420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
A subject is required when posting a new thread
Subject
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Fermi Paradox... why? by Henrietta Levitt - Thu, 22 May 2014 00:54:34 EST ID:ILYTISHs No.53812 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1400734474447.png -(111524B / 108.91KB, 400x325) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 111524
Another thread made me start thinking about this. The Fermi Paradox states (thanks, Wikipedia):

>The Sun is a young star. There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are billions of years older;
>Some of these stars probably have Earth-like planets which, if the Earth is typical, may develop intelligent life;
>Presumably, some of these civilizations will develop interstellar travel, a technology Earth is investigating even now, such as that used in the proposed 100 Year Starship;
>At any practical pace of interstellar travel, the galaxy can be completely colonized in a few tens of millions of years.

If that's the case, why haven't we been colonized already, or at least seen evidence of intelligent life somewhere in our galaxy?

My take: either A) Life takes a long time to develop, and somehow, improbably, we're the first planet to develop an intelligent civilization in our galaxy, or at least one of the first. We don't see anyone else because there isn't anyone else to see... yet, or we're all still too far apart.

Or b) Given the size and composition constraints of a planet able to foster and sustain life (as far as we know, "habitable zone," big enough to have an atmosphere, small enough to still be rocky, etc.) and continue long enough for said life to begin to explore the galaxy, the home planet simply runs out of resources before meaningful headway can be made. I think this is more of a slow-death kind of thing where maybe we get to do some exploration within the solar system and maybe a bit beyond for a while, but overpopulation, war, disease, famine, and whatever else causes us to realign our priorities from space exploration to merely sustaining life on our own planet. A civilization that had the foresight to know something like that was happening could theoretically, if they had the goal of galactic expansion from the start, avoid this situation, but the problem is that NO civilization has that kind of 10,000 year plan from the get-go, and they all sputter out right before they could have pulled it off. There's not a textbook on "how to succeed as a species" that gets handed out to a life form when it develops self-awareness,…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
302 posts and 71 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Robert Dicke - Tue, 07 Nov 2017 14:15:18 EST ID:woSCN4ry No.57080 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57079

>You know, it is likely that this has already happened somewhere and is slowly spreading across the universe.

Agreed, it's definitely possible. We could even be looking at the evidence of such a machine or collection of machines right now, we just don't know it yet because we lack the context and knowledge of what such a machine would do.

>So personally I'm all for the singularity. Earth needs to represent, instead of being swept away by for example some paper-clip producing Lovecraftian machine autist.

I don't understand this mentality. Unless you mean that we have some responsibility to build some sort of self-replicating machine that could... combat or minimize the damage caused by another, more threatening and hostile machine intelligence? Like an anti-Berserker Berserker force. That might make sense to some degree, except for the fact that any machine intelligence that is intelligent enough to fight another technological singularity would necessarily be beyond human comprehension and human motivations... so we might create something with good intentions, and end up creating something very similar to the thing we fear and are trying to fight.

It's definitely a difficult topic.
>>
Bruon Rossi - Fri, 10 Nov 2017 17:59:03 EST ID:unNII3om No.57086 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57080

I mean I'd want to see humanity spread everywhere in the universe. I don't want us to end up as the Neanderthals

But what can we do against superior intelligence?
At the very least dude, you'd like some asshole Earth AI to be in control instead of some alien jerkoff AI no?

And what a legacy it would be. Instead of thin plastic sheets squashed between the geological rock formations, we could birth something that make planets into computers.
>>
Margaret Burbidge - Tue, 14 Nov 2017 22:53:26 EST ID:wJ2P1oyO No.57088 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1510718006363.gif -(1055299B / 1.01MB, 400x224) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>Fermi Paradox exists as people think Earth is a globe.
>Fermi paradox is more evidence Earth is flat, and NASA is lying.

  1. Earth is flat.
  2. There ARE no planets out there - all images are CGI.
  3. All planets are points of light.
  4. Youtube "real stars and planets" to see if you do not own a scope.

>Somebody told you Earth is a globe and told you people worked it out. What people? Who worked it out? Dig deep - realize gravity has never been proven.
>Realize no experiments to prove earth is in motion has passed the test.

Just because someone tells you something - doesn't make it true.
Just because everyone believes it - doesn't make it true.

Ever felt or seen Earth spin at 1000mph?
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Georges-Henri Lemaitre - Fri, 17 Nov 2017 01:11:58 EST ID:R3YApPtx No.57096 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57088
You're an idiot. The Earth is round, and we have plenty of reasons to assume life exists outside our planet. Just stop.
>>
Tycho Brahe - Fri, 17 Nov 2017 19:39:56 EST ID:unNII3om No.57097 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1510965596105.jpg -(15898B / 15.53KB, 240x250) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57088

Please stay in your designated thread.


NASA is lying. by - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 05:08:23 EST ID:rguyQexW No.57030 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1507799303267.jpg -(29527B / 28.83KB, 480x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 29527
>Earth is flat.

This picture proves the globe is a lie.

Prove Globe Earth in this thread.
41 posts and 28 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Margaret Burbidge - Tue, 14 Nov 2017 22:55:22 EST ID:wJ2P1oyO No.57089 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1510718122363.jpg -(119448B / 116.65KB, 1150x929) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>Fermi Paradox exists as people think Earth is a globe.
>Fermi paradox is more evidence Earth is flat, and NASA is lying.

  1. Earth is flat.
  2. There ARE no planets out there - all images are CGI.
  3. All planets are points of light.
  4. Youtube "real stars and planets" to see if you do not own a scope.

>Somebody told you Earth is a globe and told you people worked it out. What people? Who worked it out? Dig deep - realize gravity has never been proven.
>Realize no experiments to prove earth is in motion has passed the test.

Just because someone tells you something - doesn't make it true.
Just because everyone believes it - doesn't make it true.

Ever felt or seen Earth spin at 1000mph?
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Margaret Burbidge - Tue, 14 Nov 2017 22:56:57 EST ID:wJ2P1oyO No.57090 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1510718217363.jpg -(72157B / 70.47KB, 640x640) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>Watch and learn.

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAL3xKhDOYs
>>
Margaret Burbidge - Tue, 14 Nov 2017 22:59:34 EST ID:wJ2P1oyO No.57091 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1510718374363.jpg -(108526B / 105.98KB, 960x798) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>NASA is lying.

The CGI was fine back in the 70s, but now that everyone has a smartphone that can produce better CGI than NASA way back when, things are coming apart fast.

Hollywood makes more realistic looking space films than NASA in 2017.

The globe is a lie. Space travel is a lie.
>>
Johann Bode - Wed, 15 Nov 2017 05:13:24 EST ID:C9HAnUuw No.57092 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1510740804837.jpg -(28905B / 28.23KB, 480x409) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57091
....I-I-I mean
astronaut boots have magnetic locks on the soles to fix them to surfaces. do those soles look inverted to anyone besides the schizo OP?
>no tests to prove earth is spinning
Honestly, this is the best troll thread I've seen in quite awhile
9/10 bro keep it up I want more retarded theories to "redpill" me lol
>>
Mike Brown - Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:32:13 EST ID:+kYrHA6N No.57095 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1510896733576.png -(134595B / 131.44KB, 512x341) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
umm how about the fact people have sailed around the world in a boat. how about the fact you can fly a plane from LA to beijing to moscow to london to new york to LA? how about google earth? how about the fact humans have traversed antarctica and the arctic circle? how about dem satellites? how about eratosthenes accurately estimating the diameter of the earth using simple geometry?


fate of universe by Jocelyn Bell - Sun, 14 Sep 2014 23:31:05 EST ID:SknUZfy5 No.54393 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1410751865116.jpg -(810494B / 791.50KB, 1400x907) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 810494
Is there a theory that says that eventually the universe will expand so large that it will collapse in on itself and create another big bang?

What are your thoughts on the fate of the universe?

"The Last Question" by Isaac Asimov is a short story about the fate of mankind and the universe. Idk if everyone on this has read it or not, but I love it. Here's the link: http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html
1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Thomas Gold - Mon, 15 Sep 2014 10:43:08 EST ID:psUbi2cW No.54395 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The Big Crunch doesn't necessarily mean another Big Bang though.
Look for the the Big Bounce, or the Cyclic model, OP.
Easy wiki-links because I'm lazy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bounce
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model
>>
Johan Galle - Thu, 09 Nov 2017 12:22:11 EST ID:GLF+hs85 No.57083 Ignore Report Quick Reply
i'm so fucking horny rn

jane, i want to get into your zone and yum you up for days
>>
Edmond Halley - Thu, 09 Nov 2017 19:01:53 EST ID:/PjoztBU No.57084 Ignore Report Quick Reply
the oscillating universe theory, where the universe infinitely cycles between big bangs and crunches, makes the most sense to me. ill just believe that until something else is proven. i dont buy the idea of a big freeze
>>
Galileo Galilei - Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:29:32 EST ID:yzfSDg8q No.57093 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57084
Yeah. Except time itself originated with the big bang, and it ends with the big freeze. How you gonna escape that?
>>
Mike Brown - Fri, 17 Nov 2017 00:24:32 EST ID:+kYrHA6N No.57094 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57093

there is no big freeze. there is an infinite cycle of big bangs and big crunches. time is infinite.


Ayy-lmao! A steroid! by Christiaan Huygens - Fri, 27 Oct 2017 23:01:24 EST ID:RH1VsRBv No.57067 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1509159684326.jpg -(13365B / 13.05KB, 400x227) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 13365
https://www.cnet.com/news/interstellar-asteroid-comet-a-2017-u1-pan-starrs-nasa-earth/

>All the asteroids and comets astronomers have ever spotted in our celestial neighborhood appear to come from somewhere else in the solar system and orbit the sun, just like Earth.

That is, until the University of Hawaii's Pan-STARRS 1 telescope last week discovered what appears to be the first ever seen "interstellar object" -- an asteroid (or maybe a comet) that escaped from the gravitational grasp of another star and fell through the roof of our solar system.

That makes the object currently designated A/2017 U1 an alien of sorts around our corner of the cosmos.

The foreign space-something is less than a quarter-mile (400 meters) across, but is moving super fast at 15.8 miles (25.5 kilometers) per second. That's over three times faster than Asteroid 2012 TC4, the rock that gave Earth a close shave earlier this month.

"This is the most extreme orbit I have ever seen," said Davide Farnocchia, at NASA's Center for Near-Earth Object Studies (CNEOS). "It is going extremely fast and on such a trajectory that we can say with confidence that this object is on its way out of the solar system and not coming back."
>>
Maximilian Wolf - Sun, 29 Oct 2017 03:25:09 EST ID:iHcy51j9 No.57068 Ignore Report Quick Reply
A little eerie.
>>
Nicolaus Copernicus - Fri, 10 Nov 2017 02:51:08 EST ID:XdfxkLaX No.57085 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Imagine the shit that goes faster than that tho.


You don't understand galactic scales; Relativity is a bitch thread by Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Thu, 04 May 2017 18:10:19 EST ID:unNII3om No.56931 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1493935819961.png -(221879B / 216.68KB, 521x311) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 221879
So imagine you have two cannons firing their cannon balls away from each other, and their muzzle velocity is the speed of light.

You'd think the relative speed of one cannon ball to the other would be 2x the speed of light, right?

Nope. The equation for relative speed between two objects looks like this:

>v1+2=v1+v2/(1+v1v2/c^2)

Where v1 and v2 are the speeds of the two cannon balls and c is the speed of light.

So as the velocity of the cannon balls approaches the speed of light, their own speed doesn't matter and the limit of light speed is dominant. Relative speed of 2x speed of light is thus impossible.

Or in other words: wat.


You guys got some other relativistic mind-blowers?
19 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Harlow Shapley - Wed, 02 Aug 2017 20:26:06 EST ID:d6k0JkjC No.56993 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56972
TLDR: Because light is a self-propagating electro-magnetic wave per Maxel's Equations.

http://www.wikihow.com/Derive-the-Speed-of-Light-from-Maxwell%27s-Equations
>>
William Hartmann - Mon, 11 Sep 2017 13:15:57 EST ID:kRyBQtrI No.57015 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1505150157380.jpg -(29845B / 29.15KB, 500x376) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56993
>WikiHow
But you're helpful otherwise.
>>
Fred Hoyle - Sun, 15 Oct 2017 20:38:36 EST ID:lQ9q0NgK No.57061 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56942
>causal violations are not a problem in relativity. They are in fact expected and on multiple levels
I would disagree with this sentiment. Although violations of causality certainly may be possible, I would argue that the general (excuse the pun) theories of S.R. and G.R. rely heavily on the notion that causality is inviolable. In example of separate observers witnessing events, you are confusing causality with simultaneity. This is only possible for events that are causally separated (spacelike). If events can be perceived as simultaneous in some reference frame S, then they must be causally separated if there is nonzero distance between them (in S). Special relativity and causality allows you to boost to some frame S' with nonzero velocity relative to S such that the events occur out of order, however no matter how fast you go in S', the events will never occur in each other's light cone without exceeding the speed of light, and therefore cannot be causally related. tl;dr: violating simultaneity is not violating causality.

>There's a limit to the rate of causality, that makes the speed of light, but causality itself is not necessarily inviolable
Central to relativity is the notion that the speed of light is the same in any reference frame and cannot be exceeded. As you alluded to here, causality is defined by the speed of light (if event b occurs before light from event a could have reached it, then a cannot have caused b because the information that a has occurred will reach b after b happens). Therefore in order to violate causality, you must exceed the speed of light, which is forbidden in relativity.
With that said, that paper is certainly an interesting read, but it is investigating possible mechanisms of causal violation that would modify or extend the existing theories of relativity. It is well known that quantum mechanics and general relativity don't get along, and thus a theory of "quantum gravity" will have to violate some well established principals, but this is just the nature of science. I'm trying not to argue that causal violations are impossible, just that the notion that causal violations are expected by conventional relativity is …
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>
Jocelyn Bell - Thu, 02 Nov 2017 07:39:24 EST ID:eygzYfFg No.57072 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56933
Wromholes don't mess with time because you bend space. Time still flows through the wormhole.
>>
George Hale - Sat, 04 Nov 2017 17:29:49 EST ID:unNII3om No.57075 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57072

Um no? It's known as the one most likely way of traveling through time dude. Remember time and space are two sides of the some coin. You bend one you bend the other.


Hey Nerds by Antony Hewish - Sun, 23 Jul 2017 18:26:46 EST ID:Fbpr3rrr No.56982 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1500848806452.png -(45948B / 44.87KB, 600x224) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 45948
I was wondering why you guys post here? Aren't these boards ungodly slow? Wouldn't it be easier for you to just go to an actual forum for space discussion? Why wait so long for a reply from some drug addict about stars or whatever when you can probably get better information more quickly from somewhere else?

Not judging, just genuinely curious
11 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
hokusai - Sat, 19 Aug 2017 11:26:42 EST ID:LIO8YU+/ No.57003 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503156402506.jpg -(308260B / 301.04KB, 1024x682) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
havent read the thread but i dont thing faster than light travel is possible the way it will be done is not by moving objects but consciousness around space outside time thats why i post here and not in a science forum
>>
Margaret Burbidge - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 05:14:34 EST ID:PovkMdyu No.57005 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Is there really any faster forum than a chance? I mean besides ones filled with terms like "social media"
>>
Kip Thorne - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:09:23 EST ID:KX/DxO6v No.57048 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56999

speed exists in relation to predetermined points on a coordinate system
>>
James Elliott - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:50:14 EST ID:unNII3om No.57050 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1507841414874.png -(1099690B / 1.05MB, 1013x673) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57048

Space has no inherent coordinate system dude. This is like one of THE realizations of relativism.
>>
Kip Thorne - Thu, 12 Oct 2017 19:57:11 EST ID:KX/DxO6v No.57052 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57050

yep, very good. now let's break down relativism: that which is relative [to a given frame of reference]; i.e. you make up your own system as an observer, which will be different from every other observer's system. an object in motion in relation to another object in motion can only have a determinate speed (if we are serious about this conversation we should start using the term velocity, actually) within a predetermined system.


SpaceEngine/Universe Sandbox Thread! by Cosmobud - Mon, 18 Sep 2017 22:41:08 EST ID:1NT/Ijtb No.57022 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1505788868896.jpg -(294609B / 287.70KB, 1600x900) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 294609
Why isn't there one? Post your awesome finds, explosions, super novae, whatever! OP image will be from Universe Sandbox, I'll post another from Space Engine.
>>
Cosmobud - Mon, 18 Sep 2017 22:52:10 EST ID:1NT/Ijtb No.57023 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1505789530037.jpg -(305454B / 298.29KB, 1600x900) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57022
>>
Walter Adams - Fri, 22 Sep 2017 19:44:24 EST ID:3hL9HQte No.57026 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1506123864862.png -(31006B / 30.28KB, 200x340) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57022
>>57023
>>57024
tfw no space engine VR support yet
>>
Harlow Shapley - Sat, 23 Sep 2017 02:26:00 EST ID:ur3W8pPa No.57027 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1506147960953.jpg -(200566B / 195.87KB, 1920x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Not sure where this was.


Astronomy Club by Ejnar Hertzprung - Wed, 13 Sep 2017 12:02:26 EST ID:dWt9NTso No.57017 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1505318546672.gif -(181264B / 177.02KB, 197x270) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 181264
I'm trying to make an astronomy club but I don't know what it would be about or what to do. Everyone else who likes astronomy are just shy like me and we all refuse to talk. Logically I know that the club show be at night because astronomy but what do you think I should do at such a club. Thank you
>>
Dr. Mario !gWLn19/oKs - Thu, 14 Sep 2017 21:49:37 EST ID:9UftK+wR No.57018 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57017
definitely smoke weed together. lots of weed. thats a given
>>
Jocelyn Bell - Sat, 16 Sep 2017 12:26:08 EST ID:2H001r1f No.57020 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57018
Alrighty !
>>
Karl Swarzchild - Thu, 21 Sep 2017 10:46:21 EST ID:sywMqW4i No.57025 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57017
>the club should be at night
>what do you think I should do at such a club

well gee, ill tell you what i think
>>
Galileo Galilei - Sat, 23 Sep 2017 21:07:05 EST ID:7bk1TGPO No.57028 Ignore Report Quick Reply
maybe you could look at stars and talk about them


Cassini by Edward Barnard - Wed, 26 Apr 2017 09:23:19 EST ID:rmFM08wB No.56925 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1493212999892.jpg -(688640B / 672.50KB, 1920x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 688640
No Cassini thread? Think we'll find anything we weren't expecting in dem rings?
5 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Alan Guth - Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:48:31 EST ID:unNII3om No.56978 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56977

Aw man, what a downer.
>>
George Herbig - Fri, 14 Jul 2017 03:51:43 EST ID:nRjWggLk No.56979 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1500018703267.jpg -(12257B / 11.97KB, 300x300) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56977
>>
Paul Goldsmith - Wed, 19 Jul 2017 14:04:24 EST ID:yxm0fECC No.56981 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56977
shouldn't a bunch of scientists be able to at least count properly?
>>
John Wheeler - Thu, 14 Sep 2017 23:31:42 EST ID:CZNpyEE2 No.57019 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1505446302260.jpg -(253635B / 247.69KB, 2048x1306) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Goodnight sweet prince
>>
Charles Messier - Mon, 18 Sep 2017 15:15:40 EST ID:HLehYNUW No.57021 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56977
Fraisier Cain is that you?


Other worlds by William Herschel - Tue, 08 Nov 2016 04:19:55 EST ID:FFHdMrF/ No.56642 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1478596795359.jpg -(177015B / 172.87KB, 1024x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 177015
Do you think we will be capable to leave our solar system one day? Or that getting even to the closest star is impossible.
9 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Subramanyan Chandrasekhar - Sat, 10 Jun 2017 16:28:00 EST ID:unNII3om No.56952 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56950

Just an interesting consequence of relativity: As you approach the speed of light, time slows down. While the trip might take decades or centuries from our perspective, it can take significantly less from the perspective of the travelers. With an efficient enough vessel, traveling to Alpha Centauri can theoretically be done without generation-ships.
>>
William Lassell - Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:10:24 EST ID:iClpwVzv No.56958 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56952
Even without time dilation, Alpha Centauri isn't that far.
If we could accelerate at 1g halfway, then decelerate at 1g the other half, it would only take 6 years without time dilation (3.5 years with dilation).
That kind of acceleration is a tall order though.
At only one tenth of a g, it's still only about 13.6 years to an outside observer.
Google "relativistic star ship calculator". I like the one from convertalot.com
>>
Stephen Hawking - Fri, 25 Aug 2017 23:54:14 EST ID:p1UqQx6T No.57012 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56644
The budget is what makes it impossible. As such, humans don't deserve to leave. Money and the idea of it holds us back more than people will ever realize. If man would just stop being selfish and/or trying to control others, we would be so far ahead. Those that want to waste away would be allowed to and those that want to do something great would be able to, because without money, the only thing holding you back would be yourself. In this life, it's both other people and money.
>>
Clyde Tombaugh - Fri, 01 Sep 2017 17:36:46 EST ID:unNII3om No.57014 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57012

Only that doing anything of the high-tech sort demands a huge cooperation between people. The guys who build the constituent parts of the rockets, how do they eat without bartering something for their work? How do the scientists eat without bartering something for their work?
>>
Verty - Wed, 13 Sep 2017 01:08:39 EST ID:VRvuffr/ No.57016 Ignore Report Quick Reply
We won't be able to go anywhere important until we figure out how to fold space-time, which some aliens already have as I saw.


Fucking ECLIPSE thread! by Irwin Shapiro - Sun, 20 Aug 2017 15:50:15 EST ID:KgS57XEk No.57006 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1503258615031.jpg -(263261B / 257.09KB, 1932x1932) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 263261
ECLIPSE THREAD MOFOS!

Come on! Get excited for this!

I got a cheap solar filter sheet and put it in front of my 300mm lens. Which is plugged into a 2x teleconverter. 600mm to grab the eclipse.

Took some test shots today and got to see some sunspots! Which are freaking cool (well, RELATIVELY cool...LOL!)

Post eclipse shit here people!
1 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Bruon Rossi - Mon, 21 Aug 2017 20:45:32 EST ID:bxNkmvEL No.57008 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1503362732359.jpg -(76924B / 75.12KB, 768x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57007

Nope. Just one big flat Earth.
>>
James Christy - Tue, 22 Aug 2017 02:54:41 EST ID:nHAT7Ro+ No.57009 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Can you share your footage pretty please with dank moon rocks on top?
>>
Russel Hulse - Tue, 22 Aug 2017 19:47:49 EST ID:unNII3om No.57010 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Didn't see shit.

Born too north and east to experience it, and it's like ages until the next proper eclipse over my country.

Hope you niggers enjoyed it, and avoided being like wow eclipse well whatever dude I wonder what's on youtube?
>>
Bruon Rossi - Thu, 24 Aug 2017 15:04:53 EST ID:cP2dPTDR No.57011 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Just got back from watching it in Casper, WY. It was amazing and felt so unearthly. It's really weird to look up in the sky and see something so different. You can't help but laugh and be in awe at the big ring of ghostly white light in the sky.

The difference between 99% and totality is unreal. Until that last bit of sun is covered, it's neat, but it doesn't seem like that big of a deal. Then totality clicks in and the whole character of everything changes. If you missed seeing this one, def try to get to the one that runs from Texas to Maine in 2024.

Also, for the next one, make sure to check out the shadows on the ground as you approach totality. The dappled light/shadow under a tree acts as hundreds of pinhole projectors. You'll see hundreds of projections of the moon passing in front of the sun. The patches of light will all turn fishscale-shaped. It's pretty great.
>>
Alan Guth - Tue, 29 Aug 2017 20:20:56 EST ID:fsTyqOA+ No.57013 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Was down in Greenville SC visiting my parents for it. Truly surreal, is the only way I can describe it. The most radical part was how the sun was still too powerfully bright to look at until absolute totality.

Down in Greenville totality lasted for what felt like a minute exactly. It is the most bizarre thing, it was getting visibly dimmer on the ground, and approaching totality it was near twilight. Up until exact totality though, you cant look at the sun. It was just that bright still. Then, totality, saw some Baileys Beads, even saw some sun snakes (atmospheric turbulence you can see on sidewalks as totality approaches).

Once totality was over, the sun came to the other side of the moon, and BAM, bright as fuck again.

It gave me a respect for how fucking powerfully bright that big plasma ball really is.

Surreal.


Perseid meteor shower! by Johann Encke - Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:29:34 EST ID:evrPe8Vs No.51233 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1375284574338.jpg -(3913B / 3.82KB, 262x192) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 3913
AWWWW YEAAAH.
Anyone else gonna observe this beautiful event?


Incase you haven't heard from AUG 12th to the 13th between 10:30PM and 4:30 AM, The sky's gonna light up with massive fireballs brighter than Jupiter.
37 posts and 5 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>>
Wilhelm Beer - Sat, 27 Aug 2016 04:13:56 EST ID:Y/YEbfJF No.56331 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I actually got to see it on the night of the 12th. I was on the east coast in outer banks on vacation. Was smoking js and sipping coladas with a pretty girl i just met. Walkin back to my house we saw one right above our house direction wise. Which was freaking awesome cause it looked like a ufo or something. And you can see lots of stars out there on the coast. We saw about 5 in an hour but we werent even looking. They were super low too
>>
Edwin Hubble - Sat, 01 Oct 2016 12:47:50 EST ID:r8ZHfF3E No.56504 Ignore Report Quick Reply
It was considerably longer last year and it was visible in the city.
We must have been in the outskirts of the geminid
>>
Gerard Kuiper - Wed, 09 Aug 2017 18:42:14 EST ID:/VSfubHK No.56997 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1502318534003.jpg -(128400B / 125.39KB, 774x1000) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Anyone going to observe this year's Perseid meteor shower?
>>
Wilhelm Beer - Tue, 15 Aug 2017 00:15:44 EST ID:uuw9w7i5 No.57000 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I did not know this was annual

you failed me Sagan
>>
William Lassell - Sat, 19 Aug 2017 22:02:46 EST ID:dG4sHLwu No.57004 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I caught sight of seven or so. Too bad it was too cloudy most of the time. Really want to go out of the city for next year.


Pages Next>>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.