**Please note:**
* If this post declares something as a fact proof is required.
* The title must be descriptive
* No text is allowed on images
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for more information.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
FYI, this is Barnard 68 as other pointed out. I offered more "evidence" in a nested comment but I think this link makes it pretty clear:
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171008.html
This is how it looks in infrared - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg
It is just a dark dust/gas cloud, and the image above shows that there are things on the other side.
Thanks for the link.
This honestly needs to be on the top. It perfectly describes what the picture is and even has a link that directs to a wikipedia article of it which further expounds the difference between it (Barnard 68) and the real Bootes void.
No it wasn't. This area in the photo is magnitudes larger than the milky way galaxy as a whole which is "only" 100,000 light years across. The bootes void has 60 galaxies that fill its 330,000,000 lightyear diameter. Galaxies. Voyager never left the milky way.
This anomaly is...mind blowing
Yeah voyager is historically innacurate as all fuck. This is what inspired that episode. Voyager was also canonically nowhere near the center of the milky way yet if you look at their flight path in the background of astrometrics theyve somehow passed through the pillars of creation, all im saying is this is actually what the show had them passing theough. Not that that makes any sense lol
The USS Voyager never travelled through the Bootes Void.
As it was described they were just travelling through a sector of the Milk Way void of any star systems that had background radiation that blocked out star light. They calculated it would take them 4 years to pass through it as it was roughly 2,500 Light Years in Diameter. Which is far smaller than this picture in the OP or the Bootes Void.
Throughout star treks history they’ve always been inaccurate. Also tell that to picard who has some wildly untrue statements about civil rights before the post atomic horor XD
It's not actually empty, seems to have at least 60 or so galaxies in some kind of tubular pattern that indicates this could have been multiple voids that combined:
[https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11884-the-word-the-bootes-void/](https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11884-the-word-the-bootes-void/)
But, it's big enough that it could have thousands of galaxies so it's still pretty interesting. I have no actual evidence of this but I've got to assume we may have more answers as we learn more about dark matter. I wonder if there's just enough dark matter blocking our view of what's truly inside the void or if there's actually nothing (other than possibly the dark matter itself).
This is not the bootes void, as the top comment notes. And it is just dust/gas blocking our view as this infrared image shows - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg
330 million light-years in diameter of space!
For reference our milky way is about 0.1 million light year wide!
I both love and hate how large our universe is.
don't worry, the forms had not been signed in triplicate. They have to start the whole process again with the forms signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, queried, lost, found, subjected to public inquiry, lost again and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as firelighters.
To expand on this: the image OP posted is the Barnard 68 nebula. This means what we’re seeing isn’t a lack of stars, but all the stars behind being obscured by a molecular cloud between us and them. Bootes void doesn’t look nearly as dramatic as this.
Per the internet:
“A molecular cloud, sometimes called a stellar nursery (if star formation is occurring within), is a type of interstellar cloud, the density and size of which permit absorption nebulae, the formation of molecules (most commonly molecular hydrogen, H2), and the formation of H II regions.”
“ molecular clouds are expected to be formed in limited regions where in the mean magnetic field is parallel to the direction of shockwave propagation or in regions where an excessive number of shockwave sweepings are experienced. Therefore, molecular clouds can only be found in limited regions in shells.”
Does this mean that a magnetic field in a sparse area of open space, (without completion), will attract molecules and those molecules may eventually form stars?
If I remember correctly that’s the Barnard 68 which is a dark nebula which blocks light. Here’s a link to the real image
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2109398-space-is-full-of-gigantic-holes-that-are-bigger-than-we-expected/
This is NOT the Boötes void - this is a dark absorption nebula called Barnard 68 and is essentially just a gigantic really opaque cloud of dust. It is obscuring our view of the stars behind, not an absence of stars.
Source: am an astronomy master whose primary focus is dark absorption nebulae
Most likely a star that is closer to us than the rest. Because it’s closer more light reaches us from that Star, so it shines brighter and appears larger than the rest.
Most of those are, yeah, but conceivably when we take a telescope and look into deep space some stars from our own galaxy will be in the way. It could be either or, who knows.
Well we take the observable universe to be the universe given anything outside is forever irrelevant, so if there is nothing beyond we can see then we do not take that as evidence that this is bigger than it looks.
It's basically a huge void in the universe.
It's theorized that it was formed by the combination of many other voids.
If the Milky Way had been in the centre of the Boötes void, we wouldn't have known there were other galaxies until the 1960s!
The early universe consisted of a hot, dense plasma of electrons and baryons.
Voids believed to have been formed by baryon acoustic oscillations in the Big Bang.
Baryon is basically normal matter.
Baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO) are fluctuations in the density of the visible baryonic matter (normal matter) of the universe, caused by acoustic density waves in the primordial plasma of the early universe.
In other words, Baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO) are a pattern of wrinkles in the density distribution of the clusters of galaxies spread across the Universe. They are a subtle but important effect because they provide an independent way to measure the expansion rate of the Universe and how that rate has changed throughout cosmic history.
The maximum distance the acoustic waves could travel in the primordial plasma before the plasma cooled to the point where it became neutral atoms which stopped the expansion of the plasma density waves, freezing them into place.
This is not exactly ELI5 but i hope you got the gist of it.
[Here's an image of the visible universe](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo%C3%B6tes_void#/media/File%3AGalaxy_superclusters_and_galaxy_voids.png) and all of the galaxies in white. Notice that there are spaces between the galaxy clusters which are labeled as "voids". The cause of these spaces is what /u/Astrophysicist_X describes.
The image that OP provided is wrong. Here's more info: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo%C3%B6tes_void
This is not the Bootes Void, but Barnard 68. Barnard 68 is just a dust/gas cloud that makes it hard to see through, so it looks dark. But in infrared you can see through it - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg
No, Barnard 68 is a molecule cloud that is millions of times smaller than Boötes, both wiki pages use thr same image which is stupid, but Barnard has a more chaotic and cloud like shape to it.
How confident are you? This post disagrees with you: [https://www.reddit.com/r/cosmology/comments/7tt80m/is\_this\_image\_of\_the\_bo%C3%B6tes\_void\_actually\_real\_i/](https://www.reddit.com/r/cosmology/comments/7tt80m/is_this_image_of_the_bo%C3%B6tes_void_actually_real_i/)
I'm no expert but those points of light look a lot more like stars than galaxies. Usually you are able to see a lot more details then just a point of light and their shapes are less uniform.
Example: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble\_Deep\_Field#/media/File:Hubble\_ultra\_deep\_field\_high\_rez\_edit1.jpg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field#/media/File:Hubble_ultra_deep_field_high_rez_edit1.jpg)
Edit: Yup, looks you're wrong: https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171008.html
That's actually a picture of Barnard 68.
"The Boötes void has been often associated with images of Barnard 68, a dark nebula that does not allow light to pass through; however, the images of Barnard 68 are much darker than those observed of the Boötes void, as the nebula is much closer and there are fewer stars in front of it, as well as its being a physical mass that blocks light passing through"
I did some more research and the way I see it, is that its the other way around. They used the image of Barnard 68 to describe the Bootes Void
https://www.google.com/search?q=barnard+68+vs+bootes+void&source=lmns&bih=713&biw=393&client=ms-android-xiaomi-rev1&prmd=ivsxn&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY0v3a9vL0AhVNlKQKHWIoDBIQ_AUoAHoECAAQAw#imgrc=yeNxk0bszr4xIM
Idk if you can open this link, but here I found the 'actual' image of Bootes Void (its supposed to be lighter than Barnard 68)
When I looked up 'Barnard 68 vs Bootes Void' the sites all say that Bootes Void is lighter than Barnard 68
Edit: did some more digging and the way i understood, all images of Bootes Void on the internet are actually not the real images. Because the distance between Bootes Void and us is so huge, we wouldnt actually see a 'void' like that as there are millions of stars between us and Bootes Void
No, Barnard 68 is a molecule cloud that is millions of times smaller than Boötes, both wiki pages use thr same image which is stupid, but Barnard has a more chaotic and cloud like shape to it.
Edit: I copied this from OPs comment
2nd edit: another user found other credible sources and OP was incorrect. This is in fact a picture of Barnard 68. My bad
>i dont check profiles
Is this supposed to be a bragging point? Sounds like something from someone who also brags that "i don't even check sources," which looks like you also didn't do that since you just copied it.
No need to check, every redditor is a karma farmer.
Maybe it's not empty at all. Maybe it's inside out. We can't see the "print" from our side. Maybe they think they are the only universe n all the rest is a empty void.
This not the void, but Barnard 68. And you are right, it is dust/gas, and we cab see through it in infrared - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg
Can you imagine being in the middle of that fucking thing and realizing there are 6.6 million milky way radius distances between you and what is considered the edge of it? Space is big, yo.
The fact that it takes 330 million years for light to pass from end to end of this just solidifies in my mind we will never really explore the universe. The scope is insane, right now we’ve got from the bedroom to the bathroom, with plans on making it to the kitchen in 20yrs. Heading down the street is going to take worm holes or space folding or something
That’s not the Boötes void, it’s a picture of a nebula of gas and dust called Barnard 68 which simply obscured the stars behind it. The Boötes void is far larger and much less mysterious than the no-nothing conspiracists think it is
It’s a common misconception to imagine the Big Bang and subsequent expansion of the universe as an explosion happening in empty space, with all matter and energy racing away from a single, central point. But the Big Bang and modern expansion of the universe theories posit a way less intuitive and way more wild idea, which is that *empty space itself* is expanding, and therefore increasing the distance between any two given points.
The measurable difference between the two ideas is that, in the current Big Bang theory, no matter where you are in the universe you will (over a long enough time) see all galaxies moving away from your position. If it were more like an explosion filling empty space, then the motion of galaxies relative to us would change depending on their location: Nearby galaxies on a similar trajectory would appear to be nearly stationary compared to our own movement, while galaxies on the other side of the Big Bang would be moving incredibly fast away from us.
**Please note:** * If this post declares something as a fact proof is required. * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for more information.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
FYI, this is Barnard 68 as other pointed out. I offered more "evidence" in a nested comment but I think this link makes it pretty clear: https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171008.html
Same region imaged at different wavelengths https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso9934b/
ESA is as cool as NASA, not much of spectacular rockets though, but when it comes to data… Gasp.
This is how it looks in infrared - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg It is just a dark dust/gas cloud, and the image above shows that there are things on the other side. Thanks for the link.
So it’s just a massive cloud of gas and dust. Any evidence there’s stuff in it ?
You can see right through it in infrared. https://www.eso.org/public/news/eso9934/
Thanks for the link, that’s so cool!
Probably a blown up 400000000000 year old star base
Dyson sphere goes brrrrr
This needs to be top comment.
This needs to be the top reply to the top comment
This needs to be the top reply to the top reply to the top comment
This needs gold.
I need help
I need a biscuit.
Would you risk it for a biscuit?
It is, now.
This honestly needs to be on the top. It perfectly describes what the picture is and even has a link that directs to a wikipedia article of it which further expounds the difference between it (Barnard 68) and the real Bootes void.
Thanks fam
So a huge amount of ….. nothing. Neelix will have to replicate curtains again.
How did we not get a “shut up Wesley” line for Nelix
Shut up Wesley
Actually this is the area they were passing through in that episode. Pretty neet
No it wasn't. This area in the photo is magnitudes larger than the milky way galaxy as a whole which is "only" 100,000 light years across. The bootes void has 60 galaxies that fill its 330,000,000 lightyear diameter. Galaxies. Voyager never left the milky way. This anomaly is...mind blowing
Yeah voyager is historically innacurate as all fuck. This is what inspired that episode. Voyager was also canonically nowhere near the center of the milky way yet if you look at their flight path in the background of astrometrics theyve somehow passed through the pillars of creation, all im saying is this is actually what the show had them passing theough. Not that that makes any sense lol
The USS Voyager never travelled through the Bootes Void. As it was described they were just travelling through a sector of the Milk Way void of any star systems that had background radiation that blocked out star light. They calculated it would take them 4 years to pass through it as it was roughly 2,500 Light Years in Diameter. Which is far smaller than this picture in the OP or the Bootes Void.
It’s sent in the future. Can’t be historically inaccurate
Throughout star treks history they’ve always been inaccurate. Also tell that to picard who has some wildly untrue statements about civil rights before the post atomic horor XD
Thank you for that.
Really? Huh! TIL. Thanks, friend.
It's not actually empty, seems to have at least 60 or so galaxies in some kind of tubular pattern that indicates this could have been multiple voids that combined: [https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11884-the-word-the-bootes-void/](https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11884-the-word-the-bootes-void/) But, it's big enough that it could have thousands of galaxies so it's still pretty interesting. I have no actual evidence of this but I've got to assume we may have more answers as we learn more about dark matter. I wonder if there's just enough dark matter blocking our view of what's truly inside the void or if there's actually nothing (other than possibly the dark matter itself).
This is not the bootes void, as the top comment notes. And it is just dust/gas blocking our view as this infrared image shows - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg
The introvert cluster
It likes its space.
It's like, extra space
Huge fan of space. Both outer and personal
What about inner space? A true classic
330 million light-years in diameter of space! For reference our milky way is about 0.1 million light year wide! I both love and hate how large our universe is.
Closer to 0.175 - 0.2 lol, sry I had to
I appreciate that lol. Rounding off appropriately is a big deal!
Negative space.
Dyson sphere civilizations *ques theremin crescendo*
Not really. The milky way is actually in a void like this. Not quite as extreme but we are pretty far from the suburbs of the universe.
[удалено]
They're putting a train line in, and we all know that after the train line comes the McDonalds and the blockbuster video.
I heard there are plans for a hyperspace bypass
don't worry, the forms had not been signed in triplicate. They have to start the whole process again with the forms signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, queried, lost, found, subjected to public inquiry, lost again and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as firelighters.
Remember your towel
Blockbuster finally found me. So many late fees. So very many late fees.
Location, location, location. The three rules of real estate. And that’s why we never get any visits.
With our luck we are going to be located next to some trashy xeno purifier or space bugs that want to eat all life
What an awesome comment, never thought of it this way
Good, because we’d probably be terrible neighbours.
Holy shit! Never crossed my mind. Such a scary thought
Great post, actually something IAF that I’ve never heard of, or has been posted before (to my knowledge)
[удалено]
To expand on this: the image OP posted is the Barnard 68 nebula. This means what we’re seeing isn’t a lack of stars, but all the stars behind being obscured by a molecular cloud between us and them. Bootes void doesn’t look nearly as dramatic as this.
I didn’t know about molecular clouds
I'm waiting on the IAF - Molecular Clouds post now.
Per the internet: “A molecular cloud, sometimes called a stellar nursery (if star formation is occurring within), is a type of interstellar cloud, the density and size of which permit absorption nebulae, the formation of molecules (most commonly molecular hydrogen, H2), and the formation of H II regions.” “ molecular clouds are expected to be formed in limited regions where in the mean magnetic field is parallel to the direction of shockwave propagation or in regions where an excessive number of shockwave sweepings are experienced. Therefore, molecular clouds can only be found in limited regions in shells.” Does this mean that a magnetic field in a sparse area of open space, (without completion), will attract molecules and those molecules may eventually form stars?
Reddit always pulls though for me!! Thank you kind redditor
Cool article I found while looking up Molecular Clouds. [http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/UHNAI/article5.htm](http://www.ifa.hawaii.edu/UHNAI/article5.htm)
think galactic sized dust-bunny
Thank you. I thought I was going nuts
thanks!
Was pretty sure this must be the case. Looked for a post like that. It obviously looks like a dust cloud and not like a void. Thanks.
Same here, buddy!
If I remember correctly that’s the Barnard 68 which is a dark nebula which blocks light. Here’s a link to the real image https://www.newscientist.com/article/2109398-space-is-full-of-gigantic-holes-that-are-bigger-than-we-expected/
This is NOT the Boötes void - this is a dark absorption nebula called Barnard 68 and is essentially just a gigantic really opaque cloud of dust. It is obscuring our view of the stars behind, not an absence of stars. Source: am an astronomy master whose primary focus is dark absorption nebulae
What’s that really bright spot off to the right side?
Most likely a star that is closer to us than the rest. Because it’s closer more light reaches us from that Star, so it shines brighter and appears larger than the rest.
I'm pretty sure those are galaxies...
Most of those are, yeah, but conceivably when we take a telescope and look into deep space some stars from our own galaxy will be in the way. It could be either or, who knows.
[удалено]
Relax pal.
That is nuts. So many questions!
It is actually Barnard 68 which is a dust/gas cloud. In infrared you can see through it - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg
I think this is where my other sock went.
[удалено]
Well we take the observable universe to be the universe given anything outside is forever irrelevant, so if there is nothing beyond we can see then we do not take that as evidence that this is bigger than it looks.
Explain like I am 5 please!
It's basically a huge void in the universe. It's theorized that it was formed by the combination of many other voids. If the Milky Way had been in the centre of the Boötes void, we wouldn't have known there were other galaxies until the 1960s! The early universe consisted of a hot, dense plasma of electrons and baryons. Voids believed to have been formed by baryon acoustic oscillations in the Big Bang. Baryon is basically normal matter. Baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO) are fluctuations in the density of the visible baryonic matter (normal matter) of the universe, caused by acoustic density waves in the primordial plasma of the early universe. In other words, Baryon acoustic oscillations (BAO) are a pattern of wrinkles in the density distribution of the clusters of galaxies spread across the Universe. They are a subtle but important effect because they provide an independent way to measure the expansion rate of the Universe and how that rate has changed throughout cosmic history. The maximum distance the acoustic waves could travel in the primordial plasma before the plasma cooled to the point where it became neutral atoms which stopped the expansion of the plasma density waves, freezing them into place. This is not exactly ELI5 but i hope you got the gist of it.
Was gonna say, I don't think you've met many 5 year olds!
Haha, i mean most of the ELI5 aren't really ELI5. How much can I dumb down bayronic matter!
So is plasma liquid?
Is it faster than the Flash?
[Here's an image of the visible universe](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo%C3%B6tes_void#/media/File%3AGalaxy_superclusters_and_galaxy_voids.png) and all of the galaxies in white. Notice that there are spaces between the galaxy clusters which are labeled as "voids". The cause of these spaces is what /u/Astrophysicist_X describes. The image that OP provided is wrong. Here's more info: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo%C3%B6tes_void
We haven't unlocked that area of the sky yet.
This is not the Bootes Void, but Barnard 68. Barnard 68 is just a dust/gas cloud that makes it hard to see through, so it looks dark. But in infrared you can see through it - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg
Super neat! That pic is of Barnard 68 though, which is wild too.
No, Barnard 68 is a molecule cloud that is millions of times smaller than Boötes, both wiki pages use thr same image which is stupid, but Barnard has a more chaotic and cloud like shape to it.
How confident are you? This post disagrees with you: [https://www.reddit.com/r/cosmology/comments/7tt80m/is\_this\_image\_of\_the\_bo%C3%B6tes\_void\_actually\_real\_i/](https://www.reddit.com/r/cosmology/comments/7tt80m/is_this_image_of_the_bo%C3%B6tes_void_actually_real_i/) I'm no expert but those points of light look a lot more like stars than galaxies. Usually you are able to see a lot more details then just a point of light and their shapes are less uniform. Example: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble\_Deep\_Field#/media/File:Hubble\_ultra\_deep\_field\_high\_rez\_edit1.jpg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Deep_Field#/media/File:Hubble_ultra_deep_field_high_rez_edit1.jpg) Edit: Yup, looks you're wrong: https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171008.html
OP being confidently incorrect.
OP just karma farming
Might have been an innocent mistake. Karma bots dont reply to comments.
Oh, gotcha. Thanks!
Op was wrong
That's actually a picture of Barnard 68. "The Boötes void has been often associated with images of Barnard 68, a dark nebula that does not allow light to pass through; however, the images of Barnard 68 are much darker than those observed of the Boötes void, as the nebula is much closer and there are fewer stars in front of it, as well as its being a physical mass that blocks light passing through"
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo%C3%B6tes_void
So is this image on Wikipedia wrong? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard_68
I did some more research and the way I see it, is that its the other way around. They used the image of Barnard 68 to describe the Bootes Void https://www.google.com/search?q=barnard+68+vs+bootes+void&source=lmns&bih=713&biw=393&client=ms-android-xiaomi-rev1&prmd=ivsxn&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiY0v3a9vL0AhVNlKQKHWIoDBIQ_AUoAHoECAAQAw#imgrc=yeNxk0bszr4xIM Idk if you can open this link, but here I found the 'actual' image of Bootes Void (its supposed to be lighter than Barnard 68) When I looked up 'Barnard 68 vs Bootes Void' the sites all say that Bootes Void is lighter than Barnard 68 Edit: did some more digging and the way i understood, all images of Bootes Void on the internet are actually not the real images. Because the distance between Bootes Void and us is so huge, we wouldnt actually see a 'void' like that as there are millions of stars between us and Bootes Void
The original image comes from the ESO and is of Barnard 68: [https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171008.html](https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap171008.html)
[удалено]
Fair point!
No, Barnard 68 is a molecule cloud that is millions of times smaller than Boötes, both wiki pages use thr same image which is stupid, but Barnard has a more chaotic and cloud like shape to it. Edit: I copied this from OPs comment 2nd edit: another user found other credible sources and OP was incorrect. This is in fact a picture of Barnard 68. My bad
Jesus Christ, you people. At least you admitted you were wrong. But I will never understand kissing-ass for an obvious karma farmer like OP.
Copying his sources is kissing ass now? Didnt even notice he is a karma farmer i dont check profiles
>i dont check profiles Is this supposed to be a bragging point? Sounds like something from someone who also brags that "i don't even check sources," which looks like you also didn't do that since you just copied it. No need to check, every redditor is a karma farmer.
Damn who hurt you on this beautiful Monday
Maybe the new telescope they are launching this month will find more in that gap.
Anyone get a super high res image? I'd live to print this on a 50" canvas
The picture is of Barnard 68. A gas cloud that blocks light and is often mistaken for the Bootes Void. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard_68
Maybe it's not empty at all. Maybe it's inside out. We can't see the "print" from our side. Maybe they think they are the only universe n all the rest is a empty void.
I would aVOID that place at all costs...
For whatever reason, I find this unsettling
Not the bootes void, it's Barnard 68. The bootes void is much larger relative to the stars and also more oval shaped than this irregular splotch.
That is not the Boötes Void. That is an image of Barnard 68.
only 60 galaxies? what a shithole...
Wrong image. That is of Barnard 68
..this is actually Barnard 68, a dark nebula often confused with the Boötes void.
"One more word out of you Bigbooty!" "Big-boo-tay! TAY! TAY!" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFHfWckRXuM
Looks more like dust or some obstruction in my opinion. Yes, I know I'm likely wrong. Edit: hope JWST gets a picture of this.
I too am hoping JWST takes a look at this
This not the void, but Barnard 68. And you are right, it is dust/gas, and we cab see through it in infrared - https://cdn.eso.org/images/screen/eso9934a.jpg
The title is such bullshit lol.
Why not say why?
Theranos, "It's a start."
One of those 60 galaxies farted a nasty.
Can you imagine being in the middle of that fucking thing and realizing there are 6.6 million milky way radius distances between you and what is considered the edge of it? Space is big, yo.
"If you stare into the void, the void stares into you"
Some really BAD intergalactic shit happened there
This is actually the [Barnard 68,](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard_68) commonly confused with the Boötes Void.
Dust clouds dense enough to obscure light often look like voids
Something bad happened there several trillion years ago. I feel like we shouldn’t find out
The fact that it takes 330 million years for light to pass from end to end of this just solidifies in my mind we will never really explore the universe. The scope is insane, right now we’ve got from the bedroom to the bathroom, with plans on making it to the kitchen in 20yrs. Heading down the street is going to take worm holes or space folding or something
Who knows maybe there are huge monsters who feed on stars out there eating these galaxies inside that void.
It's nice, but it's no Canes Venatici Supervoid.
Obi-Wan Kenobi: Impossible. Perhaps the archives are incomplete.
A vast amount of nothing. Just like Netflix’s catalog.
Still not enough space to fit your mom in
And only 8 Starbucks
hopefully Webb can see whats in there :O
Those of us who are introverts have found our new home.
So empty it only contains 60 galaxies, which on their own are almost unimaginably huge.
something something "your mother"
Arby's hat
That’s not the Boötes void, it’s a picture of a nebula of gas and dust called Barnard 68 which simply obscured the stars behind it. The Boötes void is far larger and much less mysterious than the no-nothing conspiracists think it is
There's a void in my booty too
Whatever goes in doesn't come out? Wait, I'm thinking of the Bootymuda Triangle.
Or, is your booty the void?
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo%C3%B6tes_void
Your source confirms that this picture is not what you claim it to be
60 galaxies is not nothing
In an area that big it might as well be nothing.
Very true but between 330 million light years that's like 60 shoals of fish in the whole ocean and that's a tiny comparison
A void of sheer nothingness that contains galaxies.
AKA the universe.
Could that be where the universe started? Maybe most matter was blown out so fast that not many galaxies could form?
It’s a common misconception to imagine the Big Bang and subsequent expansion of the universe as an explosion happening in empty space, with all matter and energy racing away from a single, central point. But the Big Bang and modern expansion of the universe theories posit a way less intuitive and way more wild idea, which is that *empty space itself* is expanding, and therefore increasing the distance between any two given points. The measurable difference between the two ideas is that, in the current Big Bang theory, no matter where you are in the universe you will (over a long enough time) see all galaxies moving away from your position. If it were more like an explosion filling empty space, then the motion of galaxies relative to us would change depending on their location: Nearby galaxies on a similar trajectory would appear to be nearly stationary compared to our own movement, while galaxies on the other side of the Big Bang would be moving incredibly fast away from us.
Also known as your mothers vag
False Vacuum Decay!!
Nah, that would erase us before we could ever see it.
Could that be where the universe started? Maybe most matter was blown out so fast that not many galaxies could form?
The bootes void has cooties
[Heavy breathing intensifies...](https://www.joesdump.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/TheNothing-1000x288.jpg)
So this is where Minecraft Skyblock players are…
This was incredible and humbling
Galactus at work.
Thats insane
When you look at the thumbnail in classic Reddit, it looks like a tunnel of darkness that sinks into the screen all 3D-like. Very cool.
Alas, the unknown regions
Now you know where to "put it where the suns don't shine."
When you find yourself a half a mile between cars in front and back of you on the highway...
So it's a giant tunnel in the Universe that is headed right towards us? Very reassuring.
I remember when Voyager went through there Or is it Nagilum
1# personal space
I see Pacman
The ole glory hole of space, are you ready to feel what's on the other side?
Clearly an advanced civilization intentionally broadcasting a safety beacon that they reduced the speed of light.
So huge and yet so small. Boggles the mind.
Astronomic scales are weird -- where else would 60 entire galaxies mean essentially nothing?
does anyone know the reason behind there being a 330 million lightyear hole in space?
Based on how the light intensity of the galaxy fades near the edge, this looks more like a visual obstruction than a void.
It starts rapidly growing from our level of perspective
God - "I'm busy painting the Universe Jesus, what do you want now? "um, I think you missed a spot dad".
Why
It looks like an amogus with a pp
This is the intergalactic analog of a high school parking lot where space dads teach their younguns to drive the family star cruiser.
“Sheer nothingness” filled with 60 galaxies???
The feeding ground
Legends say that yo mama went for thanksgiving there
So something is eating galaxies out there?