Voici l'article en question d'une liste de diffusion qui avait attiré mon attention, le lien que j'ai donné antérieurement ne marche donc je me suis permis de vous le proposer ici:
AVODAH MAILING LIST
Volume 15 : Number 014
Monday, May 16 2005
http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/
Date: Sun, 15 May 2005 23:16:46 -0400
From: "R. Alexander Seinfeld" <
[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The Extraordinary Number of Stars
The Gamara Brachos 32b is even more extraordinary than I'd first imagined.
The number itself is amazing (10^18). This is (cosmically speaking) pretty
darn close to the current estimate of 10^22. What I cannot figure out is
which assumptions the astronomers are making that could be tweaked in
order to make the numbers match better. The simplest would be to lower
the number of stars in an average galaxy to 10^4. But that seems awfully
small. Any thoughts?
By the way the wording of the passage is curious Reish Lakish doesn¹t
have the vocabulary to state such a big number so he talks in terms of
what we would call galaxies and galactic clusters.
Avg galaxy ("gastara") = about 4x10^9 stars
Avg local cluster ("karton") = 30 galaxies
Avg supercluster ("rahaton") = 30 clusters
It goes on to say that superclusters are grouped into clusters of about
30 (megasuperclusters?) and that these are in turn grouped into an even
bigger pattern of about 30 (hypermegasuperclusters?) of which the universe
has a total of (about) 365.
What¹s the significance of the number 30? I cannot find any
spiritual/religious reason for choosing that number and so it comes
across as a conscientious oral transmission of a received tradition,
rather than simply one person's guestimate.
What¹s remarkable is the recent discovery of galactic clusters and
superclusters. Our local cluster by consensus contains 30 galaxies!
Moreover from my amateurish research it seems that one of the
prevailing theories of cosmic structure is that it is fractal and
is not the calculation of Berachot 32a an example of fractal structure
(4billionx30x30x30x30x360)?
The 4 billion can be explained by the standard theory of galaxy formation.
The 365 perhaps could be explained by inflation.
I don¹t know what I¹m talking about but my intuition is that there is
a very close match here. As a previous post noted, the most you can
see with the naked eye is about 9000 -- therefore Chazal's accuracy is
all the more stunning. (as a side point Reish Lakish in whose name the
Gamara brings the number had a reputation for being impeccably honest;
it is highly unlikely that he would have made up such a number or guessed
without telling us so.)
By the way, I queried approximately 10 leading cosmologists whether
or not they had heard of any other ancient people who had a number
anywhere in the ballpark of Chazal's. All responded in the negative --
my question was even posted on the history of astronomy listproc (and
therein viciously attacked by an Israeli astronomer -- natch).
Rabbi Alexander Seinfeld
