Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
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
[*]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


Kirtaner & Spardot's 420chan Wedding

To all guests, live viewers, and our Internet family, THANK YOU.
VODs will be edited soon, we are all so tired.
Wedding Gifts
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
30 posts and 3 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Arno Penzias - Fri, 10 Aug 2018 00:02:39 EST ID:78FE/y/Y No.57410 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well the only reason I thought this was the right place was because of the fate of the Universe question. I know my ideas are all over the place, but yeah I guess this is a scientific board and not an occult or paranormal corner of the internet. My approach is more philosophical rather than quantifiable science. But one thing we do have in common is that we are pondering the many mysteries of the universe.
Hannes Alven - Fri, 10 Aug 2018 14:36:54 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57420 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>> But one thing we do have in common
I agree with your occult theories! I was the one posting about occult science earlier. I just also want to follow the board's rules, and have been yelled at here for talking about the paranormal so much I have internalized it. Seriously, repost on /pss/ and we can chat about it
Vesto Slipher - Tue, 14 Aug 2018 21:46:07 EST ID:b0wvOCbD No.57429 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Of course various local events would attribute to that
You should consider that there is no reason to assume there is some other form of influence other than cause and effect creating these synchronized events. You say there is universal synchronicity but why can't it just be that we lack the ability to measure and connect the cause and effect leading to these occurrences and thus it looks like an unrelated coincidence/synchronicity when in reality it is just a logical playing out of a series of connected events?

I think that is an important distinction because if you write off a scenario as "coincidence" or "universal synchronicity" then you limit your ability to understand why and how things happen which limits your control of your life. Everything that occurs on Earth can be explained through observation and logic because that's how the physical world works. Even if something has its origins in spiritual/immaterial reality, it has to be expressed in our reality through observable and measurable processes.
Robert Wilson - Wed, 15 Aug 2018 18:37:04 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57430 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I think you're misunderstanding what is generally implied by synchronicity. I'm not that poster so I don't know exactly what they meant, but saying something is synchronic doesn't deny that it is happening through/due to a confluence of logical factors -- in fact, it is highlighting it. It is the convergence of 'meaninglessness' in the stochastic unfolding of events (through empirically knowable processes) with the sudden alignment of patterns of meaning that, of course, only humans (or other sentient, meaning-making life) could see that we call a synchronicity. It is the irony, in a sense, between the meaninglessness of the cosmos and the hyper-meaningfulness of the human soul.

Now if you think your corn flakes contain messages from Arcturus in some *literal* sense, you've obviously gone completely insane. But in the sense that both the shape of Arcturus and the arrangement of your cornflakes both emerge from identical shape our universe's laws like a holographic fractal and are thus in some sense 'the same' then there is undeniably 'synchronicity' between your cereal and a distant star.

All apparent patterns are apophenia, even those that are fundamental to science. If you can grasp why this is the case, you can actually understand the philosophical and metaphysical underpinnings of science at large, rather than having to trust it like a dogma.
Christiaan Huygens - Thu, 16 Aug 2018 10:49:56 EST ID:hGyQlc1t No.57431 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Hai, sorry for the late response.
> where does the energy/matter come from? If this quark being ripped apart creates its own universe, with its own particles of all types including quarks, where did these quarks etc. come from? Are they actually physically smaller?

The newly created quarks would come from whatever amount of dark energy it takes to create them.
Which means essentially from my understanding of physics "from nothing" or slightly better "we don't know yet, but we know it's there"

Hence that is what the popular explanation of where dark energy comes from is. The amount of dark energy in the universe grows, based on observation, but not from any apparent source.
That is just my feeble attempt at reconciling the existence of dark energy somehow.
By that extent this "protons will spawn their own universe" hypothesis is just a way to say for me: "Perhaps dark energy doesn't mean everything has to go to shit."

That FTL means time travel meme by Pierre-Simon Laplace - Sat, 16 Dec 2017 22:22:45 EST ID:hGyQlc1t No.57130 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1513480965587.gif -(117244B / 114.50KB, 323x402) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 117244
I have a question regarding this:
If you look at this gif it shows you "backwards" travel:
The first "jump" after the first acceleration points into the direction that corresponds to the lower left quadrant of the previous reference frame leading to backwards time travel.
However: Drawing it into the upper right quadrant should be equally legal which would imply forward time travel. This would imply that direction you are moving in space would dictate the direction of the "time travel" which seems entirely non-sensical to me.
I guess this is also the point but I still get the feeling I'm missing something here.
11 posts and 1 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Bernard-Ferdinand Lyot - Tue, 26 Jun 2018 17:45:40 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57317 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I didn't intend my post as a counter or refutation to yours, but as an expansion that elaborated a little on the relationship between the mathematics and our common-sensical experience of events. I was merely highlighting that the distinction between our technical and colloquial understandings of these terms could potentially lead someone not as familiar with the subject off track. That's why we seemed to be saying the same thing.
Thomas Gold - Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:14:01 EST ID:0uLZJwlQ No.57318 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530123241612.jpg -(84329B / 82.35KB, 500x701) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
It is called tessellations moving in 5D nothing special so far

>inb4 i know hyperphysics debate me
Solipsil - Tue, 17 Jul 2018 19:48:03 EST ID:5ItxfpYI No.57352 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Maybe it doesn't make sense

The spice must flow
Urbain Le Verrier - Sat, 11 Aug 2018 12:10:02 EST ID:y4EkzkGF No.57422 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What can we do to cease to exist here and then exist somewhere else faster than the distance of light without using wormholes?

Noob question I'm sorry.
Edwin Hubble - Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:30:39 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57428 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1534192239206.gif -(8760B / 8.55KB, 480x403) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Quantum teleportation, but it really depends on your definition of 'we.' So far we can only do this with single particles.

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
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.
38 posts and 5 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
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.
William Huggins - Fri, 10 Aug 2018 21:16:36 EST ID:ncMk3uyQ No.57421 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1533950196710.jpg -(218967B / 213.83KB, 964x641) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Anyone going to observe this year's Perseid meteor shower?

Hoping for a cloudless sky.

It would really suck for an elephant to go into space by Fred Hoyle - Mon, 16 Jul 2018 15:56:10 EST ID:GswGlXbf No.57347 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1531770970343.jpg -(83816B / 81.85KB, 976x549) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 83816
It would really suck for an elephant to go into space
Or rather I mean it would really suck for an elephant to return from space. All of their bones would have degenerated and become weak from the lack of gravity. Then when they got back to earth and tried to step out of the space ship they just crumple into a splashing pile of gore and viscera. Also, did you know, that elephants die from cancer very rarely? Do you think the space radiation would have an effect on that? Or would they remain genetically stable?

Johann Encke - Tue, 17 Jul 2018 11:01:42 EST ID:xVZYF9QS No.57351 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I wonder how many war elephants would it take to beat one black hole
Antony Hewish - Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:01:30 EST ID:ZrMeE5ko No.57354 Ignore Report Quick Reply
If this is another "How I Met Your Mother" story I'm outta here.
William Herschel - Thu, 26 Jul 2018 02:04:47 EST ID:fjAVn7KX No.57357 Ignore Report Quick Reply
its actually a rather intriguing question you are indirectly asking: does the severity of impact of bone density degeneration in space have a greater or more rapid effect on animals with larger and denser bones, i.e. elephants?

i am not sure i know the answer, but my gut feeling is that since the cells in an elephant's body experience such a more significant stimuli than those in ours via gravity, that the lack of it would maybe affect their system even more than a human's.
George Herbig - Mon, 30 Jul 2018 18:02:30 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57359 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I think this is sound reasoning. The larger an animal is, the more its whole body plan is determined by the force of gravity, the more out of whack its whole body system will be without it. I suspect mice could live for quite a long time in space without too many negative effects, but an elephant or whale might die within a few hours in microgravity due to the extreme changes in blood pressure.

Lakes of liquid water found on Mars by Caroline Herschel - Thu, 26 Jul 2018 15:44:03 EST ID:CZNpyEE2 No.57358 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1532634243590.jpg -(3262171B / 3.11MB, 5333x3333) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 3262171
Ground-penetrating radar images of the southern polar cap of Mars taken by ESA's Mars Express suggest the presence of liquid water 1.5 km beneath the surface. As pure liquid water probably cannot exist at such a shallow depth and low temperature, the research team posits that the water is a brine with salts and perchlorates that dramatically lower its freezing point. The largest discovered aquifer is 20 km wide, but its thickness cannot be accurately estimated. The water reservoirs would take the form of salty brine pools beneath the mile of layered ice and dust, or the water might be a component of thicker brine-dirt sludge, mixed with Martian regolith.


Astronomical data by James Randi - Fri, 29 Jun 2018 13:36:57 EST ID:BPHCgbLm No.57327 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1530293817601.jpg -(138469B / 135.22KB, 1200x1200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 138469
I had an idea to build a digital astronomical clock for fun in unity as a learning exercise. It would include solar system clock showing the "time" and such on various planets and a 3rd model of the solar system.
I'd like to try aim for a bit of realism and have the models of planets be in accurate locations to real life.
What would be the best source for finding out planet locations so that they don't all start in the 12 oclock position when I start my program?
Like if I added Mars, how do I find how far into its solar year (month?) It currently is on Mars?

I'm new to coding in general, I already have the data for earth but that's done simply by telling the program to check the system clock and moves the model of earth to right orientation.
4 posts omitted. Click Reply to view.
Georges-Henri Lemaitre - Wed, 04 Jul 2018 11:18:07 EST ID:IRQpyxVi No.57336 Ignore Report Quick Reply
fuck, i cut out parts of the post i didnt mean to and left a part i didn't want left in because i was gonna make a suggestion for doing something and realized id rather leave it out since it didnt seem to go with what you had in mind.

what i was trying to let you know is, though, that finding out what time it is on other planets is that you're going to have to look up how the time of day was initially decided on being determined for each respective time-zone on Earth. Along with that, since the boundaries for time-zones are mostly arbitrary, but aren't entirely, you're going to have to look up the criteria that was used for ultimately deciding where a boundary would be placed by those that established GMT. Then you're going to have to do a little of analysis and decide how to best place those boundaries on each individual planet with respect to its size, its distance from the sun, the shape of its orbit and how variable its distance from the sun potentially is during a given time of year in its orbit, the rate it makes a full revolution in its planetary spin, etc.

It's gong to require some serious effort even without including the programming. Hope things turn out well for you, just don't mistake that it'll be a lot of time and work.
James Randi - Thu, 05 Jul 2018 17:55:01 EST ID:CxvjOUYt No.57338 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well I geuss I'd have to give each planet its own calender's then.
fun project.
James Randi - Fri, 06 Jul 2018 20:46:11 EST ID:CxvjOUYt No.57340 Ignore Report Quick Reply
any links to some sort of table would be helpful too
Urbain Le Verrier - Sat, 21 Jul 2018 13:39:49 EST ID:hGyQlc1t No.57355 Ignore Report Quick Reply
they mention:
digging a little there is also this:
which leads to this
Urbain Le Verrier - Sat, 21 Jul 2018 13:51:43 EST ID:hGyQlc1t No.57356 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Digging a little lets me realize that using that python api would be massive overkill
The table you want is here:
or to precise in this pdf document:

How does a closed by jolinar - Mon, 16 Jul 2018 20:31:55 EST ID:4+cG6NBX No.57348 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1531787515505.jpg -(85295B / 83.30KB, 1125x1111) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 85295
Timeline curve work? Could you be trapped in it forever ?
I have a writing prompt
Stephen Hawking - Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:04:28 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57349 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531800268505.png -(130973B / 127.90KB, 431x393) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Closed timelike curves are totally theoretical objects -- we have no real information about how they would work, or if they are even possible. Essentially, what is 'curved' in a CTC is the 'geodesic' of spacetime. What this means that, for example, if you had a geodesic curvature in space at a 45 degree angle and you fired a laser beam into that space, as it entered it the beam within it would appear to you (if you could see it reflected) as if it had bent at that same angle even though it encountered no object. In a 'closed' timelike curve, remembering that space and time are a continuum, if the curvature is so extreme that it forms a torus, i.e. loops back on itself, and one traversed the distortion in the (normally flat i.e. euclidean) curved spacetime, one could end up at the end of passing through the distortion at the same point in space, but an earlier point in time.

If you were stuck on it would depend on how you got into such an unusual object in the first place. If the geodesic torus could only be made so small, so that in order to traverse it one had to travel at relativistic speeds, the degree of time distortion could be amplified. Also, it's possible that actual matter (rather than energy) trapped within a CTC could become inertially unbound, so there might be no way to stop a spacecraft (for example) that was travelling through one, trapping its crew on an eternal voyage into the past (or future, depending on the 'direction' the geodesic is distorted in the fourth dimension.)

Anyway, a lot of people will not see any time travel story as 'hard sci-fi' so you probably have a lot of leeway. Hawking famously believed that a CTC would destroy itself in a cosmological version of the grandfather paradox, as heat from the torus' relative future would propagate backwards in time, eventually creating a thermal singularity that would destroy it.

moon by Jocelyn Bell - Thu, 31 May 2018 10:35:24 EST ID:HhkM3rED No.57285 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1527777324976.jpg -(2143958B / 2.04MB, 2580x2452) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 2143958
Does the moon really have influence on behavior? Or is it a well loved myth?
9 posts and 3 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
Bernhard Schmidt - Sun, 08 Jul 2018 22:12:19 EST ID:a/BMXTZM No.57343 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I am interested to hear more about your insight on astrology. Please post more, correct board or not.
Charles Messier - Mon, 09 Jul 2018 00:55:11 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57344 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531112111332.jpg -(129829B / 126.79KB, 604x505) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Thanks for your interest. I'll be brief so the extreme empiricists and skeptics don't get too mad.
While, like I alluded to, there are many different kinds of astrology, all with pros and cons, I'm going to talk about my general philosophical theory of interpreting any kind of astrology and why it can make sense, or is at least useful, without having to believe a whole bunch of 'woo-woo' stuff.

Astrology is a theory of psychology and sociology, boiled down to an essential core. The ancients observed that there were patterns in the way people behaved, with the same unique and coherent personality types seeming to recur over and over, and each with unique properties of interaction. In reality, they were bumping up against the personality types, something we might today characterize through models like the Myers-Briggs typology.

In whatever region where advanced astrology developed (it appeared independently multiple times throughout the ancient and medieval periods) they matched these types to legendary figures in their myths, which were themselves, unknowingly, based on the archetypes of the collective unconscious, which is itself not necessarily a mystical thing but merely the suggestion that all humans share a fundamental underlying symbolic landscape. In this way, whether knowingly or not, they identified that the mythologues embodied in the archetypes manifest as psychological tendencies in individuals, and dynamical interactions within society.

Taking this as their hypothesis, all the rest of the history of astrology as a natural philosophy were about determining what the exact 'influence' of each planet or sign was. Unwittingly, they were hunting down individual psychological phenomena, in some cases in ways that survived into the actual discipline of psychology (for example, we call people 'lunatics' because such people were formerly believed to be crazy in relation to an imbalance in the position of the moon in their chart.)

Now, as modern people, we do not seriously need to believe that there is actually some kind of energy field or force emanating from the moon that, if it hit one at the right angle, might make one more susceptible to in…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Chushiro Hayashi - Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:12:22 EST ID:lfz4p1Et No.57345 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Good post! I'd give you some internet points, if that were an option.
Gerard Kuiper - Sun, 15 Jul 2018 22:43:45 EST ID:a/BMXTZM No.57346 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Tell me more tell me more. Or feel free to post on /spooky/ and link
Stephen Hawking - Tue, 17 Jul 2018 00:22:10 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57350 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531801330505.jpg -(174176B / 170.09KB, 754x1070) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
I think I'll play it safe and leave it at that for here. Took the meta topic (of skeptical illuminism) to /spooky/ like you suggested, to expand it a bit beyond simply astrology. See ya there anyone who is still interested!

Building Blocks of Life Found on Mars by Otto Struve - Thu, 07 Jun 2018 19:12:35 EST ID:eygzYfFg No.57290 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1528413155979.jpg -(198462B / 193.81KB, 945x945) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 198462

>Two landmark discoveries reveal organic carbon on the red planet, shaping the future hunt for life on Mars.

I'm scared guys. This could mean life is common in the universe, which means the Great Filter is ahead of us instead of behind us.


Then again, maybe this can show us the Great Filter is already behind us but when it comes to cosmic horror, I'm a half-empty kinda guy.
19 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
John Wheeler - Thu, 28 Jun 2018 12:45:38 EST ID:fjAVn7KX No.57321 Ignore Report Quick Reply
whats that experiment where niggas made amino acids in a bottle or some shit
William Lassell - Thu, 28 Jun 2018 19:19:05 EST ID:4LbbDsR/ No.57322 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530227945717.jpg -(260780B / 254.67KB, 512x512) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

The universe.
James Christy - Fri, 29 Jun 2018 20:15:43 EST ID:unNII3om No.57328 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>The number of extant species is a pretty much irrelevant fact to the rate of the evolution of intelligence
>Intelligence develops logarithmically, but that doesn't mean anything about it's process is 'accidental'; its driven by the necessity of the evolutionary arms race.

It is very relevant. Looking at the history of evolution, intelligence seems to not be driven by competition between species but rather competition within species.

Today we have a bunch of intelligent species, within birds, cetaceans and primates. And only primates have the manipulatory limbs to actually make something of that intelligence. That is still one in how many groups of animals?

Truth is that maintaining intelligence is expensive, using energy and resources that may well be better used elsewhere. All truly smart animals today are few in numbers. Even humans were very few at some point. There's a threshold along the line where intelligence actually becomes more usefull than its worth in the natural world, and it appears most species selected toward intelligence struggle to actually reach it.

>That's precisely the point of the Fermi paradox. I feel like you guys aren't even grasping the fundamental issue and are getting derailed by trivial aspects.

The point with the 'accident' thing is to show how much stochasticity rules our world. A species might be selected for intelligence for some time, but then be selected for something else due to changing biological competition or physical factors. Or the line may be erased completely during a mass extinction or climate change. Evolution favors the ones that are adapted to the 'present', not what might be useful down the line.
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Fred Hoyle - Sat, 30 Jun 2018 17:08:28 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57329 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>> There's a threshold along the line where intelligence actually becomes more usefull than its worth in the natural world, and it appears most species selected toward intelligence struggle to actually reach it.
>>Evolution favors the ones that are adapted to the 'present', not what might be useful down the line.
These ideas are mutually exclusive. If evolution can only select for what is beneficial now, not in the future, then the lower stages of intelligence must also have some utility or they indeed would not be selected for to even be able to reach the higher stages. You contradict yourself.

Moreover, all this, as well as your comments about stochastic processes, are all already conceived within the figures of the Drake equation. So pointing things we all already know out about how life came into being does nothing to address the actual question/problem.

>>Earth is predicted to be within the first 7% of all possible lifebearing worlds that will ever be.
I've seen that result, and I think it's totally spurious from the data of the study it came out of. It assumes a lot of things about the requirements for life (do we really need trace amounts of chromium for life to exist at all? Or was it just the case that there happened to be chromium on earth and life integrated it? Think critically about that...) I think a more reasonable estimate for the earliest entrance of life is about ~7 billion years post big-bang, when there was enough carbon (which may indeed be an essential element) but negligible amounts of all heavier elements. That's quibbling though; even if we are in the first 7%, where are the other 6%?

>>Their results showed that at best only one in three galaxies have a civilization like us. Furthermore their work posited that there's a very likely chance we're the first.
Again, you should actually analyze the study rather than taking the pop-sci lead line as the truth. I've seen this cycle of articles and it's mostly hogwash (in terms of what the journos claim the scientists found -- the scientists themselves have a very even handed understanding of their study.)
So what that study did was assign uncertainty di…
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Roger Penrose - Sun, 08 Jul 2018 21:07:26 EST ID:eygzYfFg No.57342 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Their results showed that at best only one in three galaxies have a civilization like us. Furthermore their work posited that there's a very likely chance we're the first.

We'll all be Cthulhu all along.
We'll do the buttprobing and dreamraping.

images by Bruon Rossi - Fri, 29 Jun 2018 11:49:29 EST ID:vxFcQ9yD No.57323 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1530287369168.jpg -(3086272B / 2.94MB, 7680x4320) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 3086272
Since this is an imageboard, let's post space related images.
Bruon Rossi - Fri, 29 Jun 2018 11:51:10 EST ID:vxFcQ9yD No.57324 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530287470168.jpg -(1757861B / 1.68MB, 2000x1125) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Bruon Rossi - Fri, 29 Jun 2018 11:52:42 EST ID:vxFcQ9yD No.57325 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530287562168.jpg -(247670B / 241.87KB, 1000x766) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Bruon Rossi - Fri, 29 Jun 2018 11:56:12 EST ID:vxFcQ9yD No.57326 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1530287772168.jpg -(136960B / 133.75KB, 1680x1400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Vera Rubiin - Sat, 07 Jul 2018 18:30:41 EST ID:fjAVn7KX No.57341 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1531002641478.gif -(2398469B / 2.29MB, 640x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Astronomical Illusion - Earth is the center of the universe by William Huggins - Tue, 19 Jun 2018 17:15:11 EST ID:6aIwEr35 No.57311 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1529442911009.jpg -(342372B / 334.35KB, 1920x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 342372

This is from a video series I saw long ago and it described a general illusion that is responsible for the Earth being seen as the center of the universe.

Like they say that in a few million/billion years the sky is going to be completely dark because the stars are moving away from us. But this is just an illusion from our vantage point. We're also moving away from them but we can't see it, only visualize it.

The way I remembered in the video was very clever and simple.

It was like rows and columns of 4 dots:

. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . .
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
Pierre-Simon Laplace - Tue, 19 Jun 2018 17:47:16 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57312 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Well, to say it's an illusion is kinda misleading. The size of our hubble volume is receding even now because of the expansion of space, diminishing the number of stars from which light will ever reach our planet. But it's not an 'illusion' the light beyond the cosmic horizon really is trapped in such a way that it can never get to us. By the time all stars have receded from our hubble volume, when our hubble volume is the size of our solar system, of course those other stars will still exist, but we will in a very real, non-illusory sense, be trapped with the light of our star in a void where the nearest other star is literally impossible to reach.

So in a very real sense the earth is the center of the universe, because it is the center of our hubble volume, and so the limit for all potential voyages from earth is, in a cosmic sense more real than voyages from a particular place on earth to another point on earth, constrained to a sphere with earth at the center.

Unless FTL is possible, which is the only way to go beyond the 'illusions' that the speed of light and expansion of space force us into
Thomas Henderson - Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:08:09 EST ID:6aIwEr35 No.57313 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Thanks for the explanation but the illusion I was referring to was the fact that astronomers before would always postulate that Earth was the center of everything (that is, stationary) and everything else is moving away or moving around us.

But in reality, Earth is moving as well and isn't actually stationary.

The illusion is that Earth is just used as a stationary anchor point for our perspective because we need a relatively stable point to base our calculations on. Like the same way we arbitrarily chose the weigh of a kilogram and now use that to conceptualize weight relative to one another.

But because of modern technology, we can visualize the universe more conceptually without putting Earth at the center.
Henry Draper - Wed, 20 Jun 2018 22:42:36 EST ID:457vC2+I No.57314 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1529548956888.jpg -(111795B / 109.17KB, 1280x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Astronomers certainly are aware of the motion of our solar system and account for it in their calculations when it is relevant, including calculations of expansion and redshift. I agree I wish popularly available star charts included depictions of the direction of motion and speed of stars so people can visualize what is going on better, but if, as a matter of principle, we stop using earth as the reference point, over time they will become off center with the physical hubble volume, the universe-lifetime light sphere of earth, which is obviously centered here. Once we are an interplanetary species, we will obviously need new definitions, and for most practical purposes the difference won't matter much.

How would you feel about using the center of the galaxy (either its gravitational center or the supermassive blackhole Sag A*) as our reference center point? That wouldn't differ too much from our visible observations, and seems the most convenient.
Annie Cannon - Wed, 27 Jun 2018 15:30:26 EST ID:6aIwEr35 No.57319 Ignore Report Quick Reply

I'm not against using Earth or whatever as a reference.

I was just intrigued by the natural phenomena that we see ourselves as the center of things when it's a fallacy of perception. And I remember the same phenomena existed in astronomy until the copernican revolution

Hey by Charles Bolton - Fri, 25 May 2018 04:39:48 EST ID:eiFhhu/4 No.57283 Ignore Report Reply Quick Reply
File: 1527237588460.jpg -(368926B / 360.28KB, 720x1280) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 368926
Check this mother ****** out.
Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Sat, 26 May 2018 13:15:33 EST ID:10X7g+Qi No.57284 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1527354933221.jpg -(2595730B / 2.48MB, 2448x3264) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Whoay thread. I'm going to be working all day and maybe into the night. Hope i produce something increadible!

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