stars between galaxies?

To my surprise, I read that this was discovered by Hubble some years ago.
Can anyone direct me to a link showing an image of such a star or stars?
thanks

On 8/20/2010 5:32 PM, Sam Willardson wrote:
To my surprise, I read that this was discovered by Hubble some years
ago. Can anyone direct me to a link showing an image of such a star or
stars?
thanks
See http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/1997/02/text/.

On Aug 20, 5:32*pm, "Sam Willardson" wrote:
To my surprise, I read that this was discovered by Hubble some years ago.
Can anyone direct me to a link showing an image of such a star or stars?
thanks
10% galactic stellar mass worth of intergalactic rogue stars
("stellar outcasts") seems about right. Just imagine how many of
those took their planets along for the ride. Even if the average were
limited to 1% as rogue stars would represent a tremendous population
to identify.

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc.../1997/02/text/
“The stars are bright red giants — stars late in their lives.
Presumably there are many fainter stars — perhaps as many as 10
million — in the same field but are below Hubble's sensitivity.”

"These stars are truly intergalactic because they are so isolated
their motion is probably governed by the gravitational field of the
cluster as a whole, rather than the pull of any one galaxy," says
Ferguson.

~ BG

On Aug 21, 6:38*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
On Aug 20, 5:32*pm, "Sam Willardson" wrote: To my surprise, I read that this was discovered by Hubble some years ago.
Can anyone direct me to a link showing an image of such a star or stars?
thanks

10% galactic stellar mass worth of intergalactic rogue stars
("stellar outcasts") seems about right. *Just imagine how many of
those took their planets along for the ride. *Even if the average were
limited to 1% as rogue stars would represent a tremendous population
to identify.

*http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc.../1997/02/text/
*“The stars are bright red giants — stars late in their lives.
Presumably there are many fainter stars — perhaps as many as 10
million — in the same field but are below Hubble's sensitivity.”

"These stars are truly intergalactic because they are so isolated
their motion is probably governed by the gravitational field of the
cluster as a whole, rather than the pull of any one galaxy," says
Ferguson.

*~ BG

Brad you believe in geocentrism (earth center model)? Tycho Brahe
model is still possible to solve retrograde without epicycles. Just
curious, Steve.

On Aug 21, 6:54*pm, steve wrote:
On Aug 21, 6:38*pm, Brad Guth wrote:



On Aug 20, 5:32*pm, "Sam Willardson" wrote: To my surprise, I read that this was discovered by Hubble some years ago.
Can anyone direct me to a link showing an image of such a star or stars?
thanks

10% galactic stellar mass worth of intergalactic rogue stars
("stellar outcasts") seems about right. *Just imagine how many of
those took their planets along for the ride. *Even if the average were
limited to 1% as rogue stars would represent a tremendous population
to identify.

*http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/arc.../1997/02/text/
*“The stars are bright red giants — stars late in their lives.
Presumably there are many fainter stars — perhaps as many as 10
million — in the same field but are below Hubble's sensitivity.”

"These stars are truly intergalactic because they are so isolated
their motion is probably governed by the gravitational field of the
cluster as a whole, rather than the pull of any one galaxy," says
Ferguson.

*~ BG

Brad you believe in geocentrism (earth center model)? Tycho Brahe
model is still possible to solve retrograde without epicycles. Just
curious, Steve.

There are new, medium, old and dead stars out there

As well as there are stars of all sizes that are yet to be created and
others sent packing as rogue interstellars as well as intergalactics.
In other words, our universe isn’t a done deal, and even our galaxy
may have company of outsiders to always contend with, just as our
solar system had to fend for itself.

I’m going with a theory that perhaps others have proposed: As the
universe ages and expands it creates and sustains its very own crystal
ball, or event horizon shell that’s reflecting back. Like the inside
of an inflated balloon, whereas what we perceive as the redshift of
expansion is merely the reflection of galaxies that are no longer with
us due to their old age (those biggest and brightest of original stars
simply didn’t last very long).

The outer balloon shell or furthest shockwave of a dense molecular
cloud (possibly of carbon buckyballs plus whatever is reflective at
zero K could be damn near anything) is what is likely reflecting those
tired/redshifted photons back at us. Even though the oldest galaxies
are actually not expanding outward and might even have been negative
redshift(same as blueshift) headed back towards us, whereas it could
appear to our perception as though such photons are in fact positive
redshifted, but only because those are the only remaining photons
available for us to detect until the far-infrared spectrum can be
technically exploited.

By now such cool or spent stars are likely in the majority of what
makes up our universe, and until lately our perception as to the far-
infrared spectrum has been limited and essentially unaccounted for.
What’s needed is hidden or cloaked within the spectrum detection of
11000 microns which is close to cool microwave astronomy. Best
accomplished from a location in space that’s at maximum vacuum and
adequately shaded from our sun, however the latest spendy observatory
to be situated in Chile at 18,000’ should help catalog another half
again as many targets that need not be so uncommon outside of our
relatively newish galaxy. There could even be the majority of these
dull-red or brown dwarf targets (possibly gas giant planets that are
of insufficient mass to detect otherwise) that are individually rogue,
as having lost their original galactic and solar system associations.

Nearly all the mainstream published astronomy images are those of
complex composites with all the possible eyecandy attributes cranked
way up, so that what is presented is actually nothing like the actual
observation to the human eye. In other words, what we read about and
see of their astronomy work is rather bogus and at best misleading us
into continued funding that can’t possibly benefit humanity in a
billion years. In other words, adding up practically everything put
into such extreme astronomy has never actually returned a cent or
having otherwise benefited humanity or the global environment that’s
literally thawing and falling apart at the seams.

None the less, ever greater amounts are diverted and invested,
including their spendy logistics and satellite missions that too
haven’t paid us back one cent on their investments, but perhaps
there’s hope that someday after having invested trillions, including
our best talents for decades and centuries, that perhaps eventually
something of value will turn up.

The gist of all this context boils down to where we should put out
best talent, resources and hard earned loot to work. We could
obviously keep tossing everything into the incinerator that insures we
get nothing back, or we could put it where we’d stand the best odds of
getting something back. Most of you already know where I’d pick to
invest our next generation of loot, resources and talent, namely Guth
Venus.

Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Aug 20, 5:32*pm, "Sam Willardson" wrote:
To my surprise, I read that this was discovered by Hubble some years ago.
Can anyone direct me to a link showing an image of such a star or stars?
thanks

I used to think there couldn't be so many rogue stars between
galaxies, although 10% is starting to seem conservative, and perhaps
other items could just as easily amount to another 1015%, making 25%
of our universe mass as existing in between galaxies.

An average of mostly empty space at 0.1 particle/cm3 is 1.2e96
particles as based upon a 15e9 ly radii, and our universe is most
likely much larger.

~ BG