1. Space.Com

It makes sense. If you want news about space, then Space.com should be able to provide the goods. Space.com was first launched in 1999 and is now considered to be the number 1 source of news for sky-watching, astronomy, space exploration, and commercial spaceflight. They have excellent, in-depth articles, interviews, and videos that anyone can access. Additionally, Space.com is regularly featured by the most popular online news outlets include Yahoo! News and MSNBC. This website is maintained by the Tech Media Network, which also manages other extremely popular websites like TopTenReviews, TechNewsDaily, LiveScience, and OurAmazingPlanet.

2. UniverseToday.com

While UniverseToday.com may have the most basic appearance, it is definitely an excellent source for all types of space related news. The content on the website is definitely never in question. It is extremely timely and well researched. If you want a simple site to give you daily updates about news relating to space then is a great site for you. The only noticeable problem is that it can be difficult to navigate at times, and some people think that it is a little heavy on the advertisements. However, the excellent content easily overcomes these issues.

3. SpaceRef.com

SpaceRef.com was created by SpaceRef Interactive out of Toronto, Ontario. This website provides a number of unique benefits in terms of a space news website. Not only is it an excellent resource on its own, but it also connects you to other excellent space related websites within their family of websites. These sites include NASA Watch, OnOrbit, SpaceRef Canada, and Commercial Space. Plus, they have an excellent newsletter that you can sign up for. It will deliver the top space news stories to your inbox on a daily basis. This is especially helpful if you don’t follow RSS feeds, but still want to get the top space related news on a regular basis.

4. Science.NASA.Gov

If you are talking about the top websites for space news, then you can’t forget about the NASA website. This website is unique for several reasons. The first is that along with providing you with up to the minute news about space, it also features unique analysis from NASA researchers and also has sections dedicated to educators, students, and kids.

There are a lot of high quality websites that cover space and moon news, but if you are looking for the top websites for space news, then Space.com, UniverseToday.com, SpaceRef.com, and Science.NASA.Gov should be considered a must.

First, although we (mankind) have been studying the distance from the Earth to the Sun, we have not been studying it for any reasonable length of time (10,000 years + for instance), it is quite plausible those distances change with the Sun’s energy output, which might easily have cycles lasting 100s, 1000s, 10000s, 100000s, millions, 10s of millions, 100s of millions, or billion years, we don’t know and do not have empirical evidence to know. We do know that the orbits of electrons change with the energy changes with an atom, might be something similar like that.

My acquaintance notes that “Greenhouse gases makes lots of sense in summer, but makes no sense in winter, and if something doesn’t makes sense it is generally not true. The orbital decay theory makes sense in summer, and winter [in that regard].” Well, that certainly is a fun theory, perhaps even a conspiracy theory, because if it were so, then surely NASA would know about it, and they’d alert us all to their findings right? Well, what if they did know and didn’t want to spook our human populations into a mad frenzy?

My acquaintance went on to note that; “In summer there is enough irradiance (heat) from the sun for green house gases to trap.”

Okay so, that is an interesting correlation too isn’t it, yes, however although the amount of green house gasses in the atmosphere by percentage could also be affected by something else, perhaps an atmosphere contraction, thus increasing percentages of green house gases, therefore throwing the data off. Further, we shouldn’t assume one is the cause of the other, or a direct result of such. Additionally, let’s not forget that increased greenhouse gasses are not bad for life on the surface of the planet, in fact they are good, so in realty it is a positive.

Warming Periods are good for life, ice ages, well, if you have to live through one, not so good.

Indeed, I hope you will please consider all this and think on it.

Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank. Lance Winslow believes writing 23,300 articles by May 23, 2011 is difficult because all the letters on his keyboard are now worn off..

There are two main pillars of modern physics – relativity (part of classical physics) and quantum mechanics or quantum physics. Alas, the two pillars aren’t compatible, and thus, a Holy Grail for physicists is to find a ‘Theory of Everything’ (TOE) that merges the two. Now in the day-to-day life of physicists, a TOE isn’t essential, because relativity deals with the very big (the macro-universe) and quantum mechanics the very small (the micro-universe), and rarely do the twains meet. But, meet the two do in exceptional circumstances. Relativity deals with gravity (in the main), and on quantum scales, gravity is so weak that gravity can safely be ignored. But, there are objects that are very small, yet very dense – that is, tiny objects that have high gravity. There are basically two such objects – the Alpha Big Bang object or singularity and Black Hole singularities, or, to be honest, singularities in general regardless of where or when. And thus, to come to terms with the physics of singularities (immense gravity; micro size), the relativity and quantum worlds need to combine. So, TOE is basically a search for a theory of quantum gravity, and there are various highly complex and theoretical scenarios that fit the bill (though not yet even remotely experimentally confirmed).

Now while theories of everything or theories of quantum gravity are, in the final analysis, necessary (it just doesn’t wash that relativity and quantum mechanics can’t be made compatible – you can’t have two separate software packages governing the overall Universe), it is my opinion that they aren’t necessary to come to terms with singularities, which are usually described as an object of zero (point) dimensions and infinite density.

However, it is my opinion that it is absurd, in the extreme; to even slightly entertain the idea that a (Big Bang or Black Hole) singularity even remotely approaches such limits, far less acquires them. One cannot have a zero (point) dimensional object; one cannot have an object of infinite density. A singularity must have some sort of volume, and must have a finite density, even if the volume is very tiny, and the density is extremely extreme.

The basic logic is that a singularity has a finite volume and finite density. As you add more stuff to the singularity, the volume might remain the same but the density increases. However, as more and more stuff gets added, ultimately the density reaches the maximum possible, and from that point onwards, the volume of the singularity increases, finally increasing beyond the point where quantum mechanics can play any useful role, and gravity alone is the lone player left standing in the game.

Thus, a singularity could be large enough in volume that relativity theory alone can deal with the extreme gravitational conditions. The Big Bang object, containing the mass of the entire Universe, would be (the ultimate as) such a singularity. Massive (Galactic) Black Hole singularities, ditto. Singularities aren’t quantum objects. If you continue to add mass to a Black Hole, it gets bigger; the singularity at the centre gets bigger. To believe otherwise is, IMHO, entering the realm of scientific fantasy.

The upshot off all this is that the Big Bang was not a quantum event, nor would a future Omega Big Crunch be, and likewise, Black Holes are not quantum objects.

The Omega: In the beginning was the Big Bang event origin of our Universe – 13.7 billion years ago. Now what? It’s taken 13.7 billion years to get to ‘now’; what’s the state of play in another 13.7 billion years, or even 137 billion years hence?

What’s the ultimate fate of our Universe? Our Universe is currently expanding post Big Bang – ever increasing in volume like a balloon blowing up and up. Now either our expanding Universe will one day cease to expand as gravity slows things down to a crawl, then a stop, then a reversal – a contracting Universe, or our Universe will keep on expanding forever and ever and a day, ultimately terminating in a Heat Death. A Heat Death is when the temperature of the entire Universe becomes uniform. Everyplace has the same temperature, and that’s going to be cold – as close to absolute zero as makes no odds. Thus the Heat Death is the death of heat. That’s the Universe ending not with a bang (or even a very Big Crunch) but with a whimper. I really don’t like that ending at all.

Assuming that the Universe will ultimately contract into a Big Crunch, what will happen? Well, as one gets ever closer to the Big Crunch, density increases (but will not, can not, become infinite) and temperature increases (but again, not infinitely so) and the volume of space decreases (but will never become infinitely tiny) and time just keeps ticking on. Further, we know there are lots of Black Holes out in the cosmos; both small and massive (such as exists at the centre of our own galaxy). As the Universe contracts, these Black Holes will get closer and closer, not only to each other, but to the rest of non-Black Hole stuff as well. Ultimately, all the non-Black Hole stuff will get sucked into existing Black Holes as the Universe shrinks and matter’s density increases. Of course large Black Holes will also suck in smaller Black Holes, until ultimately, at the time approaching Big Crunch; there will be one ultimate/universal Black Hole left containing all that was.

Then what happens? The conditions inside a Black Hole are still unknown, beyond the equations of current physics, but whatever parameters are present, infinities aren’t among them (which might put me at odds with most astrophysicists). My reasoning is that no matter what, there’s only a finite amount of stuff comprising the universal Black Hole. Squeezed into a tiny area, the density will be extreme, but not infinitely so. The volume will be tiny, but not infinitely so. That is because there is an ultimate limit to how small length (hence volume) can get. The smallest possible length is known as Planck length and anything less than that space ceases to exist. Planck length is 1.6 x 10 to the minus 35 meters. Gravity might be so intense that not even light can escape, but it doesn’t take an infinite amount of gravity to do that. And there can’t be a time equals zero, either at the beginning (Big Bang) or at the end (Big Crunch). Because time exists in discrete quantum units (Planck-Wheeler time units), one must go from a minus one (contracting phase) time unit directly to a plus one (expanding) time unit, as there can be no time unit where time equals zero. In other words, you go from a Big Crunch directly to a Big Bang, contraction to expansion, endlessly cycling or recycling. Or, the universal Black Hole sucking in all matter and energy (approaching the Big Crunch) turns inside out and becomes a universal White Hole (the Big Bang) spewing out stuff (matter and energy).

That’s sort of akin to having four cars approach an intersection, on each from the north, south, east and west. If each car is one kilometer from the intersection, and each car is traveling at say 50 kilometers per hour, then it is clear this contraction of automobiles will result in a Big Crunch. However, it might be difficult to then go to an automobile expansion as the cars will be a wreck and in no condition to go anywhere! That’s one possibility.

The other possibility is that it might be unrealistic to expect in a contracting Universe that each and every bit and piece will meet at exactly the same point in time and space. Using our car analogy, what if each car was one kilometer away from the intersection, but say the north car was going 46 kilometers per hour, the east car 48 kilometers per hour, the south car 50 kilometers per hour, and the west car 52 kilometers per hour. Then, we can go directly from automobile contraction to automobile expansion as each car passes through the intersection while only having near misses with the other vehicles.

Science librarian; retired.

There was an interesting article recently in Technology Reviews “The Physics arXiv Blog” titled “Some Black Holes My Pre-Date the Big Bang, Say Cosmologists” posted on 5/03/2011 by none other than KFC. The article starts out; “If the Universe expands and contracts in cycles of Big Bangs and Crunches, some black holes may survive from one era to the next, according to a new analysis.

Now then I ask, should this surprise anyone – No I say, especially anyone who has sat in a Jacuzzi or watched water boil. Have you ever noticed the small funnels and whirlpools? It seems that they last for a very long time, is it possible that once they get going they become stronger, gain more mass as they go, and continue to grow and grow? Sure it is, and that makes sense. And even if there wasn’t a big bang, and perhaps there are a series of crunches, or as I like to explain it; a room full of firecrackers – then it is possible that black holes could last through many cycles of expansion and contraction within a universe.

That stands to reason. The only problem is we don’t know for sure, but even if you turn off the jets in a Jacuzzi sometimes the whirlpools last for quite a while afterwards. In fact, let’s say you are in a Jacuzzi which has a timer, and the timer turns off. You might be able to get out of the Jacuzzi, go and reset the timer, and wait for a small time delay, and see the whirlpool is still spinning around during that entire time period.

Now then, obviously black holes work differently than this, but the vortex flow, regardless of what is causing it tends to stay in motion, and it would take a significant amount of opposite reaction to destroy its force, that is; if there are cycles of expansion and contraction, which many cosmologists, and physicist believe, then sure it’s all possible. Indeed, I hope you will please consider all this and think on it. Even if you don’t understand the math, hopefully a simple explanation like this, will help you wrap your mind around it.

Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank. Lance Winslow believes writing 23,300 articles by May 23, 2011 is difficult because all the letters on his keyboard are now worn off.

Stars have a life cycle like any living being are born, grow to evolve and grow and eventually die and disappear more or less violent, such as an explosion of supernova that can trigger the process of birth of other new stars. But it happens so slowly that they can be seen in the human timescale.

The Universe is an almost infinite space with room for millions of stars, star clusters and galaxies. The distance from the Sun, which is the closest star to Earth is called the Astronomical Unit, AU – and amounts to 149,597,870 km. Given that the speed of light is 300,000 km per second, the visible light observed from the Sun takes about eight minutes to reach earth. The next closest star to the Sun is called Proxima Centauri, and the emitted light takes over 4 years to reach Earth. This means that when you look at this star, is “seeing” how it was more than four years and not know how at the present time. And indeed, when one observes the Sun with the proper eye protection, it “sees” what it was about eight minutes.

Molecular clouds

On clear nights, especially when viewed in the field with a small telescope, far from cities or towns that illuminate the night sky, you can also see areas nebulae where stars are born, like the Orion or M42 in the constellation of same name. These are called molecular clouds.

Molecular clouds are huge and deep dark clouds that are formed by a gas called hydrogen (99%) and interstellar dust in a very small proportion (1%), but enough so that under certain conditions, the stars can be born. You could say that these clouds provide the raw material for star formation.

The embryos of future stars are hidden inside of molecular clouds, and only the radio and infrared waves from the electromagnetic spectrum, emitted by these embryos of stars, through these dark regions – not the visible light-. With appropriate equipment such as telescopes in space or radio antennas on ground-based observatories we can interpret the results of the data, and develop a theory of star formation.

The birth of a star

Although the proportion of dust in the cloud material is small compared with the amount of gas, these clouds are so extensive that they accumulate enough mass to generate thousands, even millions of stars like the Sun.

The formation process is triggered when for some reason, there is a “fragmentation” of the cloud, breaking it into fragments with enough density-relation between the amount of mass and occupied volume to begin to shrink slowly. The reason that is the origin of a fragmentation can be the arrival of a shock wave from the aforementioned explosion of a close supernova – the final stage of stars with large mass-

This process is irreversible, the fragment of cloud continues to contract and become more dense to a value-twenty orders of magnitude greater than the original cloud -fragment – from which there is enough mass to begin to act the force of gravity, making the cloud collapses so it collapses under its own weight. This event forms the core of the star: the protostar, which continues to fall on the rest of the field of fragment cloud.

As material continues to fall in the protostar, it begins to rotate, pushing matter jets (like geysers) to large distances and high speeds, making the protostar does not rotate too quickly, which would lead to its disintegration.

Because of this initial rotation, the matter of the cloud is deposited preferentially in the equator of the protostar, forming what is known as a disk of matter orbiting the protostar, and that may be the seed of a future system of planets around it, similar to the solar system.

This first stage of star formation takes about 100,000 years and as it is obscured by the dust cloud. We have to use, as mentioned before, radio telescopes (capture the emission of radio waves) or infrared telescopes to detect that stage. Then, as the material falls onto the protostar and fragment shell of gas and dust cloud dissipates, the embryo is visible. In a Sun-like star, this happens a million years after the start of the process of collapse.

A new star

After ten million years, the first contraction process of collapse by gravity end. During that time, the temperature of the protostar has grown enormously, and that temperature is so high that when the collapse ends, the thermonuclear reactions begin to happens using hydrogen as fuel in the core of the star, making it a heavier element called Helium. At this point we can say that a new star is born and is in a phase of life called main sequence.

The star is stable as it is in a state known as hydrostatic equilibrium: the force that pushes outward (the pressure of the energy produced by nuclear reactions) is compensated by the force that pushes inward, gravity.

Firstly, our place in the central scheme of things has gone from be-all-and-end-all uniqueness, a unique life form created in God’s image, the cream of all there is and ever will be, to, well, just another life form in the Darwinian scheme of things. Detection of extraterrestrial life, especially extraterrestrial intelligence will be the final straw (nail) in that scenario (coffin).

Secondly, we’ve shrunk in potential significance because the size of the Universe keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger as instrumentation and observations get better and better. We’ve become displaced as well. Earth is no longer all there is (the be-all-and-end-all of real estate) and the centre of everything (we’ve been moved from the CBD to the boonies several times over) as well. We’re not located at the centre of things and as our visions of the size of the Universe has ever increased over time, will there ever be an end to it?

Thirdly, cosmological common sense has decreased, given way to weirdness. Or, depending on your point of view (POV), weirdness has increased over time in all things cosmological. The well ordered and common sense cosmology of Genesis or the ancient Greeks was pretty straight forward. Even up through the life and times of Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Brahe and Newton that was still pretty much the case, albeit with the invention of the telescope things did get a little weirder (and more unsettling) with respect to Genesis (and the Church) and the ancient Greeks (and other ancient societies like the Chinese). Then, ever accelerating, the weirdness quotient, the scientific fertilizer, really hit the fan! In fairly short order, uncommon sense descriptions of the cosmos and the stuff in it. Concepts like relativity, space-time, quantum mechanics, black holes, wormholes, dark matter, dark energy, antimatter, atomic structure, and string/superstring theory. Nothing made much common sense anymore. I suspect that’s a trend that’s also likely to continue. In fact, you can probably bet on it.

Now on to the Big Questions (and little answers):

Q: Did God or Nature Create the Universe or Multiverse?

A: Here I opt for nature. If God can create one universe, God can create more than one universe (but what would be the point of doing so?). If nature can create one universe, then nature can create more than one universe. Since nature isn’t intelligent, creation of multi-universes (the Multiverse) is more like to be a natural than a supernatural event. That is, it’s probably illogical to create more than one universe where one will do – so that eliminates the God hypothesis since we assume that a God would be logical. Nature however tends to be prolific. Since nature, that is the laws of physics as we understand them, can adequately explain the creation of a universe(s), there is no need to appeal to a supernatural being or higher authority or universal designer, or whatever.

Q: Is There A Universe or A Multiverse?

A: Here I opt for the Multiverse. But the background to the Multiverse, that which contains the Multiverse, is something I call the “Superverse”. There is, always has been and always will be a super vast expanse (call it the all being “Superverse”) of nothing – that is, the vacuum (lowest possible) energy (state) which seethes with quantum activity and pervades everything. That’s the bottom line. I don’t know how big the Superverse of vacuum energy is, maybe it’s infinite (but cosmologists, physicists and I too like to steer clear of the can-of-worms that is infinity), but when I consider the following progression, logic suggests ‘pretty damn big’. Just as an atomic nucleus is tiny relative to an atom; an atom is tiny relative to you; you are tiny relative to Planet Earth; Planet Earth is tiny relative to our solar system; the solar system is tiny relative to the Milky Way Galaxy; our galaxy is tiny relative to the super-cluster of galaxies of which it is a part; our super-cluster of galaxies is tiny relative to the observable universe. That’s as far as knowledge can take us, but if the progression continues, then our observable universe will be tiny relative to our Universe; our Universe is tiny compared to the Multiverse, all of which resides with the Superverse energy vacuum!

Q: What is the Origin and Fate of Our Universe? Is the Universe Open or Closed? Will There Be A Heat Death or A Big Crunch? How Can A Universe Be Created?

A: I opt for death by Big Crunch despite all the evidence currently against it! I reason as follows – we know matter can create energy. The reverse is also possible – energy can create matter. That’s because, as per Einstein’s famous equation, matter and energy are opposite sides of the same coin. And thus the all pervasive, all surrounding, vacuum energy, seething with quantum uncertainty (albeit certain quantum activity), will now and again produce particles, thus reducing the overall energy of the vacuum. This energy debt must eventually be repaid, so said particles usually decay (annihilate actually) back into pure energy and rejoin the vacuum pretty quick-smart. But, it’s possible that those particles, could, by chance, evolve into an entire universe. Particles, if they exist long enough, will be subjected to all manner of quantum effects and thus evolve into a universe instead of being immediately reabsorbed back into the energy vacuum. The energy debt however still must be eventually repaid, but who’s to say how quickly that is required? So, ultimately, in order to repay that energy debt, our Universe will need to ultimately collapse (undergo Big Crunch) back into the Superverse energy vacuum from which it originally came and pay the energy debt. The Universe (our Universe) begins and ends as pure energy – energy borrowed from the vacuum; energy returned to the vacuum. How exactly that Big Crunch is going to come about I know not, I’m just convinced it will happen.

So, why aren’t new universes being created from scratch in our backyards (where the energy vacuum holds sway as it does everywhere)? Because, for any given tiny area (like your backyard), under the relatively low probabilities of the exact circumstances coming together just so, it’s going to take trillions of years for it to happen. But, given the vast acreage of the Superverse, new universes probably pop into (and out of) existence on a fairly regular basis. It’s like you are fairly unlikely to have a meteor land in your backyard tomorrow, but somewhere tomorrow a meteor is likely to hit our planet.

Now, what if the vacuum energy (Superverse) can not produce a universe? Well, the next best (second) option I suggest is the black hole as a universal motherhood idea. That is, the extreme conditions that produce a black hole in one universe ends up producing a new universe in a different place (obviously), maybe in a different time. Our black hole connects us to that new universe, but no physicist would advise you to make the trip! At least this origin-of-a-baby-universe doesn’t rely on a Big Crunch ending.

The third best option is the Big Crunch of one universe producing the Big Bang of the next, but from observations, the prospect of a Big Crunch is dicey at best. But, I like to give the prospect of a Big Crunch the benefit of the doubt. Further, there’s nothing to say that option two, black holes, couldn’t produce a baby universe that would end up cyclic – Big Bang – expansion – contraction – Big Crunch – Big Bang, etc. Reproduction and reincarnation!

Lastly, albeit unlikely in the extreme yet I’ve sure sci-fi writers have a ball with this idea, is that advanced E.T. could manufacture a universe using the laws of physics, especially quantum physics, to do so. If nature can manufacture a universe, could not intelligence also manufacture a universe? Call it the mother of all engineering achievements. Now this differs from God creating universes, in that presumably God knows He/She/It can do so and knows the outcome to the Nth degree, but to E.T., this is just a scientific experiment. Whether an E.T. created universe would take on a life and evolution of its own, who knows? Now you’d think that creating a rapidly expanding universe in the laboratory would end up destroying said lab and surroundings. Of course maybe the physics of baby universe creation dictates that the universe forms elsewhere and/or elsewhen! One other scenario is that once universe creation becomes so routine as to end up being part and parcel of the science lab curricula at E.T. Junior High School, then it’s going to be universes galore – maybe that why we have a Multiverse!

Q: Does Our Universe or Multiverse Have an Existence that’s Finite or Infinite in Time?

A: The philosophical answer here is ‘infinite’. One can never get away from the question “Well that’s fine, but what happened before that?” Even if our specific Universe had a beginning, there was a before the Big Bang that extends the timeline back, and back, and back. If our Universe continues to expand forever, well forever equals infinity. If our Universe continues to expand forever, well forever equals infinity. If our Universe ends in a Big Crunch that kick-starts off the existence of another universe, then the timeline of the cosmos continues onward, ever onward.

Q: To Quantum or Not to Quantum the Big Bang?

A: Here I opt for the Big Bang as a non-quantum event. I just can’t figure out how you can cram the entire contents of our Universe into a space smaller than an atom at the point of origin. In any event, if the point of origin of the Big Bang were a singularity, then because singularities can’t have zero dimensions and infinite density – that just makes no sense at all – then said singularity could have been large enough to exceed the volumes commonly associated with quantum physics.

Q: Are the Laws of Physics the Same or Different in Various Universes?

A: The answer here is unknown and probably unknowable. However, I suspect that there is only one type of physics possible – as Einstein is quoted, ‘did God have any choice in the matter?’ – or maybe not. Anyway, my reasoning is that assuming that all universes arise from a common cause, say the Superverse vacuum energy or via Lee Smolin’s black holes as universe generators, or the budding off of universes via chaotic/eternal inflation, with no evidence to the contrary, it’s probably more logical to suspect that only one type of physics exists, and each universe will be the same – physics wise. But, what if you introduce extraterrestrial intelligence into the picture? Maybe, just maybe, intelligence advanced enough to create universes, may be intelligent enough to tweak the laws of physics and alter them. That certainly would be easy enough to do if you created computer software that simulated universes, each software package having different physics programmed in! So, maybe it’s just as well to fence sit on this issue.

Q: Is our Universe (Hence Ourselves) Really Real or Simulated?

A: The odds overwhelmingly favor our reality as being a simulated one. If that could be proved, it would also be likely proof of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence. If all terrestrial life is simulated, who else is left to simulate us but extraterrestrials? I just bet we’re some alien’s Ph D thesis. The possibility of course exists that humans from what we would term the future have simulated us and the running simulation has only reached a simulated early 21st Century. Of course this is a fairly unpalatable theory, so I’ll just conclude here that the odds are overwhelmingly in favor of my being wrong.

Science librarian; retired.

The majesty one beholds at the foot of the Rocky Mountains impels visions and dreams.

Lying at the gateway are trails into the valleys which travel beyond human footprint. Trails of heritage and understanding of the visions of the few who have passed through.

Astraevs, named for the God of the Stars, arrived in the wilds of the Rockies’ while only a colt; his caregivers never successful in harboring his spirit, his self-determination, nor his brute strength; at 18 hands he would not be held behind gates. In the darkness and silence of the forest and with the stars guiding him along the trail he knew he was home.

Now, years later breaking through the tree line of the forest his movements were swift. Spring had arrived and as he had done for many years he was escorting his herd down to the valleys. They knew no fencing, no limits; their home was vast and free from humans.

The sun rays clarified the hidden shadows as the herd passed down the trail towards the valleys. The emerald ponds reflected the shadow of the Sea Eagles soaring far above the snow caps of the mountains stopping long enough to rest and then disappearing far beyond the summit continuing their venture to the west coast where they would meet the millions of salmon along the mighty Fraser River.

Astraevs stood tall at the crown of the ridge taking in the landscape. It had been a long winter season and the herd anxious to greet their destination. His eyes followed the fouls and colts, always wanting to stop and play, cantering into the tree lines along the trails. He watched the weighty moms, careful in their steps descending the trail. He knew the trail at this point would remain safe for their travel; barren of berries and seeds, only attracting the winter white owl, nesting in silence in the stump of the fallen evergreen protecting her young, who were settled deep inside the hollow.

At day’s end they gathered, with the young amidst them; Astraevs remained behind, standing alone, the solider positioned on the highest hill blended with the other shadows rolling down the stone cliffs. The stars, his stars, so bright that the moon traveled in their shadow. Silence traveled along the trail. His courage remains unquestioned; his allegiance unwavering. Honorable for his tolerance for the young, the aged and the weak.

The herd moved without interruption, day and night. In the distance the silence of the forest was swallowed up by the sounds of the waterfall, the water crashing down onto the stones and carrying on into the spring ponds surrounded by the valleys and where they would make their home until the leaves of fall surrounded them.

Astraevs had selected two colts, now sufficient in size and maturity to train with him to protect the herd.

They positioned themselves on the perimeters of the herd, always catching the sun rays that lead into the dense forest, throwing a kaleidoscope of colors through the shadows keeping safe deep within the brush the doe’s only hours old, speckled with white spots laying in complete silence.

Along the far side of the springs the Mountain goats roamed; travelling from above the tree belt of the Mountains to the valley knowing the treasure of mineral deposits surrounding the springs for their attention.

As the days passed the valley’s vegetation burst in colors with the tiger lilies, crocuses, willows and daisies all abound. The evergreen layered in new colors of jade and the aspens now full in colors of sea moss rolling in the breezes, throwing their shadows at night under the stars.

The valley was also now home to many new colts and fouls, kid goats and the spotted fawns, all rising and staying close by their mom’s side.

Astraevs and the colts remained separated from the pack. Scents and sounds of wolf packs in the distance and the grizzly tracks surrounding the springs trained the young colts towards courage and patience. They no longer run into the forest chasing echoes now following the lead of Astraevs.

The summer carried on; Astraevs and the colts challenged only a few times by a passing Mountain Cat or the families of Black Bears travelling into the forest for berries.

On this fall evening as Astraevs lead the herd away from the valley he turned looking at the harvest of colors that lay on the ground knowing that it wouldn’t be long before the ground would be covered in snow; the falls would defy gravity and remain suspected over the cliff until the following spring, yet would offer an audience never ending pattern of constantly changing colors and shapes against the snow covered springs.

Astraevs was content knowing he was returning to the Mountain where he could climb to the peaks that would reach the Stars.

What we do know is that it exists, and we can see it. It doesn’t appear that we are in any danger in the next hundred thousand years of it hitting Earth, but it is rather interesting. There was an interesting article in SpaceDaily Online titled “Newly Discovered Asteroid Is Earth’s Companion,” which was posted by the Staff Writers in London on April 7, 2011.

The article stated; “Astronomers from the Armagh Observatory in Northern Ireland have found that a recently discovered asteroid has been following the Earth in its motion around the Sun for at least the past 250,000 years and may be intimately related to the origin of our planet.”

We do know that there are other asteroids following other planets around, and often scientists have deduced that they’ve ended up in their Lagrange points, and that they most likely ended up there by getting trapped as they were flung around the solar system had their trajectories diverted by gravitational forces, which slowed them down. Could this asteroid or Near Earth Object have had a similar past? There is one way to find out right?

Sure, NASA can go and check it out. We’ve sent other probes to other asteroids in the past. By taking a sample of that asteroid we could match it to the consistency of Earth, and the moon and determine if it was once part of us, which makes the most sense, or at least scientists and astronomers speculate. If not, it might give us clues as to how asteroids’ trajectories and orbits evolve and decay over time. This might help us predict their future paths.

There’s a lot to learn, but right now we have more questions than answers, which is okay, but these questions beg further scrutiny. Indeed I hope you will please consider all this and think on it. If you have any questions, comments, concerns, or alternate theories please shoot me an e-mail as soon as possible.

Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank. Lance Winslow believes writing 23,100 articles was a lot of work – because all the letters on his keyboard are now worn off.