10 ms·

> We do not have plausible mechanisms to generate structures on such a massive scale. Actual structure no. But, random chance can make things look like a stru

by Retric 2y ago

> We do not have plausible mechanisms to generate structures on such a massive scale. Actual structure no. But, random chance can make things look like a structure on this scale. > But if you had 20+ stars arranged in a circle like that ring, no one would think it was a chance projection, you would demand a physical explanation. I would generally assume it to be random. In galaxies stars move around far to much for any structure from their initial formation to remain for long, and forming a ring long after creation would just be happenstance.

pests 2y ago
> I would generally assume it to be random. But its not, it has structure - it looks like ring or arc. The universe should be homologous at this scale.
- Retric 2y ago
  Every formation of galaxies has structure. Random processes can appear to have meaningful structure, but that’s just because we value some outcomes more than others. > The universe should be homologous at this scale. That doesn’t mean we’re going to perceive it as homologous. A true random number generator spitting out 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 would be freaky as fuck to see, but that doesn’t make it non random.
  - jakeinspace 2y ago
    This is true, but at this scale, aren’t we looking at a moderate portion of the visible universe? This is hundreds of thousands or millions of galaxies appearing with some strong correlation, I believe. There are only a few trillion galaxies in the observable universe, so it’s not like we have 10^20 chances to observe random chance correlations like this. I’m just talking without actually having done a close reading or done the statistics for myself, so I could be quite wrong.
    - Retric 2y ago
      Check out the preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.07591 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.07591 It’s less impressive when looking at the background data than how it’s described.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - beltsazar 2y ago
    > Random processes can appear to have meaningful structure, but that’s just because we value some outcomes more than others. No. It's because some structures are much much much less likely to form randomly than other structures. If you throw 1000 dices, is it possible to get all one? Yes. Is it likely? Not at all. Why do planets look like a sphere (approximately)? Because that's the most probable shape if things happen randomly. If a pyramid-shaped planet was found, scientists would freak out. This galaxy ring phenomenon is similar to that (but not that crazy).
    - moralestapia 2y ago
      Finding ~50 dots arranged in a (very loosely defined) circle, from any projection, of a dense set of 2 trillion of them is very plausible. Actually, you would have a hard time producing this set in such way that no "circles" like that are found at all. It would have to be a very artificial distribution of points in space for you not to observe this, like all of them arranged in a single line, or a giant rectangle, idk.
      - beltsazar 2y ago
        > Finding ~50 dots arranged in a (very loosely defined) circle, from any projection, of a dense set of 2 trillion of them is very plausible. It depends on the size of the circle, though. The smaller the size, the more likely the probability is. But that’s only for a particular combination of 50 dots. Now we have to average out of all possible circle sizes and all combinations of 50 dots. Can someone do the math (or the simulation)?
        moralestapia 2y ago
        On a first glance it seems so, but ... could it be the opposite? I'm thinking, the larger the space, the larger the number of points contained within it, so the larger the probability of them being arrange in such way that blah blah ... We need a math guy to chime in. I have a hunch there may be a theorem about something like this already.
    - unusualmonkey 2y ago
  - ineptech 2y ago
    For any allegedly-random distribution, it's possible to statistically determine an upper-limit on the size of non-random-appearing structures. The upper limit for such structures in our universe is thought to be about 370 MPc, about 1/3rd of the size of this ring. A lot of these questions are much more clearly addressed in the previous paper by the same authors, which is much more layperson-friendly: https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/516/2/1557/6657809?login=false https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/516/2/1557/6657809?lo...
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - stouset 2y ago
      I’m guessing the point is something along the lines of, if you have a page of randomly-distributed points, you would expect to see small features but a large circle spanning the page would be inexplicable. That makes sense, thanks for actually explaining the core idea.
- stouset 2y ago
  This isn’t how randomness works. Given enough points plotted at random on the surface of a sphere, you’ll find the entire written works of Shakespeare scribed across it. That doesn’t mean it was put there intentionally, just that given enough random samples any pattern will appear.
mr_toad 2y ago
> But, random chance can make things look like a structure on this scale. You can never absolutely prove that something isn’t random. However: Galaxy distributions are pink noise, not white noise. Large scale structures are less probable. The Komolgorov complexity of large structures is lower than random noise, and lower Komolgorov complexity usually indicates some non-random process. A random process is less likely to produce structure than a non-random process.

by Retric 2y ago

pests 2y ago

> I would generally assume it to be random. But its not, it has structure - it looks like ring or arc. The universe should be homologous at this scale.

Retric 2y ago
Every formation of galaxies has structure. Random processes can appear to have meaningful structure, but that’s just because we value some outcomes more than others. > The universe should be homologous at this scale. That doesn’t mean we’re going to perceive it as homologous. A true random number generator spitting out 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 would be freaky as fuck to see, but that doesn’t make it non random.
- jakeinspace 2y ago
  This is true, but at this scale, aren’t we looking at a moderate portion of the visible universe? This is hundreds of thousands or millions of galaxies appearing with some strong correlation, I believe. There are only a few trillion galaxies in the observable universe, so it’s not like we have 10^20 chances to observe random chance correlations like this. I’m just talking without actually having done a close reading or done the statistics for myself, so I could be quite wrong.
  - Retric 2y ago
    Check out the preprint: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.07591 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2402.07591 It’s less impressive when looking at the background data than how it’s described.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- beltsazar 2y ago
  > Random processes can appear to have meaningful structure, but that’s just because we value some outcomes more than others. No. It's because some structures are much much much less likely to form randomly than other structures. If you throw 1000 dices, is it possible to get all one? Yes. Is it likely? Not at all. Why do planets look like a sphere (approximately)? Because that's the most probable shape if things happen randomly. If a pyramid-shaped planet was found, scientists would freak out. This galaxy ring phenomenon is similar to that (but not that crazy).
  - moralestapia 2y ago
    Finding ~50 dots arranged in a (very loosely defined) circle, from any projection, of a dense set of 2 trillion of them is very plausible. Actually, you would have a hard time producing this set in such way that no "circles" like that are found at all. It would have to be a very artificial distribution of points in space for you not to observe this, like all of them arranged in a single line, or a giant rectangle, idk.
    - beltsazar 2y ago
      > Finding ~50 dots arranged in a (very loosely defined) circle, from any projection, of a dense set of 2 trillion of them is very plausible. It depends on the size of the circle, though. The smaller the size, the more likely the probability is. But that’s only for a particular combination of 50 dots. Now we have to average out of all possible circle sizes and all combinations of 50 dots. Can someone do the math (or the simulation)?
      - moralestapia 2y ago
        On a first glance it seems so, but ... could it be the opposite? I'm thinking, the larger the space, the larger the number of points contained within it, so the larger the probability of them being arrange in such way that blah blah ... We need a math guy to chime in. I have a hunch there may be a theorem about something like this already.
  - unusualmonkey 2y ago
- ineptech 2y ago
  For any allegedly-random distribution, it's possible to statistically determine an upper-limit on the size of non-random-appearing structures. The upper limit for such structures in our universe is thought to be about 370 MPc, about 1/3rd of the size of this ring. A lot of these questions are much more clearly addressed in the previous paper by the same authors, which is much more layperson-friendly: https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/516/2/1557/6657809?login=false https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/516/2/1557/6657809?lo...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - stouset 2y ago
    I’m guessing the point is something along the lines of, if you have a page of randomly-distributed points, you would expect to see small features but a large circle spanning the page would be inexplicable. That makes sense, thanks for actually explaining the core idea.
stouset 2y ago
This isn’t how randomness works. Given enough points plotted at random on the surface of a sphere, you’ll find the entire written works of Shakespeare scribed across it. That doesn’t mean it was put there intentionally, just that given enough random samples any pattern will appear.

mr_toad 2y ago

> But, random chance can make things look like a structure on this scale. You can never absolutely prove that something isn’t random. However: Galaxy distributions are pink noise, not white noise. Large scale structures are less probable. The Komolgorov complexity of large structures is lower than random noise, and lower Komolgorov complexity usually indicates some non-random process. A random process is less likely to produce structure than a non-random process.