+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: Astronomy - the science of the very big

  1. Link to Post #1
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    66
    Posts
    5,659
    Thanks
    26,233
    Thanked 36,600 times in 5,379 posts

    Default Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Since I was a young boy, I have been fascinated by the planets and the sun.

    The concepts they evoke are enormous, and their understanding requires extensive knowledge of geometry, trigonometry, calculus and beyond but their beauty and majesty can be aptly appreciated by all.

    Astronomy is a daunting mystery with possibly intangible, almost esoteric origins. Philosophically and temporally, even spatially, astronomy is the study of the ineffable.

    It was the size and the distance that enthralled me as a boy. Such massive bodies, floating in nothingness, effected by fundamental laws. What had created them?

    I tried to understand the distance between worlds. The moon was a trip in the car for three thousand hours (125 days) or so. But the trip to Mars, our closest habitable neighbor, is incomprehensible at more than 200 times farther - 600,000 hours or over 68 years!

    The size differential also amazed me. More than a hundred Earths can fit in the diameter of the sun, a million (edit: from 1000) in its volume! The giant red spot on Jupiter, a huge churning storm, can comfortably fit four Earths! Why does Venus rotate in the opposite direction of all the other planets? The more I learned the more fascinated I became. I learned the diameter of every body, its mass and its distance from the sun.

    That is our solar system.

    When I tried to imagine the distance to the nearest star I faltered. If our sun were the size of a basketball, which in those days I always had handy, then our closest neighbor would be over a basketball court distant in another school a mile away and all our planets would be but a thin onion layer of orbits around our 'basketball'.

    There was so much more to know but I had to drop that and learn my dates for the battle of Fort Erie or some other such nonsense.

    In any case I think everyone should know at least the name of the planets in order of closest to furthest from the sun, as follows:

    MERCURY
    VENUS
    EARTH
    MARS
    JUPITER
    SATURN
    URANUS
    NEPTUNE
    PLUTO

    I found this video with lots of good info and fun facts.
    Last edited by Ernie Nemeth; 9th July 2017 at 23:48.

  2. The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    Alekahn2 (10th July 2017), Ankle Biter (30th April 2022), Baby Steps (9th July 2017), Bluegreen (30th April 2022), Chip (1st May 2022), dynamo (9th July 2017), fourty-two (11th July 2017), Johnnycomelately (30th April 2022), Justplain (9th July 2017), Matt P (9th July 2017), Matthew (16th May 2022), Noelle (9th July 2017), shijo (10th July 2017), Star Tsar (10th July 2017), toppy (10th July 2017), WhiteLove (9th July 2017), Wind (9th July 2017), wondering (9th July 2017)

  3. Link to Post #2
    Avalon Member dynamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    13th March 2013
    Location
    Cosmic Messenger
    Posts
    624
    Thanks
    4,865
    Thanked 4,972 times in 595 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    This is one of many videos that shows the relationship in size between our planet Earth to the largest known star...enjoy!


  4. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to dynamo For This Post:

    Alekahn2 (10th July 2017), Ankle Biter (30th April 2022), Bluegreen (30th April 2022), Ernie Nemeth (9th July 2017), Matt P (9th July 2017), Noelle (9th July 2017), WhiteLove (9th July 2017), wondering (9th July 2017)

  5. Link to Post #3
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    22nd February 2014
    Location
    Lexington, KY
    Age
    53
    Posts
    953
    Thanks
    6,393
    Thanked 9,019 times in 927 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    I was just bending my mind around this topic today! LewRockwell.com published an article about Jupiter this morning. Weird. About 1,300 Earths fit in Jupiter and about a thousand Jupiters fit in the sun so definitely more than a thousand Earths in the volume of the sun. What really starts to short circuit my brain is there are stars many hundreds of times bigger than our sun with millions of times the mass. The size is impossible to comprehend. This Earth is sooooo tiny compared to them. And if there's that scale bigger than us, think of what might exist at the same scale less than us! Trippy. 😀

    Matt
    Fear is simply a consequence of a lack of information.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Matt P For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (30th April 2022), dynamo (10th July 2017), Ernie Nemeth (9th July 2017), toppy (10th July 2017)

  7. Link to Post #4
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    66
    Posts
    5,659
    Thanks
    26,233
    Thanked 36,600 times in 5,379 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Such a massive star! Looks like about six or seven orders of magnitude larger than our sun, incomprehensible.

    Thanks for the correction. Went in and edited the op...

    There is so much else to bring up about the planets. So much amazing information. Mercury in fact does have a tail, spreading for millions of miles (if you watched the video there is a mention that Mercury does not have a tail like the animation made it seem). The plane of the solar system is not the same as the plane of the galaxy. It takes the average photon of light one million years to travel from the center of the sun to its surface. The largest moon is Ganymede of Jupiter, larger than the planet Mercury. There are groups of asteroids that originate from different places in the solar system, one is associated with Uranus and sometimes assumed to be the remnants of the body that knocked the planet on its side long ago. And so much more...


  8. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    Alekahn2 (10th July 2017), Ankle Biter (30th April 2022), dynamo (10th July 2017), Matt P (10th July 2017)

  9. Link to Post #5
    Australia Avalon Member Ankle Biter's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th May 2013
    Language
    English
    Age
    46
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    7,897
    Thanked 2,662 times in 368 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Fumbled my way up the hills in total darkness this morning (note to self, buy a torch aka flashlight).

    It was worth the effort and thankful to lady luck that when I got to my vantage spot the clouds temporarily cleared so that I could get some pics.






    To the mind that is still, the whole universe surrenders. -Lao Tzu

    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

  10. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ankle Biter For This Post:

    Bluegreen (30th April 2022), Ernie Nemeth (30th April 2022), Johnnycomelately (30th April 2022)

  11. Link to Post #6
    Canada Avalon Member Johnnycomelately's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th January 2022
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Language
    English
    Age
    65
    Posts
    1,002
    Thanks
    18,597
    Thanked 5,577 times in 981 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Quote Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)

    In any case I think everyone should know at least the name of the planets in order of closest to furthest from the sun, as follows:

    MERCURY
    VENUS
    EARTH
    MARS
    JUPITER
    SATURN
    URANUS
    NEPTUNE
    PLUTO
    A way to remember the order of the planets, an old way so includes Pluto:

    “Mr. Vey eat my jammie sandwich under Ned’s punt”.

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Johnnycomelately For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (5th May 2022), Ernie Nemeth (30th April 2022)

  13. Link to Post #7
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    66
    Posts
    5,659
    Thanks
    26,233
    Thanked 36,600 times in 5,379 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    If you get up early enough, Venus is clearly visible to the east just before sunrise. It is in its 'morning star' phase.

    At the same time, Mars dominates the sky and the washed out stars (because of sunrise) to the south.

    Back to Venus. Because Venus is inside the orbit of the earth, ie. is closer to the sun, it is always 'near the sun'. That is, it is visible just before sunrise or just after sunset. So it is called either the morning star or the evening star depending on the orientation of earth and Venus in their orbits.

    I just love astronomy.

    But, I also believe that certain modern dynamics that are considered proven assumptions are incorrect so I take everything being discovered these days with modern equipment as dubious at best. Small discrepancies in understanding become massive faux pas as time proceeds. I especially have a problem with astronomical (not galactic distances so much) distances and the age of the universe.

    I also have a very big problem with solar and planetary system formation. The accretion disk theory is flawed at best. And don't get me started on 'dark' explanations for the 'missing mass' conundrum.

    I must admit that I have not kept up with the 'science' because of the many problems with the theories that have never been addressed. I don't trust their conclusions anymore. So I may have missed some clarifications and retractions and corrections. But understanding the state of 'knowledge' these days in general, I very much doubt I've missed something important.

    Anyone care to prove me wrong? I'd be keenly interested.
    Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like water...Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend. Bruce Lee

    Free will can only be as free as the mind that conceives it.

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (1st May 2022), Bluegreen (30th April 2022), Johnnycomelately (30th April 2022)

  15. Link to Post #8
    England Avalon Member Spiral's Avatar
    Join Date
    20th July 2012
    Location
    Clown World, NE Quadrant
    Language
    English
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,460
    Thanks
    11,950
    Thanked 10,648 times in 1,409 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Quote Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)

    But, I also believe that certain modern dynamics that are considered proven assumptions are incorrect so I take everything being discovered these days with modern equipment as dubious at best. Small discrepancies in understanding become massive faux pas as time proceeds. I especially have a problem with astronomical (not galactic distances so much) distances and the age of the universe.

    I also have a very big problem with solar and planetary system formation. The accretion disk theory is flawed at best. And don't get me started on 'dark' explanations for the 'missing mass' conundrum.

    I must admit that I have not kept up with the 'science' because of the many problems with the theories that have never been addressed. I don't trust their conclusions anymore. So I may have missed some clarifications and retractions and corrections. But understanding the state of 'knowledge' these days in general, I very much doubt I've missed something important.
    The Electric Universe Theory does a lot better job of explaining things than conventional "dark matter" stories IMHO, mainstream science won't touch it of course.

    https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/


    One of my favourite oddities about astronomy is how did the Moon get where it is, there are no answers made by "science" that make any sense at all, because the Moon is far too big for this planet, without an outside "force" it would have sailed past or hit us, "something" or "someone" had to have put it there !

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Spiral For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (1st May 2022), aoibhghaire (30th April 2022), Bluegreen (30th April 2022), Ernie Nemeth (30th April 2022), Johnnycomelately (1st May 2022)

  17. Link to Post #9
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    66
    Posts
    5,659
    Thanks
    26,233
    Thanked 36,600 times in 5,379 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    According to my best understanding, the moon has been found to be composed of the same stuff as the earth's crust. And the leading moon formation scenario is the 'double impact' theory, where some passing body whacked the earth a glancing blow, tearing a blob from the side of our planet, then came around and whacked it again, stabilizing the fledgling moon's orbit. Sounds sketchy to me.

    It is just as probable that it was built up there intentionally from material gathered from the earth by another global civilization the earth spawned in some long ago age. Another idea is it may have been constructed from a smaller natural moon, building it outward on a frame and hollowing out the center...then backfilling it with material from earth. To me that is just as plausible...


    The Electric Universe theory is certainly onto something more resembling observational science. It can account for many of the problems the gravity alone advocates have a hard time dealing with. Most of the problems have been 'solved' by adding a new component to the universe they call 'dark'. But what it actually means is, 'we are blind and refuse to see'. And now they actually go around looking for what they cannot see by measuring what they do see and adding the rest by inference (referring to 'looking for areas in the universe that do not behave 'correctly' and adding the 'dark' concentrations that must be present' to prove dark matter exists). This theoretical nonsense has gotten out of hand in many areas of science.

    It is hubris to continue on a trajectory leading to an almost invisible universe that dwarfs our visible one. To me that is the epitome of a tempest in a teacup, to coin an old phrase, and it has long ago ceased to amuse.
    Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like water...Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend. Bruce Lee

    Free will can only be as free as the mind that conceives it.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    Johnnycomelately (1st May 2022)

  19. Link to Post #10
    Australia Avalon Member Ankle Biter's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th May 2013
    Language
    English
    Age
    46
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    7,897
    Thanked 2,662 times in 368 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Quote Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
    ...I also have a very big problem with solar and planetary system formation. The accretion disk theory is flawed at best. And don't get me started on 'dark' explanations for the 'missing mass' conundrum.
    I understand the whole thing about the 'dark' explanations to wiggle around the missing mass problems but I've not encountered any of the issues regarding solar system and planetary formation through accretion disk etc.. As far as I was aware this kind of star & planetary system formation has even been observed.. (I'll have to go back now and double check on that)... How would you say it is flawed? I've known about this idea of electric universe for some time now though ashamedly never went into it.. perhaps it's touched on there and now's the time for me to look into it.
    To the mind that is still, the whole universe surrenders. -Lao Tzu

    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

  20. Link to Post #11
    Avalon Member Merkaba360's Avatar
    Join Date
    9th December 2010
    Location
    SE Asia
    Language
    English
    Age
    45
    Posts
    485
    Thanks
    1,497
    Thanked 2,479 times in 414 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Or very high powers, like the source of creation itself, had some plan for earth and just materialized the moon since all is just holographic anyways. I also wonder where the archeological evidence is for these very advanced civilizations that lived on earth. They have no machines, buildings or whatever that are somewhat preserved? What if the creator just wipes all their evidence, like the matrix reset. Can leave those dinosaur fossils, that will feed into their misleading theories of history. lol

    this is supposed to be the 5th or 6th epoch? The movie "The Matrix" so happens to use the same number of resets. Maybe when the game is reset, and altered their is a clean up as to not affect the new experiment. Maybe they unleash the swarms of nanobots to just recycle all non natural structures.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Merkaba360 For This Post:

    Ernie Nemeth (1st May 2022)

  22. Link to Post #12
    Avalon Member Merkaba360's Avatar
    Join Date
    9th December 2010
    Location
    SE Asia
    Language
    English
    Age
    45
    Posts
    485
    Thanks
    1,497
    Thanked 2,479 times in 414 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Quote Posted by mpennery (here)
    I was just bending my mind around this topic today! LewRockwell.com published an article about Jupiter this morning. Weird. About 1,300 Earths fit in Jupiter and about a thousand Jupiters fit in the sun so definitely more than a thousand Earths in the volume of the sun. What really starts to short circuit my brain is there are stars many hundreds of times bigger than our sun with millions of times the mass. The size is impossible to comprehend. This Earth is sooooo tiny compared to them. And if there's that scale bigger than us, think of what might exist at the same scale less than us! Trippy. 😀

    Matt
    And just thinking about all the energy and incredible speed going on in the quantum to make it all happen. Just thinking of how much effort goes on in the nano world of powerful computers is wild. The holographic computer running the universe has far far more going on.

    Perhaps from the singularities point of view, it is all effortless. But just like everything going on in our macro world, there is a whole lot of management/upkeep. I just want to know what are the limits of awareness. How much can any being or the prime being be aware of simultaneously. Sometimes, I feel a bit sad that my experience is so small, and am missing out on 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 % lol

    The internet age reveals our desire to experience more and miss out on a bit less. It is a small improvement, but where does it go from here. I guess our current operating mind is a single processor. Do we later upgrade to parallel processing? Wonder what it would be like watching 5 videos at once lol. Is that even possible. Perhaps all that knowledge would get stored in your brain, but maybe you wouldnt be aware of that knowledge until you started thinking about it in review. Kind of like how the speed readers take pictures, but are still processing after finishing reading the book.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Merkaba360 For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (2nd May 2022)

  24. Link to Post #13
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    66
    Posts
    5,659
    Thanks
    26,233
    Thanked 36,600 times in 5,379 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Quote Posted by Ankle Biter (here)
    Quote Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
    ...I also have a very big problem with solar and planetary system formation. The accretion disk theory is flawed at best. And don't get me started on 'dark' explanations for the 'missing mass' conundrum.
    I understand the whole thing about the 'dark' explanations to wiggle around the missing mass problems but I've not encountered any of the issues regarding solar system and planetary formation through accretion disk etc.. As far as I was aware this kind of star & planetary system formation has even been observed.. (I'll have to go back now and double check on that)... How would you say it is flawed? I've known about this idea of electric universe for some time now though ashamedly never went into it.. perhaps it's touched on there and now's the time for me to look into it.

    Planetary formation is a problem. When a star achieves first light it pumps out a massive spurt of matter and energy. If there were planets forming in its vicinity those disks would most likely be blown apart by the discharge.

    Also, when a disk of material collapses under the force of gravity it does not form rings of material, it forms spirals. Each spiral of material is being pulled toward the center. What force would pinch it off and create rings of material?

    Then there are the anomalies. Like Venus, that rotates the opposite direction from all the other planets. Where did it come from? Like the asteroid belt, that is a ring of material that never re-accreted - why? If planetary formation is supposed to accrete into existence then the asteroid belt should naturally reform a planet. After all, it has to happen naturally all over the universe so it should happen here as well.

    The Electric Universe theory has an explanation that I find far more possible. The home star births planets whole from time to time according to conservation laws, most notably the conservation of charge.

    There are things we yet do not understand. Which would be fine except the standard assumption is that science has uncovered all the mechanics of the universe and all that is left to do is cross some 'T's' and dot some 'i's'. It is because of that arrogance that astronomy has veered way off course and headed down a dead end.

    Gravity alone could not have created this universe, there are no dark forces or matter, and science does not understand star formation or star mechanics near as well as they think they do.

    And don't get me started on the properties of space itself. That is one they almost completely ignore. What is empty space? What makes empty space hold a space for phenomena to occupy? Why do we even call it empty? It obviously is something...so it is not empty.
    Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like water...Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend. Bruce Lee

    Free will can only be as free as the mind that conceives it.

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (2nd May 2022)

  26. Link to Post #14
    Australia Avalon Member Ankle Biter's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th May 2013
    Language
    English
    Age
    46
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    7,897
    Thanked 2,662 times in 368 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Quote Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
    Quote Posted by Ankle Biter (here)
    Quote Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
    ...I also have a very big problem with solar and planetary system formation. The accretion disk theory is flawed at best. And don't get me started on 'dark' explanations for the 'missing mass' conundrum.
    I understand the whole thing about the 'dark' explanations to wiggle around the missing mass problems but I've not encountered any of the issues regarding solar system and planetary formation through accretion disk etc.. As far as I was aware this kind of star & planetary system formation has even been observed.. (I'll have to go back now and double check on that)... How would you say it is flawed? I've known about this idea of electric universe for some time now though ashamedly never went into it.. perhaps it's touched on there and now's the time for me to look into it.
    Planetary formation is a problem. When a star achieves first light it pumps out a massive spurt of matter and energy. If there were planets forming in its vicinity those disks would most likely be blown apart by the discharge.

    Also, when a disk of material collapses under the force of gravity it does not form rings of material, it forms spirals. Each spiral of material is being pulled toward the center. What force would pinch it off and create rings of material?

    Then there are the anomalies. Like Venus, that rotates the opposite direction from all the other planets. Where did it come from? Like the asteroid belt, that is a ring of material that never re-accreted - why? If planetary formation is supposed to accrete into existence then the asteroid belt should naturally reform a planet. After all, it has to happen naturally all over the universe so it should happen here as well.

    The Electric Universe theory has an explanation that I find far more possible. The home star births planets whole from time to time according to conservation laws, most notably the conservation of charge.

    There are things we yet do not understand. Which would be fine except the standard assumption is that science has uncovered all the mechanics of the universe and all that is left to do is cross some 'T's' and dot some 'i's'. It is because of that arrogance that astronomy has veered way off course and headed down a dead end.

    Gravity alone could not have created this universe, there are no dark forces or matter, and science does not understand star formation or star mechanics near as well as they think they do.

    And don't get me started on the properties of space itself. That is one they almost completely ignore. What is empty space? What makes empty space hold a space for phenomena to occupy? Why do we even call it empty? It obviously is something...so it is not empty.
    A 2018 study here, provides a good observational case for accretion disc-planet formation. However the parent star this disc is located around, PDS 70 is still considered in its pre-main sequence and yet to discharge outer free H2. It would be odd however if an accretion disc forms only to be expelled when fusion happens at the star's core to then eject from the star itself a planet to settle in a orbital path where one may have been similarly positioned prior to the star going main sequence.

    For the most part conservation of angular momentum laws seems to support the accretion proto system model like we have in our solar system but as you point out there is the anomaly of Venus with it's very slow and in reverse rotation, though orbit is in line with all other planets. Then there is Uranus which has a tilt way way over, almost perpendicular to every other planet, that has cosmologists and astrophysicists scratching their heads.. I guess it's very hard to formulate definitive models on things, as you aptly named in the title, science of the very big.. including length of time. Venus' and Uranus' anomalies are explained away rather conveniently with .. "oh they were struck by something really big that affected their angular spin to make them different to everything else".

    Much of the predictability for formation of systems and their spins, mass etc works quite well with gravitation at the core of it all but the angular spin of the milky way and other galaxies being held together vs rate of spin absolutely does not work on gravity alone.. and yes, I agree this bizzo of dark this and dark that is really lazy science. I'm not up to speed on electrical universe ideas, did a few papers and whatnot today but barely scratched the surface I feel, seems quite interesting though. But I was able to very easily locate a myriad of 'videos' to debunk which I couldn't get past 5 minutes because it just had that feel of debunk through condescension... which really bugs me. There's many instances in our learning history where the consensus was challenged, those challenging thoughts were ridiculed and even proponents of the ideas persecuted only to then some decades or centuries later become the leading thought on an idea.

    As for space... yeah, it doesn't 'sit' right with me that it's empty.. I feel with the JWST observing further in the infrared will give us new ideas but again, there is likely to be a strong resistance to acceptance of those ideas, especially when they require what is already established be rewritten or thrown out all together. All very interesting stuff really and cool to think over and discuss but one consensus on which you'd be hard pressed to find an opposing opinion on is.... all this space stuff looks cool af! I hope I can sort out my telescope to add some better images than the previous post but glad to have this thread and hope to contribute more along the way.
    To the mind that is still, the whole universe surrenders. -Lao Tzu

    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Ankle Biter For This Post:

    Ernie Nemeth (16th May 2022)

  28. Link to Post #15
    Australia Avalon Member Ankle Biter's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th May 2013
    Language
    English
    Age
    46
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    7,897
    Thanked 2,662 times in 368 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    [QUOTE=Merkaba360;1496365]
    Quote Posted by mpennery (here)
    Sometimes, I feel a bit sad that my experience is so small, and am missing out on 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 % lol
    I hear ya! Feel exactly like this all the time!
    To the mind that is still, the whole universe surrenders. -Lao Tzu

    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

  29. The Following User Says Thank You to Ankle Biter For This Post:

    Ernie Nemeth (23rd May 2022)

  30. Link to Post #16
    Australia Avalon Member Ankle Biter's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th May 2013
    Language
    English
    Age
    46
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    7,897
    Thanked 2,662 times in 368 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Live stream Lunar Eclipse

    To the mind that is still, the whole universe surrenders. -Lao Tzu

    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to Ankle Biter For This Post:

    Ernie Nemeth (16th May 2022)

  32. Link to Post #17
    UK Avalon Member Matthew's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th July 2015
    Location
    South East England
    Language
    English
    Age
    51
    Posts
    4,138
    Thanks
    25,644
    Thanked 36,191 times in 4,071 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    The planets in the solar system are a bunch of reckless joyriders. We're orbiting the sun, and that system is orbiting a super massive black hole. 'Orbiting' sounds so civilised. Looks more like haphazard kinetic carnage to me

    I am terrified by the scale and power of the universe!


  33. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Matthew For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (21st May 2022), Ernie Nemeth (23rd May 2022), Mare (17th May 2022)

  34. Link to Post #18
    Canada Avalon Member Ernie Nemeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    25th January 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    66
    Posts
    5,659
    Thanks
    26,233
    Thanked 36,600 times in 5,379 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Thanks Mathew. That is one video that must change a person's overall perspective to the idea of 'solar system'.

    The reason for our old view of the solar system is because of the way science perceives a 'body'. A 'body' is a conglomeration of material that for all intents and purposes can be considered a point, with all its properties concentrated at its center. So for calculations involving large 'bodies' it is not the surfaces but the centers that are considered.

    The center of the solar system is the center of the sun, so a heliocentric map is an overhead view with the sun at the center. It is accurate. But more accurate still is the galactic viewpoint that shows how the planets are actually continually 'falling' toward the sun, and dragged through their relative orbits in a spiral motion.

    It can take a moment to realize that angular momentum cannot fully account for the fact that there is cohesion in the solar system. In fact it is the conservation laws that decree that: an object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force (my wording from memory).

    A larger viewpoint still, an extra-galactic viewpoint, would show that the sun is also travelling in a spiral orbit, as it 'falls' towards the center of the galaxy...along with all the other stars and their planets. And the galaxy as a whole would be seen hurtling toward the 'great attractor', along with hundreds of 'local' galaxies.

    It would take yet another level to see that each galaxy is also 'falling' toward the force that attracts it in a spiral motion...and so on.

    There always seems to be an 'outside force' that accounts for the inaccuracies in orbital trajectory and planetary formation theory cannot account for these in full. Those inaccuracies at a local level are what causes the current planetary theories to miss the mark.
    Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless — like water...Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend. Bruce Lee

    Free will can only be as free as the mind that conceives it.

  35. The Following User Says Thank You to Ernie Nemeth For This Post:

    Ankle Biter (31st May 2022)

  36. Link to Post #19
    Australia Avalon Member Ankle Biter's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th May 2013
    Language
    English
    Age
    46
    Posts
    376
    Thanks
    7,897
    Thanked 2,662 times in 368 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Live stream for Tau Herculids shower about to start in 40mins..

    To the mind that is still, the whole universe surrenders. -Lao Tzu

    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.

  37. The Following User Says Thank You to Ankle Biter For This Post:

    Ernie Nemeth (2nd June 2022)

  38. Link to Post #20
    Canada Avalon Member Johnnycomelately's Avatar
    Join Date
    14th January 2022
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Language
    English
    Age
    65
    Posts
    1,002
    Thanks
    18,597
    Thanked 5,577 times in 981 posts

    Default Re: Astronomy - the science of the very big

    Quote Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)

    It was the size and the distance that enthralled me as a boy. Such massive bodies, floating in nothingness, effected by fundamental laws. What had created them?
    Wal Thornhill, of the electric universe theory organization Thunderbolts Project, describes what he sees as evidence for the theory, in (recent, now is 8.20.22, so first images) pics from the JWST.

    Earnie, I quoted the whole small paragraph to bump clarity, but only mean to address your “floating in nothingness”, hehe. If Wal is right, and he sounds right to me, it is all connected by streams of charged particles (currents include, but are not only, electrons). And of course the accompanying magnetic field structures.

    I don’t fan out on all Thunderbolts ideas, but this is IMO notable.

    Last edited by Johnnycomelately; 21st August 2022 at 18:14.

  39. The Following User Says Thank You to Johnnycomelately For This Post:

    Ernie Nemeth (21st August 2022)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts