Astrophysics

© 2005 author: Michael Köchling
 



Does the Olbers´sche Paradox apply?

Already much was written about this topic and some very interesting solution-suggestions were done. However about what it goes on this occasion and how can solution-bases be formulated?
The Bremer doctor and astronomer Heinrich Wilhelm Olbers took up the considerations of Johannes Kepler. This had determined that the cosmos-building of the Giordano Bruno could not correspond to the reality. Olbers closed on the basis of the spatial, even distribution of the stars at the heaven that our gaze would always fall into each direction on a number stars and the heaven had therefore to would appear to us as a brightly beaming surface.
These considerations are absolutely right, however on the other hand we perceive the heaven between the stars visible for us as dark surfaces. There it remains to clarify as it occurs.

Let's begin in that we put in some telescopes with differently big openings as aids. We see started with its help with the smallest telescope, until to the biggest, more and more stars. In other words: the more a telescope can collect light, all the more stars becomes with it for us visibly and simultaneously the distances decrease through it between the stars. The heaven becomes in the picture-excerpt of the telescope more and more brightly and we actually approach the Olbers´s statement.
Arrived at this position, we find the first explanation why the night-heaven is mainly dark for us with bare eyes and we only relatively near and bright stars can see.
The explanation for this delivers the light!
It decreases with proportional distance-increase in the square. Hereby, too little light, as which our brain could manage a picture from it, manages to big distances for our quite small eye-surfaces at. Where we can see nothing, the heaven therefore remains dark for us.

However, we now come to the second reason. It is based on the Hubble - constant and refers mainly on the emitted light of galaxies, because it takes a turn us with them quite similarly, as at the first reason. Galaxies consist of many billion stars, which we cannot also see directly on the basis of the gigantic distances. However as total-mass, the next objects appear to us exactly as perceptible, inconspicuous nebula. On this occasion, it is about the two Magellan´s clouds and the Andromeda - galaxy.
Behind the Hubble - constant it hides the statement that an object of us is ever distant further, its light proportionally to the red spectrum-area is postponed. As soon as therefore the emitted light in the spectrum bigger like Z = 1 after red is postponed, has become largely invisible it for us and only by means of infrared-optics, we can still do it visible. Stars in galaxies - distances can see we with our eyes no longer individually anyway but represented like above the complete galaxies as diffuse fogs at best. We see even the stars in the bond of our Milky way as grey until sallow shining fogs at best. If we recognise stars in it, so it is foreground-stars, that are relatively near us and possess all much bigger brightness as our sun, without exception. From distances > 50 Ljs. our sun can only be done with telescopes visible. It is just only a yellow dwarf-star of the main-row in the Hertzsprung - Russel - diagram.

Let's come to the third and last reason now, why us the heaven-background the at night gloomily appears. This is that our eyes are receptive only for a quite small area of the wave-spectrum. The total-spectrum is enough from extremely reaches radio waves over microwaves, infrared-waves, the visible area, the ultraviolet, the x-rays - and gamma-area, up to the ultra-short space-radiation. All waves above the violet - and below the red area, is not receptive for our eyes. If this would not be so, so we could not see one single object at the night-heaven because our eyes would alone already be dazzled through the radiance of the earth and their atmosphere in the infrared area. At all our eyes would be hardly still to be delivered sensible pictures in the situation since they would be blinded frequencies overlaying constantly by itself. Our eyes would be totally overtaxed through it and consequently superfluously. Even if we went into the cosmos, the heaven-background would now be brightly shining actually and Olbers´s view-manner would apply, because each matter in the cosmos shines in his frequency own it.

We can see happy manner only the spectral-area visible for us. It is us given with it to see everything in an incomparable colour-splendour. We can be very content with this solution of our eyes even if some areas appear to us through it gloomily!

The representations done above have proven that Olbers had right in certain respects and the reasons why it is not so, I have shown you!


In the astrophysics, much is possible, however, it should always be compatible with the natural conditions.

back to the mainpage