from the comes-in-colors-everywhere dept.
In 2001, some physicists put their heads together and asked: “What is the color of the Universe?”
By this they meant what color would an observer see, “if they had the Universe in a box, and could see all the light at once.”
“And,” they added, as if that question was too simple, “it wasn't moving.” They added this bit because, because of the Doppler effect, stars that are receding from Earth are redshifted – i.e. they appear redder than if they weren’t moving, relative to us.
Even though, as New Scientist observed, the question might seem about as useful as “the ‘answer’ to life, the Universe and everything given in the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy - 42,” the astronomers knew the spectral analysis would help them trace the history of star formation. So they forged ahead with the calculations and, in January 2002, captured the public’s attention when they announced their result.
“In space no one can hear you scream, which is probably a good thing,” the Guardian wrote in their coverage, “as scientists have discovered that the universe is a shade of turquoise.”
The Guardian’s reporter might have been glib, but many others embraced the color. The real problem was, the universe isn’t turquoise. The scientists had gotten it wrong.
http://priceonomics.com/what-is-the-average-color-of-the-universe/
(Score: 2) by WizardFusion on Thursday January 29 2015, @12:07PM
I like beige.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Thursday January 29 2015, @01:30PM
Yes. It goes with everything.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday January 29 2015, @08:02PM
Cosmic Latte is OK, but Univeige would have been an awesome name!
(Score: 3, Funny) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Thursday January 29 2015, @12:15PM
1. Find someone with synesthesia
2. Ask them what colour "42" is.
Job done.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29 2015, @01:24PM
Easier: Grab the colour rectangle with xv, press the middle mouse button and read off the HSV values: 42, 9, 100
So you see, 42 is the hue of the universe. So the question of life, the universe and everything, to which the answer is 42, is:
What is the hue of the universe?
Damn, I just notice today is Thursday! And a hue of 42 at full saturation instead of just saturation 9 happens to be a shade of yellow very much like that commonly found on construction site equipment … and probably also on Vogon constructor fleet ships …
Also note the saturation of 9. What was again the question the caveman revealed? Right, what do you get if you multiply 6 by 9. Yes, exactly, nine. The saturation of the universe!
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday January 29 2015, @08:32PM
Of course they must have made a mistake, because it's obvious that the HSV values of the universe's colour must be (42,42,42).
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by KritonK on Monday February 02 2015, @08:58AM
I thought the question was "what do you get if you multiply six by nine?"
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday January 29 2015, @06:31PM
Turns out the color of the univers is bacon flavored. How interesting.
(Score: 2) by CoolHand on Thursday January 29 2015, @12:38PM
I'm too lazy to RTFA..
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
(Score: 2) by WizardFusion on Thursday January 29 2015, @12:44PM
Yes, beige
(Score: 2) by CoolHand on Thursday January 29 2015, @06:16PM
So that's why you said you like it... boy, I'm quick... :)
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
(Score: 2) by fishybell on Thursday January 29 2015, @12:57PM
I remember from a while (2002) back, a similar [highbeam.com] story on a similar [slashdot.org] site. That said, I like both "Decidedly Salmon" and "Cosmic Latte."
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29 2015, @02:49PM
I remember this. The scientists had gotten it wrong, realized shortly that they'd made a mistake, tried again and published a correction. Non-news... or perhaps an example of the Scientific Method at work. TFA even mentions that they'd fixed it "two months later".
Why is it being brought up again 12 years later? Perhaps a better question - why leave end the quote with simply "The scientists had gotten it wrong" without completing the thought?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29 2015, @06:42PM
Some of the universe is unobservable anyway due to the expansion of the universe. So they can't really say what the color is.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29 2015, @04:13PM
Mauve [dilbert.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29 2015, @05:01PM
ah, if your Caucasian?
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday January 29 2015, @06:59PM
To express this value in EM wavelengths (i.e., angstroms)?
Just sayin'.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday January 29 2015, @08:35PM
No, it wouldn't. Indeed, there is no wavelength with this colour, and there cannot be. The only way the total colour of the universe could be accurately described by a wavelength would be if all but a negligible amount of all light would be at that wavelength. However if that were the case, colour reception would be pointles, and thus we'd see the world in black and white and wouldn't even understand what "the colour of the universe" is even supposed to mean.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday January 29 2015, @08:49PM
Ummm....not so much. Light is EM radiation [wikipedia.org].
All EM radiation has a wavelength. "Visible" (to us at least) light has wavelengths in the 4000-7000 angstrom range.
If you can say with any sort of confidence that the universe is "beige" then you can be more exact by expressing that in terms of wavelength.
This is high school (middle school?) physics, friend.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday January 29 2015, @09:14PM
Yes, of course. BTW, no need for a link, I'm physicist.
Wrong. EM radiation is generally a mix of many different wavelengths. EM radiation that consists of a single wavelength is called "monochromatic".
More exactly, 400 to 750 nm.
No. You can give a spectrum which consists of many different wavelengths (generally, all of the visible wavelengths are there, although there are exceptions). However the spectrum is not the same as the colour since different spectra correspond to the same colour (this is why you can mix almost all colours with only three base colours — in other words, this is why your colour monitor works). The only exception are the spectral colours (that is the colours of monochromatic light). Those cannot be mixed from other colours (which BTW also means that your monitor cannot properly display them).
It must be an extraordinarily bad physics course that doesn't teach spectra.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Thursday January 29 2015, @09:44PM
All EM radiation has a wavelength.
Wrong. EM radiation is generally a mix of many different wavelengths. EM radiation that consists of a single wavelength is called "monochromatic".
I'm going to assume you misunderstood me rather than being deliberately obtuse. Let me be more precise. Each quanta (photon) of EM radiation has a specific wavelength.
"Visible" (to us at least) light has wavelengths in the 4000-7000 angstrom range.
More exactly, 400 to 750 nm.
And so it is.
If you can say with any sort of confidence that the universe is "beige" then you can be more exact by expressing that in terms of wavelength.
No. You can give a spectrum which consists of many different wavelengths (generally, all of the visible wavelengths are there, although there are exceptions). However the spectrum is not the same as the colour since different spectra correspond to the same colour (this is why you can mix almost all colours with only three base colours — in other words, this is why your colour monitor works). The only exception are the spectral colours (that is the colours of monochromatic light). Those cannot be mixed from other colours (which BTW also means that your monitor cannot properly display them).
Apparently, you didn't even bother to read the *headline* of TFS: "What is the Average Color of the Universe?" TFA says:
"So what is the average color? i.e. the color an observer would see if they had the Universe in a box, and could see all the light at once (and it wasn't moving, for a real observer on earth, the further away a galaxy from us the more it is redshifted. We have de-redshifted all our light before combining)."
What is more, TFA provides the spectra as well if you're interested in anything other than arguing irrelevancies while trying to make yourself feel more important.
This is high school (middle school?) physics, friend.
It must be an extraordinarily bad physics course that doesn't teach spectra.
I can't speak for your school. Mine certainly did.
So. To be non-judgemental, I'll assume you just misunderstood rather than being deliberately obtuse.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Thursday January 29 2015, @08:00PM
If you had all light in a box, and discounted any kind of distortions, the obvious answer (from basic physics knowledge) is white visible light, followed shortly by blindness unless you put a filter on the eyepiece.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Thursday January 29 2015, @08:05PM
With even amounts of all wavelengths, you'd get white, but this being off-white, does that tell us something about what the universe is doing on a broad scale?
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday January 29 2015, @08:41PM
Above a certain intensity, all light appears white because our eye's receptors are all saturated.
Also below another certain intensity, again all light looks white because it's too weak for our colour receptors to detect.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 29 2015, @08:56PM
All that it means is that locally, in a human sense, the mean of all light is of a cooler color than the mean of the entire universe. White, being defined as all light will vary with input.
(Score: 2) by meisterister on Friday January 30 2015, @12:36AM
So why can't I get a new computer case in that colour?
(May or may not have been) Posted from my K6-2, Athlon XP, or Pentium I/II/III.