Time-Lapse shows the beauty of the galaxy we live in.

I recently purchased a Canon EOS DSLR.

This video made it painfully obvious what I need to be doing with it!

This gorgeous video is a compilation of shots taken with a Canon EOS-5D every 20 seconds over about nine hours at a star party in Fort Davis, Texas. It's a humbling sight.

The Canon was equipped with a fisheye lens (an EF 15mm f/2.8 lens) and powered with an external battery to capture all that goodness. The more interesting part is the replacement anti-alias filter the photographer, William Castleman, used: The Canon's stock AA filter blocks out certain red wavelengths to achieve a "more desirable" skin tone, but if it's replaced with a filter that lets those wavelengths in, you've got yourself a camera capable of shooting a galaxy, as seen here, even if we can't see it with the naked eye.

Its also great to know about the filter, I am off to google more into that now!

Check it out on Vimeo

Via Gizmodo

Picture of Time-Lapse shows the beauty of the galaxy we live in.
Picture 1.png
sort by: active | newest | oldest
1-10 of 65Next »
Mattrox8 years ago
and evolutionists beleive nothing eploded into every thing
gmjhowe (author)  Mattrox8 years ago
And scientists think that something that beautiful happened by accident.
Accident? The lack of any need for a designer does not logically imply, let alone require, accidental or arbitrary origins. Your statement is a specious straw man set up by dogmatists, not an accurate representation of scientific understanding.

Physical law is deterministic (see Tegmark(2009) for comments on unitary quantum mechanics). If the initial conditions are arbitrary, then there is some level of "accident" involved, or at least some support for the strong anthropic principle (which I dislike intensely :-).

Most of us hope (expect is too strong a word) that a truly fundamental theory will either constrain the initial conditions to uniqueness, or something like the landscape will show that the initial conditions themselves are part of the unitary evolution.
gmjhowe (author)  kelseymh8 years ago
No matter how much science you throw my way, regardless of whether I understand it or not. I will always believe something that amazing, so perfect, and awe inspiring could not just 'happen'. I know, that science will continue to find new things, and our understanding will increase. That won't alter my faith, just reassure me that God is most probably a scientist himself (except he is allowed to break the laws of physics).
You wrote, "I will always believe something that amazing, so perfect, and awe inspiring could not just 'happen'." I completely agree with this statement, Jake. That's essentially the point of my last paragraph.

What I disagree with, and what I find logically fallacious, is your conclusion that "could not 'just happen'" (adjusting the quotes :-) implies that a designer must have been involved. An equally logical conclusion is that the laws of nature make this amazing, complex, and perfect Universe inevitable.

Consider snowflakes -- there are no elves in a workshop carefully crafting each individual one. The laws of physics and chemistry make them all different (so each one seems "random"), but guarantee (inevitable) that they will be perfect or nearly perfect hexagonal structures with fractal complexity.
gmjhowe (author)  kelseymh8 years ago
Truthfully, I know how you 'can' be with these items, i only read so far through your comment. Not to insult in any way at all, but your not think far out enough, what if God decided he wanted to make all snowflakes unique then he would not set up snow flake factories, he would make it so that physics and chemistry gives him that result. Truth is, i believe everything you do regarding science (that i actually can understand that is :P) i just believe that God made science. Science so complex, we have to build massive equipment spanning several countries just to scrape the surface of understanding.
lemonie gmjhowe8 years ago
Maybe you don't think far enough out?
> God is not male "he" is inappropriate.
> God is a creation of / perception of / part of ourselves. To think that God operates independently is a poor starting-point in the same way as thinking you can understand yourself by making impartial, independent observations / diagnoses of yourself.

gmjhowe (author)  lemonie8 years ago
I am human, and unable to think in the terms required to understand any of that. Im more than aware of the failings of the english language, but again, that is human in origin.
lemonie gmjhowe8 years ago
Too close to ground-level, but I think you sum my point up in "I am human". We should be looking beyond the stars into ourselves. Look in a mirror and consider you are looking at a reflection of God. Think also that God looks in a mirror and sees... what? L (I'm used to "far-out" but it still hurts my head...)
gmjhowe (author)  lemonie8 years ago
I agree about the looking at ourselves, but i also think that sometimes, looking into the stars we can stumble upon a truth regarding ourselves. God can not look in a mirror, the glass would melt..
1-10 of 65Next »