT DWARF GALAXIES.

Don't get excited. Ferrous Cranus here is simply going to keep up with the lies, so it's best to just mellow out. Have sex. Drink your beverage of choice.

[Lord Zentei]

Post subject: Re: Since it is very hard to prove the negitive,

Hey, look at this. He thinks he is being asked to prove a negative. Wow, just wow.

[Psyborg]

I did not say minimalist ever. My possition is that modest could not be used by normal people to discribe a galixy that is in the top one percent of galixies by size. 120,000LY is certainly deep into the 99 %tile and as such no rational person could call it "Modest" could they?

I must've missed where you provided the evidence for this assertion. Could you please do so again?

There are several Ask the Scientist articles at the NASA and planetarium web sites on the spectral distribution of galixies by size. For every one of 100,000LY there are 100 of 10,000 orless. there are also very many more smaller sized galixies than larger. It is a concave curve with the horizontal scale across the bottom from small to large and with the nuber highest near the origen and progressivle smaller the larger you go. I thought all you space fans would know these things. It never occured to me that you were colectively ignorant of these facts.

[Batman]

Why don't you prove that the average galixy is larger than 10,000LY across.

Why should we? You make the claim, you provide the evidence.
Not that we're asking you to prove a negative in the first place.
Oh, and I notice you still haven't learned how to spell galaxy.

For ever astronimy web site it lists at least some info on the size distribution of galixies. For every one of 100,000LY there are 100 less than 10,000LY across. For every one of 10,000 there are 100 of ~1,000LY. You do any kind of analysis you like but the numbers will show that the average is less than 10,000LY across.

I like it how you provide evidence for that claim, for the claim that that's the frame of reference the modest comment was referring to, AND for modest actually meaning what you claim it does. Oh wait you don't.

[SirNitram]

It never occured to me that you were colectively ignorant of these facts.

You know, this is a bad sentence to completely fuck up. Because it makes it all too clear that you're a lying little boy, probably not even out of middle school.

[Lord Zentei]

I did not say minimalist ever. My possition is that modest could not be used by normal people to discribe a galixy that is in the top one percent of galixies by size. 120,000LY is certainly deep into the 99 %tile and as such no rational person could call it "Modest" could they?

I must've missed where you provided the evidence for this assertion. Could you please do so again?

There are several Ask the Scientist articles at the NASA and planetarium web sites on the spectral distribution of galixies by size. For every one of 100,000LY there are 100 of 10,000 orless. there are also very many more smaller sized galixies than larger. It is a concave curve with the horizontal scale across the bottom from small to large and with the nuber highest near the origen and progressivle smaller the larger you go. I thought all you space fans would know these things. It never occured to me that you were colectively ignorant of these facts.

How hard is it for you to understand that we are discussing SPIRAL GALAXIES, you inbred retard?

[Lord Zentei]

SPIRAL GALAXIES, ASSHOLE. NOT DWARF GALAXIES.

Don't get excited. Ferrous Cranus here is simply going to keep up with the lies, so it's best to just mellow out. Have sex. Drink your beverage of choice.

Aye, probably a good idea. Here's wondering when the little asstard gets his custom title, though.

[Surlethe]

There are several Ask the Scientist articles at the NASA and planetarium web sites on the spectral distribution of galixies by size. For every one of 100,000LY there are 100 of 10,000 orless. there are also very many more smaller sized galixies than larger. It is a concave curve with the horizontal scale across the bottom from small to large and with the nuber highest near the origen and progressivle smaller the larger you go. I thought all you space fans would know these things. It never occured to me that you were colectively ignorant of these facts.

I'm sorry; I thought I asked you to post evidence, not your claims repackaged to look nice, replete with spelling errors. I guess you really don't want to discuss this, and are instead trolling.

[Surlethe]

Aye, probably a good idea. Here's wondering when the little asstard gets his custom title, though.

I think what's coming to him is probably going to be a bit heavier than a derogatory custom title.

[Lord Zentei]

Aye, probably a good idea. Here's wondering when the little asstard gets his custom title, though.

I think what's coming to him is probably going to be a bit heavier than a derogatory custom title.

No shit. Though the CT could come first as an apperatif.

[Psyborg]

See NASA web site. There are Spiral Galixies as small as 1000LY accross. The average is something less than 10,000LY so modest must be less than this.

Give the link and quote the text. Frankly, you're the illiterate retard who thinks hyperbole is hyperboil(Which would be the kind of sore you are on the ass of the human race), galaxy is gilixy(Possibly some kind of space glitter), and who thinks that the fact humans can see the illuminated core of the galaxy doesn't effect your idea that the core would be dark.

NASA.gov Go to the ask a scientist part of the site. See also any of the various planetarium web sites. Ask them the qustions your self.

If there is any dust at all near the core of the the galaxy, NASA states that at least 20% of all objects near the core are obscured, it is possable like so many other obscured features that that particular place just might be dark. Do you contend that there are no places in the entire galaxy that are dark?

[RedImperator]

Why don't you prove that the average galixy is larger than 10,000LY across.
For ever astronimy web site it lists at least some info on the size distribution of galixies. For every one of 100,000LY there are 100 less than 10,000LY across. For every one of 10,000 there are 100 of ~1,000LY. You do any kind of analysis you like but the numbers will show that the average is less than 10,000LY across.

Psyborg, you have directly stated that there are spiral galaxies 1000 light years across. I am now demanding that you produce that evidence. Pursuant to DR 6, you are compelled to produce that evidence, concede the point, or face disciplinary action.

Consider yourself warned. We already have a Banathon underway, and I have no patience with Stone Deaf trolls such as yourself, especially those who can't be bothered to correctly spell a six-letter word. I'll happily refer your ass to the Senate, and I'd be deeply surprised if the ban poll was less than unanimous.

[SirNitram]

NASA.gov Go to the ask a scientist part of the site. See also any of the various planetarium web sites. Ask them the qustions your self.

You made the claim, you provide the evidence.

D. R. 6

If you are asked for evidence to support a claim you've made, you should either produce this evidence or concede the point until such time as you can produce this evidence. People who consistently ignore requests for evidence to support their claims (particularly contentious claims) are not looked upon kindly here.

If there is any dust at all near the core of the the galaxy, NASA states that at least 20% of all objects near the core are obscured, it is possable like so many other obscured features that that particular place just might be dark. Do you contend that there are no places in the entire galaxy that are dark?

No, I am not an idiot like you. I contend that the obscurement will not be bad enough to remove the fact there are stars two lightyears away, and that the dust will be illuminated(Which would obscure, but still be damn bright. Are you simple?).

[Batman]

If there is any dust at all near the core of the the galaxy, NASA states that at least 20% of all objects near the core are obscured, it is possable like so many other obscured features that that particular place just might be dark. Do you contend that there are no places in the entire galaxy that are dark?

Who cares? We can SEE the centre of the galaxy and it looks nothing like what we see in TFF. Case closed.

[Batman]

( Are you simple?).

I object. that's a grave insult to simpleminded people everywhere, comparing them with Psyretard.

[Psyborg]

I did not say minimalist ever. My possition is that modest could not be used by normal people to discribe a galixy that is in the top one percent of galixies by size. 120,000LY is certainly deep into the 99 %tile and as such no rational person could call it "Modest" could they?

PROVE IT SHITSTAIN!
Prove that 120K ly is top knots. Prove that it is in the given frame of reference.

I never stated that 120K is the top, NASA states that the size of galaxies ranges from 1,000,000LY to 1,000LY and that for every one of 100,000 or larger there are at least 100 that are less than 10,000, therefore by %tile deffinition if 100/1 are smaller then being larger makes it in the 99%tile or top one percent.

[Surlethe]

I never stated that 120K is the top, NASA states that the size of galaxies ranges from 1,000,000LY to 1,000LY and that for every one of 100,000 or larger there are at least 100 that are less than 10,000, therefore by %tile deffinition if 100/1 are smaller then being larger makes it in the 99%tile or top one percent.

Where does NASA state this? Please provide a link.

[Psyborg]

Modest means lessor than the average at least as far as coloquealism is concerned.

Oh really? I hate to break it to you, but the word "modest" is very often used to mean "about average". Now quit your stupid semantics whoring.

But it is more often meant to mean less than average. Go to the varrious deffinitions posted by others and substitute synonyms for some of the words in the various deffinitions and you can quickly find that the most common refferance is to a lessor relationship.

[Lord Zentei]

NASA.gov Go to the ask a scientist part of the site. See also any of the various planetarium web sites. Ask them the qustions your self.

It is not incumbant on us to provide evidence for your claims. You spoke of website info: provide the link. And remember we are discussing spirals, not dwarf irregulars or dwarf ellipticals.

If there is any dust at all near the core of the the galaxy, NASA states that at least 20% of all objects near the core are obscured, it is possable like so many other obscured features that that particular place just might be dark.

The dust is to be found throughout the thin disk; the obscurement you reference is because of this, not because there is an inordinate amount of dust in the galactic bulge itself.

Do you contend that there are no places in the entire galaxy that are dark?

Strawman. There are places where the galaxy is dark: the dark nebulae. These are found in the spiral arms, not the bulge.

[Lord Zentei]

Modest means lessor than the average at least as far as coloquealism is concerned.

Oh really? I hate to break it to you, but the word "modest" is very often used to mean "about average". Now quit your stupid semantics whoring.

But it is more often meant to mean less than average. Go to the varrious deffinitions posted by others and substitute synonyms for some of the words in the various deffinitions and you can quickly find that the most common refferance is to a lessor relationship.

Irrelevant.

[Psyborg]

No really that's a mean thing to say. Surely Psydolt would never do something like that.
BAD Einhander! No dessert for you! Keep this up and we won't let you railgun this stupid fuckh... poor misunderstood fellow poster.

I did not say minimalist ever. My possition is that modest could not be used by normal people to discribe a galixy that is in the top one percent of galixies by size. 120,000LY is certainly deep into the 99 %tile and as such no rational person could call it "Modest" could they?

There are 6 or 7 types of spiral galaxy and they come in all sizes. so if there is some canon deffinition of which type of spiral galaxy it is then modest must mean smaller than average. One of the other poster's stated that "Modest" could also mean "Average". I do not see how any of the deffinitions posted so far might be construed to mean this but if it is and the average is less than 10,000LY across, how does that help your side?
Unless it is a given that it is a spiral galaxy.

[Batman]

Prove that 120K ly is top knots.

Prove that it is in the given frame of reference.

I never stated that 120K is the top,

Oh really. Notice the bolded.

NASA states that the size of galaxies ranges from 1,000,000LY to 1,000LY and that for every one of 100,000 or larger there are at least 100 that are less than 10,000, therefore by %tile deffinition if 100/1 are smaller then being larger makes it in the 99%tile or top one percent.

Which is top knots you imbecile. Your evidence for this being the frame of reference used is? Your evidence for the novelizations using 'modest' the way you want them to is?

[Surlethe]

You know, it appears psyborg is mechanically going through the thread and selectively replying to various rebuttals; am I incorrect in presuming this is a common troll technique?

[Lord Zentei]

Wow, how often does it need to be said? And learn to use the goddamn quote tags.