/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11644276

433KiB, 1242x960, Screenshot_2020-05-07 (JPEG Image, 994 × 768 pixels).png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Wed 06 May 22:25:28 2020 No.11644276 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11644282 >>11644310 >>11644358 >>11644512 >>11648412 >>11650267

>The moon is 1/400th the size of the sun but also 1/400th the distance from earth which results in the moon and the sun being the same size in the sky, a coincidence not shared by any other known planet-moon combination

>Intelligent design

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 22:26:40 No.11644282 Report

Quoted By:

>>11644276
>>Intelligent design
Yes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 22:37:36 No.11644310 Report

Quoted By: >>11644357

>>11644276
> by any other known planet-moon combination
Given that we can only see 8 planets, some of wich have no moons or are gas giants, that's not exactly saying much.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:01:15 No.11644357 Report

Quoted By: >>11644393

>>11644310
One planet would be sufficient to show that it's not by necessity. So it's just a coincidence or by design. thought: Proponents of ID should claim also to believe life is a "simulation." By the loose meaning of this word, they'd not even have to change their beliefs or lie. They'd just be evolving (heh) to incorporate brainlet terminology. #elonmuskforID when?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:02:46 No.11644358 Report

Quoted By: >>11644363 >>11650471

>>11644276
Why would a coincidence about the ratio of the Moon/Sun's diameters and distances be how an intelligent creator communicates his existence?

Wouldn't it make a million times more sense just to inscribe the bible on the surface of the moon in 1 billion point font?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:04:46 No.11644363 Report

Quoted By: >>11644367

>>11644358
presumably because His intention isn't merely to convince every brainlet of His existence

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:06:09 No.11644367 Report

Quoted By:

>>11644363
but every brainlet can recognize that 1/400 and 1/400 are the same number

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:11:27 No.11644384 Report

Quoted By: >>11644403

imagine how much sooner we would have arrived at the proper astronomical model if this were not the case

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:13:36 No.11644393 Report

Quoted By: >>11644409

>>11644357
We won't have telescopes with sufficient resolution to see individual planets outside of our solar system.
Even in solar systems close to ours we won't see planets anytime soon, so we're basicly stuck with 8 planets for decades to come.
And only 3 of them are at least somewhat earthlike, one of wich is earth itself meaning we only have two planets to compare it with.
So that won't happen anytime soon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:16:23 No.11644403 Report

Quoted By: >>11644446

>>11644384
Define "we", because the ancient greeks where pretty close while the christians didn't accept it for millenias to come.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:17:43 No.11644409 Report

Quoted By: >>11644425 >>11644448

>>11644393
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOCAL_(spacecraft)
>Maccone suggests that this should be enough to obtain detailed images of the surfaces of extrasolar planets.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:22:39 No.11644425 Report

Quoted By: >>11644447

>>11644409
>requires spacecraft several hundred AU from the sun
Again, not happening anytime soon.
Even if we started something right now, it would take decades or centuries to get far enough to work.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:28:15 No.11644446 Report

Quoted By: >>11644494

>>11644403
Anon, Ptolemaic mechanics can explain any continuous orbit. Epicycles are just Fourier transforms.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:28:21 No.11644447 Report

Quoted By: >>11644485

>>11644425
well, IMO we're right on the cusp of some big breakthroughs in spaceflight tech, but I can see why people would be pessimistic about that, given that we've been on the same cusp for about 50 years

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:28:29 No.11644448 Report

Quoted By: >>11644458

>>11644409
which is more far-fetched: this gravitational lens idea, or a solar-system sized interferometry telescope?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:31:25 No.11644458 Report

Quoted By: >>11644469 >>11646856

>>11644448
the only thing holding back the gravitation lens idea is an adequate refueling infrastructure to actually push an object into deep outer space in a reasonable timeline

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:34:53 No.11644469 Report

Quoted By: >>11651697

>>11644458
do we know for sure that when we put a telescope that far off into space, it'll actually work the way we think it will?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:39:15 No.11644485 Report

Quoted By:

>>11644447
I'd agree that we are currently having major breakthroughs in launch-vehicles.
However to see individual planets and their moons in sufficient detail, you would need a primary mirror larger than even SpaceX Starship could carry up there.
And the mass for that scales roughly with the cube of its diameter, so not going to happen anytime soon, but possibly in a few decades if humanity still progresses as a civilisation at that point.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:42:22 No.11644494 Report

Quoted By:

>>11644446
Tell that to Newtons first law...

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 06 May 2020 23:50:41 No.11644512 Report

Quoted By: >>11644622

>>11644276
>a coincidence not shard by any other know planet-moon combination
You realize the amount that we know in this regard is compared to an infinite universe right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 May 2020 00:21:55 No.11644622 Report

Quoted By: >>11645049 >>11646833

>>11644512
>To date, more than 4,000 exoplanets have been discovered and are considered "confirmed."

And not a single one with this "coincidence"

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 May 2020 02:48:40 No.11645049 Report

Quoted By:

>>11644622
I guess you vastly overestimate our capabilities.
Exoplanets aren't spotted directly, scientists can only spot the ever so slight change in brightnesd of a star while a planet passes between a telescope and a star.
We have no idea about their moons and even less about the orbits of said moons.
Even with our best telescopes, most stars are smaller than even one pixel.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 May 2020 16:06:52 No.11646833 Report

Quoted By: >>11652272

>>11644622
>this "coincidence"
You know this is a temporary condition, righth?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 May 2020 16:12:38 No.11646856 Report

Quoted By:

>>11644458
The problem with using the sun as a gravitational lense is that you need to know what you're looking at first because you cant just move the telescope around like you would with the hubble.
Youd also have to design something that can survive decades in interstellar space without any on site maintenance.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1522461343966.png, 91KiB, 500x375

Anonymous Thu 07 May 2020 16:16:27 No.11646873 Report

Quoted By: >>11646887

Wait a few million years, the numbers will change
>Oh right mortality, doh!
You just happen to be looking up at this specific point in time, you arent special, nor is the moon

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 07 May 2020 16:19:24 No.11646887 Report

Quoted By: >>11646900

>>11646873
Specific point in time, in which humans just happen to exist.
Hmmm

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1588476720982.jpg, 9KiB, 323x156

Anonymous Thu 07 May 2020 16:22:48 No.11646900 Report

Quoted By:

>>11646887
Keep regressing

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 May 2020 00:01:37 No.11648412 Report

Quoted By: >>11650698

>>11644276
Why? Why is THIS observation so damn important? If The Moon were 1/399th the size, and 1/400th the distance, would that BTFO Intelligent Design?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO seriously....png, 724KiB, 494x926

Anonymous Fri 08 May 2020 14:17:41 No.11650267 Report

Quoted By: >>11650494

>>11644276
>Intelligent design

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 May 2020 15:32:01 No.11650437 Report

Quoted By:

This proves that eclipses are necessary for the emergence of life

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 May 2020 15:43:58 No.11650471 Report

Quoted By:

>>11644358
you would be the most boring God ever. No mystery, no wonder, no need for questions. Existence under the all seeing commandments is merely an exercise in humble futility. Besides, who says this is anyone's way of a signature and not an ideal combo for tidal forces that would boost the evolution algorithms chances of success

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 May 2020 15:50:51 No.11650494 Report

Quoted By:

>>11650267
>not showing the full zoom out
Ruined

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 May 2020 17:06:04 No.11650698 Report

Quoted By:

>>11648412
As the moons orbit isn't perfectly circular, there is a certain variation in that figure.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 08 May 2020 22:42:11 No.11651697 Report

Quoted By:

>>11644469
We only know that all the experiments done confirm Einstein't theories to the degree of precision we can manage.
Of course there can be further surprises but we do not know or even have any idea of such things.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 09 May 2020 02:28:47 No.11652272 Report

Quoted By:

>>11646833
>temporary condition

>right in time when an intelligent species can watch the sky

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches