Was sure id heard this somewhere just want it confirming as i havent time to do the counting.
2006-09-25 09:07:22 · 21 answers · asked by bogstandard 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Earth Sciences & Geology
yes and if you shrank the size of the galaxy down to the size of a quarter and put it on eastern most point of the USA, the nearest galaxy would be on the other side of the USA.
2006-09-25 09:10:19 · answer #1 · answered by IshotJR 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Seeing as the universe is (supposedly) infinite, then if follows that there would probably be an infinite number of stars within the universe.
As there is only a finite amount of rock from which to make sand on the earth (and a lot of sand eventually gets compressed back into rocks) then I'd say that yes, there are more stars in the universe than grains of sand throughout the world.
2006-09-26 01:16:16 · answer #2 · answered by junkmonkey1983 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Estimated at around 10 x 6.63 to the power of 22 the number of grains of sand on earth (could be more dependant on the size of the grains and the depth of the sand). Number of stars estimated at around 10 to the power of 21 at the moment could be more but we haven't seen them. If the big bang is real and singular (not being repeated in other parts of nothingness) then we should be in a finite universe and there may not be a greater number of stars then grains of sands. At the moment its a close call with sand ahead by a nose but I'm sure stars will over take sand soon.
2006-09-25 11:11:44 · answer #3 · answered by Aerroc 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it's true. People who say it's impossible to tell are just dumb, or scared of big numbers. You can imagine unrolling all the coast line in the world, that's a guessable number of miles, maybe 300,000. You can allow a tenth of it to be beaches, average them 200 yards wide and 4 feet thick, divide by grains of sand 1 millimetre in diameter, treble it for all the little islands you forgot, then quadruple it to allow for the Sahara Desert and others, it's still just a NUMBER and you know it's a realistic estimate. Then you take the whole universe 14,000,000,000 light years in radius, our galaxy of 10,000,000,000 stars occupying a volume only about 3,000,000 light years in radius, assume it's like that everywhere and you get another estimated NUMBER of the stars in the universe. It's big, way big, but it's still just a NUMBER. And it's way way bigger than the first number you got for the sand grains, so much bigger that no amount of juggling with the rough figures would ever close up the gap. There are more stars.
2006-09-25 10:39:27 · answer #4 · answered by bh8153 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, absolutely true. In fact, there are millions of times more.
Who knows how many grains of sand there are on earth - but a person with average sized hands can hold about a million. So you can start to get an idea of the vastness of the numbers involved.
2006-09-25 09:17:29 · answer #5 · answered by Hello Dave 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, you did hear it right, and I don't think anyone has the time to count them all either, the sand or the stars.
2006-09-25 09:10:07 · answer #6 · answered by sedona71 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
How many grains of sand are there throughout the world ?
If u don't tell me that how on earth can I give you a sensible answer .
2006-09-25 09:24:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It is I've counted both! What a basta*d when I lost count first time at 84,423,532, 845, 235, 236, 973, 277, 097, 843, 185, 343, 799, 834, but hey ho.
2006-09-25 09:10:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
its unproveable either way. no-one knows the size of the universe, and we can't even put a good estimate into how many stars their are in a galaxy, same with the amount of sand on portabello beach. no-ones ever going to try and count it. so the question is moot.
2006-09-25 09:16:40 · answer #9 · answered by Azure_dragon 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
not too sure anyone has had a chance to count either grains of sand or stars!
2006-09-25 09:10:04 · answer #10 · answered by xvickiexx 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋