Are there more stars in the Universe than there are grains of sand on the Earth?

[Lancer]

There are over a hundred million stars in the Milky Way, yes? Ours is a rather small galaxy, right? Then there are 1.25 Billion galaxys in the Universe, correct? Thats allota stars I'm thinking, but there's a whole bunch of grains of sand on the Earth as well. Consider the Sahara, the Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area, the Gobi and all the other vast amounts of sand in all the deserts and on all the beaches of the whole of the planet Earth. However the numbers are so huge that likely one total blows away the other, so which is it? Stars or sand?

[Lancer]

Oregon Dunes National Recreation Area...

http://www.duneguide.com/sand_dune_guide_oregon_dunes.htm

Sand, lots of it.

[DanielXY]

if you assume 200 Million Stars per Galaxy time 1,25 Biollion Galaxys, its not nearly enough. There is much more sand than this on earth...

Ofc the bounderies of the universe are unknown so there may be many more stars than assumed above

[SlowwHand]

More Stars than grains of sand on Earth!

[TheStinger]

there are 4 more

[Wezil]

I demand a recount.

[SlowwHand]

Google Answers: More stars than sand particles?There are more stars than grains of sand on the earth. With sand, there is a definite number of particles. The cosmos are infinite..

[Cort Haus]

Although some sources favour the stars over the sand, these calculations are based on the sand on beaches, whereas the OP just refers to grains of sand on earth.

Chuck in the Sahara and other deserts, and it's a bit different I reckon.

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/~gmackie/billions.html

[SlowwHand]

You can probably find sources that say moose are really platypus if you look hard enough.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
You can probably find sources that say moose are really platypus if you look hard enough.

Yoe mean there not

[Zkribbler]

I think we should count them both and compare numbers.

[Japher]

Is it fair to assume a finite universe since the sand is in a finite space. Also, what constitutes a particle of sand? Would sand that comprises lime stone be sand, or even a rock before it is pulverised by the ocean into sand? If that were the case could I count He molecules since they could be unborn stars in the right condition?

Really, I think there are too many assumptions within that question to have an awnser. If were to apply my assumptions then the awnser would be stars, because I would have an infinite universe.

[SlowwHand]

So you say that when you get to "the end of space", there's a UTurn only? Turn around and come back?


Even with deserts included, talking ALL sand, bottom of the ocean sand, there's a finite number of sand grain.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
So you say that when you get to "the end of space", there's a UTurn only? Turn around and come back?

Nope. You don't come to the end of space because there's no such thing. It is curved. So it's like coming to end of a hula hoop.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
So you say that when you get to "the end of space", there's a UTurn only? Turn around and come back?

There is no actual end to space. The curvature of the universe is such that you do, in fact, just come back around.

Damn you, Zkribbler.