Muad'zin
Fractal Fanatic
That model also tried to explain why sometimes the planets move backwards using wonky explanations. Astrology is still based on that model. Further evidence that it is nonsense.That’s the same evidence the ancients used to confirm the Earth is not moving lol
Notice ..? You said the Sun and moon “rises” & “sets”?
Ironically similar to the scriptures...
Ecclesiastes 1:5
“ The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.”
Psalms 113:3
“From the rising of the sun to its setting, the name of the LORD is to be praised!”
This is one of the reasons why Ptolemy developed his model and it was the held model for centuries.\
We know the Earth is a sphere and not flat. We know that the Moon journeys around the Earth in a lunar month, we have observed the Earth turning around its axis. We know that the other worlds in the solar exists, we have visited all of them with probes. All their moons orbit their worlds Comet come in from the outer solar system. We see the other planets in the solar system move around the Sun. We find more and more planets in other solar systems just by observing their transit in front of their sun. We're even observing the stars move, including the ones orbiting the supermassive black hole Sagitarius A that is at the center of our Galaxy. Why should the Earth be any different? Because some Holy Book written in ancient times says so? Because there are nutters who can't wrap their minds around being on a small ball that orbits a massive fiery ball?Again there is no scientific empirical evidence that the Earth actually moves per the preferred standard model.
We are victims of the academia that prefers the cosmological model that has it move.
Here’s the leading cosmologists of today confirming.
George Ellis:
“….I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with the Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations.”
“you can only exclude it on philosophical ground. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that.
What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.”
George Ellis,
Famous cosmologist, in Scientific American,
“Thinking Globally, Acting Universally”, October 1995
He co-authored the book “The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time” in 1973 with Stephen Hawking. It is now a classic.
—————-
“Thus, even now, three and a half centuries after Galileo's condemnation by the Inquisition, it is still remarkably difficult to say categorically whether the earth moves, and, if so, in what precise sense.”
⁃ Julian B. Barbour, Absolute Relative Motion? p.226, 2nd paragraph
Astonishingly, there is literally no credible “settled science” of the Earth’s motion in space.
This then may play a huge factor in the opts post.
I had two such ingrown toenails, one so bad they had to cut a part of the nail and I managed to have the other outgrow again . I have been pain free ever since. Not only did it hurt like crazy, it got infected at time. I know the pain. There is a difference between this sucks and I am a victim, woo to me! I am not judging anyone on this, but please don't be a victim and tell yourself woo to me! Know, and this is what I tell myself every time I suffer a misfortune or an injury, all good things come to an end, but also all bad things. I will get through this. Persevere and never give up.Do you yell "ow" when you stub your toe with the ingrown toenail that already hurts on its own? Would you consider that act to be the act of someone "playing victim"?
That is kinda where I am at. Even Jesus, if you believe that mythology, had his moment of doubt and pain. Would you say He was "playing victim"?
There is an old Native American saying that applies:
"Great Spirit, grant that I may not judge a man until I have walked a mile in his moccasins."
Have a blessed day. Or not. Who am I to judge?
If you take some of the useless planets like Mercury and take it apart for materials you can easily construct enough O'Neill cylinders to house trillions of humans. You all are thinking in terms of scarcity on Earth when you should be thinking in abundance when you can factor in the entire solar system.I think so to... living on Mars, moon, spacecraft for 10,000 yr? Nope
Most reasonable approach to longevity of human..... is to kill 98% of the population and start over again
Unless you specifically wish to terraform Mars its biggest value right now is as a resource of building material to build space infrastructure like O'Neill cylinders for humans to live in. Or you can terraform Mars as a long term project as the Sun will gradually become bigger and hotter to the point that like Venus now, Earth will become unlivable in 600 mln years. At which point in time Mars will become far more comfortable too. You'd just have to find a way to create a magnetic field so the planet can retain its atmosphere.Yes, I think the whole living on Mars stuff is also kind of stupid on a large scale. Living on Mars is like living in the antarctic, just much more deadly. And nobody wants to live there either ...
Sure its possible for humans. But like you said, without that return ticket. You can send out colonizing fleets, which solely exist to prepare and seed star systems they come across. People that would live their entire lives in the interstellar regions of space. Or you can even send out robot fleets that will colonize other systems for us so all we have to do is move in.People also don't fully understand relativity.
Interstellar travel will be possible for sure. But not for humans. Every interstellar journey would be without a ticket back home.
Thing is though, any Earth power that would try to do such a thing would also destroy itself because the vast majority of its population would be Earth based. It's the equivalent of starting global nuclear war. You're bound to destroy yourself with it.There’s helium on the moon, tho, and a valuable isotope thereof. Plus the Moon has a much shallower gravity well which makes it easier to launch stuff to Earth from there. This was explored in great detail by Heinlein in “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”. Technically it’d be super easy to destroy Earth by launching projectiles from the Moon. They’d be accelerated to hypersonic speeds by the Earth’s gravity well. And you can’t do jack shit about whoever is launching it. Hence why a military base of some sort is inevitable there within this century.
The value of the moon is, as you correctly said our industrial zone in space from which to build up space infrastructure around Earth and as a launching pad to the rest of the Solar System.
Would you really want to launch such material knowing that if the launch were to fail, it still happens after all, it could spread that material over large parts of this planet?Just don't store yer spent fission materials there....
You're thinking in planets with breathable atmospheres. I'm thinking in O'Neill cylinders, La Grange points and Dyson swarms. We can park trillions of human beings in space by building O'Neill cylinders by dismantling planets like Mercury or the many comets and asteroids that make up the Asteroid belt, Kuijper belt and Oord cloud. And we are already discovering planets that may have Earth like atmospheres. Proxima B is already one of the most promising prospects, orbiting Proxima Centauri, only 4 lightyears from us. In the end we have to get off this rock eventually cause the Sun will make in uninhabitable in 600 mln years, unless we come up with a form of giant sun screen, and even then eventually in 4 bln years when the Sun becomes a red giant. Red Dwarfs offer the best long term prospect because they will last for trillions of years, until even in the Black Hole Era.There is no place in space to live that can support human life. If there is it would take many lifetimes to get there. That's not to say we shouldn't look. But knowing is far different than going. I think the distances are on purpose. Additionally, if your concerned about 600 million years from now I wonder what you worry about now. sarc
Last edited: