PDA

View Full Version : If we had no Moon...



MrBlueSky1960
08-31-2007, 05:29 AM
Found this video whilst trawling on Google, the song is... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif Well different, but considering the subject matter it's understandable the lyrics are as they are... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Any Whoo, try to stick with it because it's fascinating to think that we are here because of a chance planet collision...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyOyH9u4AdI

K_Freddie
08-31-2007, 05:43 AM
Haven't looked at the clip - work doesn't allow youtube (thank goodness http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

With no moon, our combined earth-moon mass would be less, therefor less Sun-Earth gravitational pull. Now we would fly out into outer space. But if this developed from Bang, the earth would be closer to the Sun and much hotter, and most likely we would look like strange 'hot' aliens wearing Thermal underwear http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif.. Actually probably no life would exist on our scorched barren planet, very similar to Mars.

I'll watch the clip on my home PC tonight.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Irish_Rogues
08-31-2007, 06:14 AM
The moon also acts as a stabilizer keeping the earth on it's axis. In other words the earth would wobble instead of spinning true. This wobble could cause wild unpredictable changes in climate over very short periods of time, possibly month to month.

The moon is also drifting away from the earth and one day in the extremely distant future will lose the earths gravitational pull and drift away. The effects of this are actually being felt now as there is a very slight wobble to the earths axis.

The moon is our good friend. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

RK_Achilles
08-31-2007, 07:03 AM
Chance you say....

MEGILE
08-31-2007, 07:38 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auikBu7soMs

Earth gets owned.

Daiichidoku
08-31-2007, 08:09 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif


the moon was already lost to us on sept 13, 1999
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DF9nDJZrdA

AKA_TAGERT
08-31-2007, 08:11 AM
The worst things is no one would know what to call it when I press my but cheaks aginst the window as you drive by

heywooood
08-31-2007, 08:55 AM
our relative distance from our star, Sol and its composition and size...the composition and size of our own planet, as well as the relative size and position of our moon along with a million other very specific and vital components integral to the ability of this Earth to have developed and sustained living organisms leaves one to believe more in the probabilty of design than that of chance, be sure.

We live in an amazing place and most people have never begun to consider it - so narrowly focused are they. My house, my yard, my car, my job etc...

I have stood in the midst of a vast ocean of wheat on a farm in Ontario and heard the voice of the wind in the swaying stalks of grain..
I have sailed on the Pacific beyond the sight of land on a 25' wood hulled Sloop and contemplated the unknown age of the seas and of the Earth...
I have flown in the atmosphere of breathable gas then was suspended beneath a canopy of nylon and cotton, swaying slowly down... and seen this world from the great height of near earth orbit...seen the curve of the horizon and the thin, yet dense blanket of our atmosphere through the sunrise beyond it - once clear and tinged with the bluegreen reflection of the sparkling, living oceans - but now a rusted haze of smoke and fume in many places, the oceans stained with the effluent of man along the shorelines of his 'civilizations'..."will it be restored after we are gone?" I asked - "soon, and completely" was the comforting reply...and I was relieved beyond words.

Bewolf
08-31-2007, 09:44 AM
Originally posted by heywooood:
our relative distance from our star, Sol and its composition and size...the composition and size of our own planet, as well as the relative size and position of our moon along with a million other very specific and vital components integral to the ability of this Earth to have developed and sustained living organisms leaves one to believe more in the probabilty of design than that of chance, be sure.

We live in an amazing place and most people have never begun to consider it - so narrowly focused are they. My house, my yard, my car, my job etc...

I have stood in the midst of a vast ocean of wheat on a farm in Ontario and heard the voice of the wind in the swaying stalks of grain..
I have sailed on the Pacific beyond the sight of land on a 25' wood hulled Sloop and contemplated the unknown age of the seas and of the Earth...
I have flown in the atmosphere of breathable gas then was suspended beneath a canopy of nylon and cotton, swaying slowly down... and seen this world from the great height of near earth orbit...seen the curve of the horizon and the thin, yet dense blanket of our atmosphere through the sunrise beyond it - once clear and tinged with the bluegreen reflection of the sparkling, living oceans - but now a rusted haze of smoke and fume in many places, the oceans stained with the effluent of man along the shorelines of his 'civilizations'..."will it be restored after we are gone?" I asked - "soon, and completely" was the comforting reply...and I was relieved beyond words.

Hardly. With billions of clusters out there each containing billions of galaxies, in return possession billions of stars, I'd say chances are pretty high that "all" kinda coincidences can happen, and probably did. It's mostly human arrogance hidden in "modesty" trying to find a sense in everything.

That aside, earth is not as "unique" as its made out to be in the past.

Even if chances for a planet to develop life is 1:1 billion, due to position around a star, moon, large gas giants to catch up meteroids and asteroids and numerous other factors, the sheer number of stars out there should produce countless habitable worlds. There is nothing noteworthy in it aside that we think we are special, when in fact we are just one species out of many on one of those planets with the right conditions supporting them.

heywooood
08-31-2007, 10:01 AM
I didn't say we were alone - I said that the ingredients required of a planet to sustain life - or more importantly - sentient life are too vast to be occasioned by pure chance...

You never saw what I posted in other threads about the existence of several universes - from the one we think of as 'ours' to the ones that exist on our 'molecular' level...to the ones that we are a mere molecule of.

I attempt to suggest that not only is 'our' universe beyond measure - but that every particle in our universe (such as but not limited to every grain of sand on every planet in it) contains a universe or more in lesser scale to ours and futher that we are likely just a particle in the next larger universe in scale and so on...like a hall of mirrors...

..and that regardless of that magnitude - the volume of coincidence necessary for the creation of a planet that can and does sustain sentient life is likely equal to the number of lifeless rocks or grains of sand on every lifeless rock in every universe imaginable...and wouldn't the realization that we are at least that rare cause us to stop and think that maybe life is valuable beyond measure?...or are you just sick of tripping over all these beings in all your extraterrestrial travels and see the need for thinning the herds? I hope one day to learn that we are not alone if only to have another perspective on life that isn't as impatient or self important, narrowly focused and pompous as the one we have developed here.

waffen-79
08-31-2007, 10:02 AM
hmm...

The Moon is drifting away as we speak, that's a fact.

But Earth with no moon? that'll never happen, even if we don't come to develop the necesary technolgy to make it stay in like a 1000 years, we could put to good use all the nukes in the planet to make corrections in its orbit, BE SURE

Divine-Wind
08-31-2007, 10:21 AM
If we had no moon we wouldn't have tides. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif Imagine washing clothes without Tide...

heywooood
08-31-2007, 10:25 AM
I think your swashing would buckle...maybe you should walk the plankton for that n'ocean...no Tide indeed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

Bewolf
08-31-2007, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by heywooood:
I didn't say we were alone - I said that the ingredients required of a planet to sustain life - or more importantly - sentient life are too vast to be occasioned by pure chance...

You never saw what I posted in other threads about the existence of several universes - from the one we think of as 'ours' to the ones that exist on our 'molecular' level...to the ones that we are a mere molecule of.

I attempt to suggest that not only is 'our' universe beyond measure - but that every particle in our universe (such as but not limited to every grain of sand on every planet in it) contains a universe or more in lesser scale to ours and futher that we are likely just a particle in the next larger universe in scale and so on...like a hall of mirrors...

..and that regardless of that magnitude - the volume of coincidence necessary for the creation of a planet that can and does sustain sentient life is likely equal to the number of lifeless rocks or grains of sand on every lifeless rock in every universe imaginable...and wouldn't the realization that we are at least that rare cause us to stop and think that maybe life is valuable beyond measure?...or are you just sick of tripping over all these beings in all your extraterrestrial travels and see the need for thinning the herds? I hope one day to learn that we are not alone if only to have another perspective on life that isn't as impatient or self important, narrowly focused and pompous as the one we have developed here.

Never said you did, just pointing out some probabilities. And you are right, I did not. That said, i am aware of those thoughts about universes on a molecular level or we beeing part of a far greater universe. It certainly is a very interesting line of thinking, but as such pure speculation in the same way ppl ponder about us beeing something like a computer simulation run by far higher beeings or just existing in the imagination of something. But that goes into the esoteric/mystic corner, which I am not too huge a fan of. If at all, talking about parallel universes, the string theory is way more interesting and feasable.

Now back to the life question, the number of coincidences may be high...but then again they may not be as high as you think they are. Take the moon. Earth is in a region around the sun where several planets tend to form. This means it is easily thinkable that several planets form within a certain distance, finally crashing into each other. Some will completly explode, some will come together again as one planet without a moon, but chances of a planet/moon system are not any less then those other options. The same is true for a lot of the other "coincidences" as you put, which actually are just a lot of different options of what can happen. And often enough it will go exactly the way earth devloped. Just a short while ago scientist though that the formation of planets themselves is an expection and huge margin of luck involved. Nowadays though astronoms find new planets on nearly a daily basis, and those only are the most gigantic ones in the immidiate vacinity around the solar system. By far not as rare and coincidental as it appeared to be before. The same probably holds true for most of the other "coincidents". Not that every star now will have habitable planet, but chances are not that far of. And habitable planets most likey will develop live. Actually there are theories out there that the forming of life, given the right circumstances, is a "must".

Now, going along, sentient life is not that special either. In fact it is just one survivall concept among many others in the reallm of animals. Nearly every animal devlops something special to keep it ahead of others. Claws, Speed, camouflage, intelligence all serve the same purpose...to be more succcessful in survival. Intelligence as such is not a special trait, but just another survival tactic in the old race to gain the upper hand. And not nessecarily the most successful one, just the latest. Sharks have been around for millions of years, even before the dinosaurs, and still exist. Humans now have the problem of still working by the same old instincts and reflexes, (90 percent of all your daily descisions are made by instinct, not by "thinking it over") but mixed up with intelligence, with which they have nothing better to do then to kill each other while at the same time thinking they are special just because they prosuce art.

Sure, at first glance that is super, magnificent, woah. But then again...who cares about it aside ourselves?

Bewolf
08-31-2007, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by Divine-Wind:
If we had no moon we wouldn't have tides. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif Imagine washing clothes without Tide...


As far as I know, the moon will drift away somewhat more, but then will reverse and come back again, finally crashing with earth in a few billion years. That will happen after the sun already exploded, though, so no worries.

Blood_Splat
08-31-2007, 10:48 AM
If there was no moon I wouldn't be able to turn into a werewolf.

SeaFireLIV
08-31-2007, 10:56 AM
I just bet someone £50 that I could tell a Raaiid thread just from the title....

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

heywooood
08-31-2007, 11:16 AM
Originally posted by Bewolf:


Sure, at first glance that is super, magnificent, woah. But then again...who cares about it aside ourselves?

Oh you might be surprised....

And the examples you give, of the adaptation of life on a living planet, must first assume you have a living planet...easy says you - ours was orbiting the right kind of star (you know they are all different yes?) and it was colided with by just the right celestial object and ended up at just exactly the correct distance from that star and still in orbit around it - with that vital moon intact as well, serving as the perfect pump for our atmosheric and oceanic environment - without the moons gravitational and otherwise symbiotic relationship to Earth, we might not be - so your adaptation model as I say assumes a life sustaining planet - thats the rarety to chance that I maintain.

But if we extrapolate your notion - then we must assume that life on any living planet would be similar to the life forms on this one...based on a few degrees of seperation?
There would be heat and cold - but only to the extremes that do not end organic life...there would be predator and prey so genetic development/mutation would have to occur...there would have to be sentience or understanding developed - things like memory (what eats us - what can we eat that won't kill us etc...) and finally - there must be questions (why am I - what is the plan?) so maybe Gene Roddenberry was right - the universes are full of hot, green babe-tastic alien chicks and we just need to figure out how to get to their parties - gonna need to borrow the car that pops has only dreamed of so far...

Bewolf
08-31-2007, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by heywooood:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bewolf:


Sure, at first glance that is super, magnificent, woah. But then again...who cares about it aside ourselves?

Oh you might be surprised....

And the examples you give, of the adaptation of life on a living planet, must first assume you have a living planet...easy says you - ours was orbiting the right kind of star (you know they are all different yes?) and it was colided with by just the right celestial object and ended up at just exactly the correct distance from that star and still in orbit around it - with that vital moon intact as well, serving as the perfect pump for our atmosheric and oceanic environment - without the moons gravitational and otherwise symbiotic relationship to Earth, we might not be - so your adaptation model as I say assumes a life sustaining planet - thats the rarety to chance that I maintain.

But if we extrapolate your notion - then we must assume that life on any living planet would be similar to the life forms on this one...based on a few degrees of seperation?
There would be heat and cold - but only to the extremes that do not end organic life...there would be predator and prey so genetic development/mutation would have to occur...there would have to be sentience or understanding developed - things like memory (what eats us - what can we eat that won't kill us etc...) and finally - there must be questions (why am I - what is the plan?) so maybe Gene Roddenberry was right - the universes are full of hot, green babe-tastic alien chicks and we just need to figure out how to get to their parties - gonna need to borrow the car that pops has only dreamed of so far... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, I never said easy. I just said, given the trillions of stars out there, and I do not think you are aware just how many there are, even the lowest of lowest possibilities have a chance for success...and more then once.

And yes, I was only talking about life similiar to our own. We have no idea what other life forms there "may" be. It is already pretty much proven that simple organism may develop under the harshest of conditions. Life within this planetary sytem alone could be possible on two other celestrial bodies. Planet Mars and Europe, a moon of Jupiter. That does not mean there is life, but we have organisms on earth that are able to survive within both environments.

3 places capable of holding life, just in this one star system.

Add to that that we have several self sentient speices on this planes, apes and dolphins beeing an example, who, when looking into a mirror, recognized themselves. Scientificly that applies as self sentient. It certainly is not the last call here, but the border between men and animalls certainly is vanishing the more effort is put into understanding how animals work. if you define it by purely human standarts, I doubt you will find a comparable species anywhere. But that only applies if you take humanity onto a completly diferent level then other beeings on this planet. A rather archaic and religiously influenced approach. Not that you do it, but just to throw that in.

heywooood
08-31-2007, 12:15 PM
trillions of stars and planets? - I say trillions times trillions so we agree on that.

and I refer to the extremes at which 'organisms' can survive - so we agree on that as well...

self aware and sentient are almost the same thing but for organisms to evolve into sentient beings takes several millenia so you need a stable life-planet environment for 'aeons' and there is another improbability that boggles the mind...

I do not possess the ego to believe for an instant that any universal life forms with self awareness and sentience could be humanoid - only that the parameters required for such an evolution are so similar that it is possible.

And the 'separation between man and animals'.. ?...man is an animal my friend.

snafu73
08-31-2007, 12:26 PM
That's right Bewolf. When you seriously ponder the numbers involved, that there are possibly a trillion planets in the milky way galaxy alone, and that there are over a hundred billion galaxies, much like the milky way, in the visible Universe you realise that with the trillions of possibilities involved you are dealing with inevitabilities not flukes. This is the implication that you are left with when dealing with these types of numbers.

Also taking into the equation that the Universe is isotropic and homogoneous, so what can generally happen here can also happen elsewhere.

The Astronomer Frank Drake formulated his famous equation to give us some sort of clue as to what is out there:

N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL

The equation can really be looked at as a number of questions:

N* represents the number of stars in the Milky Way Galaxy
Question: How many stars are in the Milky Way Galaxy?
Answer: Current estimates are 100 billion.
fp is the fraction of stars that have planets around them
Question: What percentage of stars have planetary systems?
Answer: Current estimates range from 20% to 50%.
ne is the number of planets per star that are capable of sustaining life
Question: For each star that does have a planetary system, how many planets are capable of sustaining life?
Answer: Current estimates range from 1 to 5.
fl is the fraction of planets in ne where life evolves
Question: On what percentage of the planets that are capable of sustaining life does life actually evolve?
Answer: Current estimates range from 100% (where life can evolve it will) down to close to 0%.
fi is the fraction of fl where intelligent life evolves
Question: On the planets where life does evolve, what percentage evolves intelligent life?
Answer: Estimates range from 100% (intelligence is such a survival advantage that it will certainly evolve) down to near 0%.
fc is the fraction of fi that communicate
Question: What percentage of intelligent races have the means and the desire to communicate?
Answer: 10% to 20%
fL is fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations live
Question: For each civilization that does communicate, for what fraction of the planet's life does the civilization survive?
Answer: This is the toughest of the questions. If we take Earth as an example, the expected lifetime of our Sun and the Earth is roughly 10 billion years. So far we've been communicating with radio waves for less than 100 years. How long will our civilization survive? Will we destroy ourselves in a few years like some predict or will we overcome our problems and survive for millennia? If we were destroyed tomorrow the answer to this question would be 1/100,000,000th. If we survive for 10,000 years the answer will be 1/1,000,000th.
When all of these variables are multiplied together when come up with:
N, the number of communicating civilizations in the galaxy.

Bewolf
08-31-2007, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by heywooood:

self aware and sentient are almost the same thing but for organisms to evolve into sentient beings takes several millenia so you need a stable life-planet environment for 'aeons' and there is another improbability that boggles the mind...

I do not possess the ego to believe for an instant that any universal life forms with self awareness and sentience could be humanoid - only that the parameters required for such an evolution are so similar that it is possible.

And the 'separation between man and animals'.. ?...man is an animal my friend.

There is nothing much to add there. Agreed.
Just to scratch your point about aeons of stability. It does not require aeons. It just requires enough stability for living beeings to adapt in time to changing conditions. And that goes only by taking earth animals as a standart. We have no idea how life would develop under more extreme and changing conditions given enough time to get used too it.

heywooood
08-31-2007, 12:48 PM
well - yes - supposing that organic life needs a temperature/radiation/gravitational equivalency and long term stability of the life planet it occurs on, I would imagine that the evolution might just work along similar lines....basic organic matter is what it is.

as far as the relative speed or alacrity of adaptation who can say?
Time is relative, so one might assume that the amount of time it takes an organism to adjust or evolve be relative I guess...Its funny that you say flat out though that aeons are not required...how do you know?

people say war is the mother of invention - I say it is survival.

Survival is what spurs the memory - survival necessitates communication - like organisms tend to bond from our limited experience - hence the 'herd mentality' of more complex life forms...so it would not be hard to imagine that intelligence is a necessary byproduct of the will to live...survival skills are the foundation of sentience and self awareness because once you have figured out what is is that sustains you and what it is that threatens you, and how to manage it all with your friends and neighbors - you all begin to have time to ponder deeper issues...or go to the movies and party instead.

Bewolf
08-31-2007, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by heywooood:
well - yes - supposing that organic life needs a temperature/radiation/gravitational equivalency and long term stability of the life planet it occurs on, I would imagine that the evolution might just work along similar lines....basic organic matter is what it is.

as far as the relative speed or alacrity of adaptation who can say?
Time is relative, so one might assume that the amount of time it takes an organism to adjust or evolve be relative I guess...Its funny that you say flat out though that aeons are not required...how do you know?

people say war is the mother of invention - I say it is survival.

Survival is what spurs the memory - survival necessitates communication - like organisms tend to bond from our limited experience - hence the 'herd mentality' of more complex life forms...so it would not be hard to imagine that intelligence is a necessary byproduct of the will to live...survival skills are the foundation of sentience and self awareness because once you have figured out what is is that sustains you and what it is that threatens you, and how to manage it all with your friends and neighbors - you all begin to have time to ponder deeper issues...or go to the movies and party instead.

I completly agree on that one. War is just an extension of the old urge to secure ressoruces on a very sophisticated level. Indeed, all of human action, with only very very few exceptions, is based on a 2 basic rules found everywhere in nature. survival and reproduction

ploughman
08-31-2007, 01:17 PM
Or as I like to put it, dinner and a sh@g. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

heywooood
08-31-2007, 01:21 PM
yes 'Ploughman' http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gifhahaha

Lurch1962
08-31-2007, 05:53 PM
Regarding the Moon...

That the Moon is slowly receding from Earth is proven. Therefore it once must have been closer. It's postulated that if the Moon was the result of a collision by a Mars-sized body, after the debris of the smash-up coalesced into the body we see today, it was only about 4 Earth diameters away (as opposed to the now 29 earth diameters.) That would make for a VERY short month, and wicked tidal forces! (But it would take quite a while for water to collect on the surface.) And a number of lines of evidence point to a commensurately shorter day, as well.

The Moon is currently tidally locked to earth, in that one side always faces us. This came about due to the tides induced on the Moon by Earth. The Moon will always remain tidally locked in this fashion, even as it slowly spirals out to several times its present distance over a period of time measured in billions of years.

And the length of our day will inexorably lengthen as the tides induced by the Moon work on Earth in similar fashion, until the duration of a day and lunar month become the same--certainly of order one full year. In other words, the Earth and Moon will will both have the same side facing each other.

=====================

About Life in the Universe...

It's only natural that we would think that the amazing sequence of events and conditions that led to us being here must be more than coincidence. If there are other sentient beings out there who, like us, are wondering about other life, they too likely think that their existence must be the result of a guiding hand.

But consider that Man has been here for only the tiniest fraction of the planet's recent history. We are the "lucky" descendants of the small mammals who survived the cataclysm which eradicated the former lords of this world, the dinosaurs.

Who knows? Our time here could be limited by the cruel arbitrariness of Nature. The evidence points to numerous mass extinctions during the past several hundred million years. A small Earth crossing asteroid might very well have our name on it, before we can devise a way to deflect it. Then the cockroaches might be granted their bid for global dominion.

The lesson is this. We must always be wary of our propensity to view the World from our very limited perspective. Only when one steps back to view the larger picture can one really appreciate that the Universe can indeed make wonderful worlds by happenstance alone. There is no need to invoke a "Creator" if science as we understand it can offer a plausible explanation.

--Lurch--

heywooood
08-31-2007, 06:24 PM
which came first?...existence - or the egg....

Lurch1962
08-31-2007, 06:41 PM
That's easy... existence came first. The stepping stone to life is amino acids, which make up proteins. Then on to self-replicating bacteria, and so on and so on, up the chain of evolution. No "egg" required to get Life started.

Take this overly simplistic synthesis as that of an ignorant non-bioligist. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

--Lurch--

Copperhead311th
08-31-2007, 11:37 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
The worst things is no one would know what to call it when I press my but cheaks aginst the window as you drive by

lol Sure they would Tag, they'd call it the same thing they do now. Man with his head up his @ss"

K_Freddie
09-01-2007, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by snafu73:
N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL

Carl Sagan came up with the 'Gargoyle' (spelling) - a VERY VERY VERY large number

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan

From Wiki -
Drake equation suggested that a large number of extraterrestrial civilizations would form, but that the lack of evidence of such civilizations pointed out by the Fermi paradox suggests technological civilizations tend to destroy themselves rather quickly. This stimulated his interest in identifying and publicizing ways that humanity could destroy itself, with the hope of avoiding such a cataclysm and eventually becoming a spacefaring species. Sagan's deep concern regarding the potential destruction of human civilization in a nuclear holocaust had been conveyed in a memorable cinematic sequence in the final episode of Cosmos, called "Who Speaks for Earth?". Following his marriage to his third wife (novelist Ann Druyan) in June 1981, Sagan became more politically active"”particularly in regard to the escalation of the nuclear arms race under President Ronald Reagan.

Sagan was a user of marijuana, although he never admitted this publicly during his life. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

snafu73
09-01-2007, 07:08 AM
He was a great human being, I have his cosmos series.

There are some good chunks of it on youtube:

Carl Sagan - A thousand years of darkness.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMsdEkGQL0U&mode=related&search=

Not sure K_Freddie - but you might be getting confused with a "googol", a googol is a 1, followed by one hundred zeros.

A googolplex is a 1, followed by a googol of zeros.

the word "googol" came from the young nephew of a mathematician, who was asked to think of a name for a very large number.

I believe "Google" take their name from this in a roundabout way.

DuxCorvan
09-01-2007, 09:14 AM
Exactly.

Ten thousand million (Ten billion in USA)= 10^10
One googol= 10^10^10
One googolplex= 10^10^10^10

This number is so big that if it was not written down in exponential language, but down to the real decimal numbers, it would physically occupy more space than it is available in the diameter of the known universe.

M_Gunz
09-01-2007, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
The moon is also drifting away from the earth and one day in the extremely distant future will lose the earths gravitational pull and drift away. The effects of this are actually being felt now as there is a very slight wobble to the earths axis.

Yeah, the orbit gains about 2 inches a year. How many years to 25,000 miles at that rate and
be 10% farther? Will it get that far since as the orbit increases, the rate of orbit increase
decreases in a parabolic rather than linear fashion. It's not going away any time soon short
of the sun going nova or a comet size collision. It's been so close to the orbit it has now
for so long that most all life is in tune with it.

Oh, and the moon helps keep earth's core hot and the crust turning, no gas and water releases,
else no time and environment for life to develop.

Then again someone might read Brin's "Earth" and buy the ending.

Ruy Horta
09-02-2007, 02:11 AM
Heywooood, didn't know you had this in you, your opening post was very strong.

Not that I agree with all you wrote in this threat, but the philosophical side commends you.

neural_dream
09-02-2007, 05:05 AM
Why do you find the existence of life on a planet to be fascinating? Do you also find the non-existence of life to be fascinating? If not then the only reason you find life fascinating is that you have one. Like saying that a mother finds her family fascinating, well because it's her family.

Life is wasted on the living.

Having said that, what a piece of prose that was:

Originally posted by heywooood:
I have stood in the midst of a vast ocean of wheat on a farm in Ontario and heard the voice of the wind in the swaying stalks of grain..
I have sailed on the Pacific beyond the sight of land on a 25' wood hulled Sloop and contemplated the unknown age of the seas and of the Earth...
I have flown in the atmosphere of breathable gas then was suspended beneath a canopy of nylon and cotton, swaying slowly down... and seen this world from the great height of near earth orbit...seen the curve of the horizon and the thin, yet dense blanket of our atmosphere through the sunrise beyond it - once clear and tinged with the bluegreen reflection of the sparkling, living oceans - but now a rusted haze of smoke and fume in many places, the oceans stained with the effluent of man along the shorelines of his 'civilizations'..."will it be restored after we are gone?" I asked - "soon, and completely" was the comforting reply...and I was relieved beyond words.
Lovely. Really lovely and warm.

BUT,

I'm tired of "comforting" being a positive word. Oh yes I AM.

DuxCorvan
09-02-2007, 06:24 AM
Originally posted by heywooood:
I have stood in the midst of a vast ocean of wheat on a farm in Ontario and heard the voice of the wind in the swaying stalks of grain..
I have sailed on the Pacific beyond the sight of land on a 25' wood hulled Sloop and contemplated the unknown age of the seas and of the Earth...
I have flown in the atmosphere of breathable gas then was suspended beneath a canopy of nylon and cotton, swaying slowly down... and seen this world from the great height of near earth orbit...seen the curve of the horizon and the thin, yet dense blanket of our atmosphere through the sunrise beyond it - once clear and tinged with the bluegreen reflection of the sparkling, living oceans...

Well, are you a replicant about to die? Or is it you coming out the closet? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

jimDG
09-02-2007, 07:04 AM
While we are on the topic of space music videos, here's Muse's entry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9lLeRlcDq9E

MEGILE
09-02-2007, 07:08 AM
If there is ET life.. they don't know about us, and we don't know about them. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

neural_dream
09-02-2007, 07:30 AM
Originally posted by jimDG:
While we are on the topic of space music videos, here's Muse's entry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://youtube.com/watch?v=9lLeRlcDq9E
While we're on the post-apocalyptic subject, I'll throw in some more Muse.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wC-u2yIsawM&mode=related&search=

han freak solo
09-02-2007, 04:31 PM
I just saw this show on the Science Channel in the US this afternoon. Makes a quick lesson for the non-scientific, like me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

http://shopping.discovery.com/product-52214.html?jzid=40588012-21-0

Viper2005_
09-02-2007, 07:21 PM
Very Tom Lehrer esque...

http://www.hti.umich.edu/u/umhistmath/Lobachevsky.mp3