Our Universe is too vast for even the most imaginative sci-fi

[yiostheoy]

Thus we can trace where modern mankind's notion of Gods came from.

It came from the heavenly bodies above.

Oddly enough, several humans came along claiming to be messengers of the Gods.

Moses in 1450 BCE is probably the first that we know of. By his day the Egyptians already had a plethora of Gods and demigods.

Moses told everyone there is only One God and that he had seen him within a fiery bush in the desert, and his commandment was to let the Hebrew peoples of Egypt go free.

Several Hebrew prophets claimed to see him as well hundreds of years later, and they described him the same way as Moses (and Zarathustra) had.

Confucius and Buddha came along about 700 years after Moses and told of enlightenment but did not speak of any particular Gods.

Jesus came along about 1450 years after Moses and claimed that God was his Father, and that there was also yet another God called The Holy Spirit. Now we are back to a pantheon again, with at least these 2 Gods, which when you add Jesus' name to the Christian pantheon you now get 3 of them.

Muhammad came along about 600 years after Jesus and claimed that an angel called Gabriel (plagiarized from Judaism and from Christianity) taught him verses which were written down later as the Quran.

Shinto evolved in Japan about this time as well. And Jainism in Asia.

Hinduism has existed in India since prehistory. We don't know anything about the founders of that religion, only that their pantheon includes hundreds of Gods and demigods.

 

[yiostheoy]

Now, 10 thousand years since the dawn of civilization, and 2 million years since the dawn of mankind, we live in a very complex world where Religion, Philosophy, Science, and Politics (a branch of Philosophy) compete for all people's allegiance.

You can conclude that everything began with the Sun, the Moon, and the planets however.

 

[Muhammed]

Go visit a library.

Why would I do that when I have a perfectly good moosleem here to tell me ???

I'm not Muslim. I'm an atheist.

Good for you !!

You have shaken off the brainwashing of islam.

Why the fuck did you think I was an Arab Muslim???

Because you have a fokking Arab name, Bozo.

 

[yiostheoy]

Why would I do that when I have a perfectly good moosleem here to tell me ???

I'm not Muslim. I'm an atheist.

Good for you !!

You have shaken off the brainwashing of islam.

Why the fuck did you think I was an Arab Muslim???

Because you have a fokking Arab name, Bozo.

Yah I heard about this on the news.

Lots of violence across the globe from moosleems everywhere anytime they don't like something.

They do not like the Jews being in Palestine (now renamed Israel).

They do not like Americans in Afghanistan or Iraq.

They do not like the USA supporting the Jewish State.

Jeeze they cannot rest.

So they set off bombs and hope they will get 72 virgins in Valhalla with firm breasts for doing it.

Jeeze.

 

[Old Rocks]

I can't stand Tyson. The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you? No shit Sherlock.

Of course you cannot. Unlike you, Tyson is a logical, rational person of high intelligence. Quite obviously a far better man than you are.

 

[Old Rocks]

My brain can't comprehend it; it's overwhelming.

Yes, it is.

The way science fiction approaches it, warp drive in Star Trek for instance, makes us imagine unimaginable distances to be 20 minutes away.

There are two ways for humans to visit the far reaches of the cosmos ... one within our present state of technolgy.

Build large ships with nuclear engines that travel close enough to the speed of light for time dilation to be a factor. Voyages that last thousands of centuries by Earth time will take only a few years to the crew of the ship. Of course, they will never come back and never report what they find.

The second, 'Star Trek' way, plausible but not within our current state of technology, is to create massive gravitational lenses that allow us to bend space time so that we will cross vast distances using conventional propulsion.

Things like worm holes and black holes might theoretically be possible ways to explore the cosmos, but that would be many centuries in the future.

Maybe, maybe not. The very first phone I ever used, in a very rural area in Oregon in 1948, was a wooden box on the wall, you spun the little handle on it, and told the operator whom you wanted to call. And, if you called outside of the county, you had better have a good paycheck. Today, we routinely speak to people halfway around the world for the normal monthly charges. And that phone can monitor our heartbeat, tell us the best route to take in a city, street by street. A technology unimaginable when I first used that old phone. And this is in less than one lifetime.

Some young fellow or gal in India or China may already know how to get around the C limit.

 

[Old Rocks]

Can time be described in a mathematical context?

What is time? | plus.maths.org

(takes too long to read? Or takes time?)

Time does not exist.

It is merely an invention of the human mind.

Same is true of mathematics -- it also does not exist. It too just a human invention.

Fucking bullshit. The mathematical relationships we see in nature certainly do exist. The way we represent them with our symbols is our invention, but the relationships exist independent of our existence.

 

[Iceweasel]

I can't stand Tyson. The universe is under no obligation to make sense to you? No shit Sherlock.

Of course you cannot. Unlike you, Tyson is a logical, rational person of high intelligence. Quite obviously a far better man than you are.

Aw, did I get your hate machine fired up? He is an anti-religion zealot, which is fine but when he talks about religion instead of science that makes him an activist, not a scientist. Scientists talk about science, they don't have an ax to grind.

 

[Iceweasel]

My brain can't comprehend it; it's overwhelming.

Yes, it is.

The way science fiction approaches it, warp drive in Star Trek for instance, makes us imagine unimaginable distances to be 20 minutes away.

There are two ways for humans to visit the far reaches of the cosmos ... one within our present state of technolgy.

Build large ships with nuclear engines that travel close enough to the speed of light for time dilation to be a factor. Voyages that last thousands of centuries by Earth time will take only a few years to the crew of the ship. Of course, they will never come back and never report what they find.

The second, 'Star Trek' way, plausible but not within our current state of technology, is to create massive gravitational lenses that allow us to bend space time so that we will cross vast distances using conventional propulsion.

Things like worm holes and black holes might theoretically be possible ways to explore the cosmos, but that would be many centuries in the future.

Maybe, maybe not. The very first phone I ever used, in a very rural area in Oregon in 1948, was a wooden box on the wall, you spun the little handle on it, and told the operator whom you wanted to call. And, if you called outside of the county, you had better have a good paycheck. Today, we routinely speak to people halfway around the world for the normal monthly charges. And that phone can monitor our heartbeat, tell us the best route to take in a city, street by street. A technology unimaginable when I first used that old phone. And this is in less than one lifetime.

Some young fellow or gal in India or China may already know how to get around the C limit.

You lived long enough for the phone to get smarter than you.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Moon is related to minus. To understand its original meaning, think like a primitive or a child. Its main characteristic is that it seems to be getting smaller, which happens when we're not looking at it (if you have the mind of a child).

I had learned that the English word "Moon" comes from the German word "Mond" which comes from a more ancient Aryan word meaning "to measure".

Origin
View attachment 113883
Old English mōna, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch maan and German Mond, also to month, from an Indo-European root shared by Latin mensis and Greek mēn ‘month,’ and also Latin metiri ‘to measure’ (the moon being used to measure time).

Google

The Moon and Sixpence

The fact that it seems to get smaller is more striking and definitive. Way back when they first named it, they were too primitive to be much interested in time and measurements. They didn't have a numbering system except for "one, two, many" (indicated by waving the hand (manus in Latin)). I don't trust academics; no one would unless he looked at them as the highest authority.

Long before astronomers and people learned how to reckon the seasons with the Sun, they were using the Moon to measure days and weeks.

The Moon is more obvious for measurement, and that's why it was named from the same root word in Aryan as "measure".

The Moon disappears into the Sun every month, which is called a new moon. It then reappears as a sliver at dusk. This is called a waxing moon. From then on every evening the moon grows larger.

One week after the new moon at midnight it is half lit and called a first quarter moon because it is one quarter through it's cycle.

Two weeks after the new moon at sunset it is a full moon.

Three weeks after the new moon at noon the other half is lit and it is called a waning third quarter.

Four weeks after the new moon it disappears into the Sun again. The last sliver can be seen just before sunrise.

This is how the ancient peoples measured time.

So Moon, measure, and month all come from the same Aryan root word for measurement.

Has nothing to do with shrinkage.

The shrinkage is in your head.

Professors Can't Even Figure out That Dog Means "Pointer"

Did you know that in some Aryan languages, the root of our word black means "white" (blanca) (Belo-Russian)? So the cavemen might have been more concerned with the time when the moon started getting smaller and emphasized that, instead of the fact that it also waxed. Unlike English, Latin started confusing moon with month, so it came up with the completely new word luna, from lux "light." The ancient Russians did the same.

 

[Mindful]

The main premise for me is how science fiction tries to reconcile the universe, space travel, aliens, and so on, into something realistic and believable.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Why would I do that when I have a perfectly good moosleem here to tell me ???

I'm not Muslim. I'm an atheist.

Good for you !!

You have shaken off the brainwashing of islam.

Why the fuck did you think I was an Arab Muslim???

Because you have a fokking Arab name, Bozo.

Something Is Rotten in the State of Denmark

Violent protesters should be shot dead; it doesn't matter if they only do property damage and don't kill anybody themselves. The Danish police are forced by their rulers to be cowards. And the same rulers imported Muslim beasts against the will of the Danish people.

 

[Dalia]

Our Universe is too vast for even the most imaginative sci-fi | Aeon Ideas

The US astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson once said: ‘The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.’ Similarly, the wonders of the Universe are under no obligation to make it easy for science-fiction writers to tell stories about them. The Universe is mostly empty space, and the distances between stars in galaxies, and between galaxies in the Universe, are incomprehensibly vast on human scales. Capturing the true scale of the Universe, while somehow tying it to human endeavours and emotions, is a daunting challenge for any science-fiction writer. Olaf Stapledon took up that challenge in his novel Star Maker (1937), in which the stars and nebulae, and cosmos as a whole, are conscious. While we are humbled by our tiny size relative to the cosmos, our brains can none the less comprehend, to some extent, just how large the Universe we inhabit is. This is hopeful, since, as the astrobiologist Caleb Scharf of Columbia University has said: ‘In a finite world, a cosmic perspective isn’t a luxury, it is a necessity.’

Conveying this to the public is the real challenge faced by astronomers and science-fiction writers alike.

I respond to what I put in black, the universe we saw it in a way like the round earth, but we forget the top and bottom that is infinity too.

 

[yiostheoy]

Our Universe is too vast for even the most imaginative sci-fi | Aeon Ideas

The US astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson once said: ‘The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.’ Similarly, the wonders of the Universe are under no obligation to make it easy for science-fiction writers to tell stories about them. The Universe is mostly empty space, and the distances between stars in galaxies, and between galaxies in the Universe, are incomprehensibly vast on human scales. Capturing the true scale of the Universe, while somehow tying it to human endeavours and emotions, is a daunting challenge for any science-fiction writer. Olaf Stapledon took up that challenge in his novel Star Maker (1937), in which the stars and nebulae, and cosmos as a whole, are conscious. While we are humbled by our tiny size relative to the cosmos, our brains can none the less comprehend, to some extent, just how large the Universe we inhabit is. This is hopeful, since, as the astrobiologist Caleb Scharf of Columbia University has said: ‘In a finite world, a cosmic perspective isn’t a luxury, it is a necessity.’

Conveying this to the public is the real challenge faced by astronomers and science-fiction writers alike.

I respond to what I put in black, the universe we saw it in a way like the round earth, but we forget the top and bottom that is infinity too.

The Universe (capitalized because it is the name of ours) appears to be an exploding sphere, from radio telescopic data.

The extent of it is finite not infinite.

However we have no idea of what lies beyond it.

There could be other universes (not capitalized because now it is a word not a name).

 

[yiostheoy]

The main premise for me is how science fiction tries to reconcile the universe, space travel, aliens, and so on, into something realistic and believable.

Science fiction is no different than ancient mythology.

It is the product of limited mortal minds applied to infinite or almost infinite concepts of space and distance and succession (which we erroneously call time).

 

[yiostheoy]

Moon is related to minus. To understand its original meaning, think like a primitive or a child. Its main characteristic is that it seems to be getting smaller, which happens when we're not looking at it (if you have the mind of a child).

I had learned that the English word "Moon" comes from the German word "Mond" which comes from a more ancient Aryan word meaning "to measure".

Origin
View attachment 113883
Old English mōna, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch maan and German Mond, also to month, from an Indo-European root shared by Latin mensis and Greek mēn ‘month,’ and also Latin metiri ‘to measure’ (the moon being used to measure time).

Google

The Moon and Sixpence

The fact that it seems to get smaller is more striking and definitive. Way back when they first named it, they were too primitive to be much interested in time and measurements. They didn't have a numbering system except for "one, two, many" (indicated by waving the hand (manus in Latin)). I don't trust academics; no one would unless he looked at them as the highest authority.

Long before astronomers and people learned how to reckon the seasons with the Sun, they were using the Moon to measure days and weeks.

The Moon is more obvious for measurement, and that's why it was named from the same root word in Aryan as "measure".

The Moon disappears into the Sun every month, which is called a new moon. It then reappears as a sliver at dusk. This is called a waxing moon. From then on every evening the moon grows larger.

One week after the new moon at midnight it is half lit and called a first quarter moon because it is one quarter through it's cycle.

Two weeks after the new moon at sunset it is a full moon.

Three weeks after the new moon at noon the other half is lit and it is called a waning third quarter.

Four weeks after the new moon it disappears into the Sun again. The last sliver can be seen just before sunrise.

This is how the ancient peoples measured time.

So Moon, measure, and month all come from the same Aryan root word for measurement.

Has nothing to do with shrinkage.

The shrinkage is in your head.

Professors Can't Even Figure out That Dog Means "Pointer"

Did you know that in some Aryan languages, the root of our word black means "white" (blanca) (Belo-Russian)? So the cavemen might have been more concerned with the time when the moon started getting smaller and emphasized that, instead of the fact that it also waxed. Unlike English, Latin started confusing moon with month, so it came up with the completely new word luna, from lux "light." The ancient Russians did the same.

I love studying Aryan roots because these are the most ancient words in Western speech.

This is in contrast with Asian, African, and Semitic languages and roots.

African languages (sub Saharan) are funny. They sound like monkeys.

Asian languages are ugly. They sound like quacking ducks.

Semitic languages (Hebrew and Arabic) sound like someone coughing and getting ready to throw up.

Aryan languages sound like cats meowing however. These are much more melodic than any of the others.

So it would seem that these various ancient language groups evolved from the animals that surrounded the various peoples there.

I love my cat.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

View attachment 114211

Moon is related to minus. To understand its original meaning, think like a primitive or a child. Its main characteristic is that it seems to be getting smaller, which happens when we're not looking at it (if you have the mind of a child).

I had learned that the English word "Moon" comes from the German word "Mond" which comes from a more ancient Aryan word meaning "to measure".

Origin
View attachment 113883
Old English mōna, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch maan and German Mond, also to month, from an Indo-European root shared by Latin mensis and Greek mēn ‘month,’ and also Latin metiri ‘to measure’ (the moon being used to measure time).

Google

The Moon and Sixpence

The fact that it seems to get smaller is more striking and definitive. Way back when they first named it, they were too primitive to be much interested in time and measurements. They didn't have a numbering system except for "one, two, many" (indicated by waving the hand (manus in Latin)). I don't trust academics; no one would unless he looked at them as the highest authority.

Long before astronomers and people learned how to reckon the seasons with the Sun, they were using the Moon to measure days and weeks.

The Moon is more obvious for measurement, and that's why it was named from the same root word in Aryan as "measure".

The Moon disappears into the Sun every month, which is called a new moon. It then reappears as a sliver at dusk. This is called a waxing moon. From then on every evening the moon grows larger.

One week after the new moon at midnight it is half lit and called a first quarter moon because it is one quarter through it's cycle.

Two weeks after the new moon at sunset it is a full moon.

Three weeks after the new moon at noon the other half is lit and it is called a waning third quarter.

Four weeks after the new moon it disappears into the Sun again. The last sliver can be seen just before sunrise.

This is how the ancient peoples measured time.

So Moon, measure, and month all come from the same Aryan root word for measurement.

Has nothing to do with shrinkage.

The shrinkage is in your head.

Professors Can't Even Figure out That Dog Means "Pointer"

Did you know that in some Aryan languages, the root of our word black means "white" (blanca) (Belo-Russian)? So the cavemen might have been more concerned with the time when the moon started getting smaller and emphasized that, instead of the fact that it also waxed. Unlike English, Latin started confusing moon with month, so it came up with the completely new word luna, from lux "light." The ancient Russians did the same.

I love studying Aryan roots because these are the most ancient words in Western speech.

This is in contrast with Asian, African, and Semitic languages and roots.

African languages (sub Saharan) are funny. They sound like monkeys.

Asian languages are ugly. They sound like quacking ducks.

Semitic languages (Hebrew and Arabic) sound like someone coughing and getting ready to throw up.

Aryan languages sound like cats meowing however. These are much more melodic than any of the others.

So it would seem that these various ancient language groups evolved from the animals that surrounded the various peoples there.

I love my cat.

Cat itself came into Latin from Egypt, which got it from the nomadic tribes in Algeria.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Our Universe is too vast for even the most imaginative sci-fi | Aeon Ideas

The US astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson once said: ‘The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.’ Similarly, the wonders of the Universe are under no obligation to make it easy for science-fiction writers to tell stories about them. The Universe is mostly empty space, and the distances between stars in galaxies, and between galaxies in the Universe, are incomprehensibly vast on human scales. Capturing the true scale of the Universe, while somehow tying it to human endeavours and emotions, is a daunting challenge for any science-fiction writer. Olaf Stapledon took up that challenge in his novel Star Maker (1937), in which the stars and nebulae, and cosmos as a whole, are conscious. While we are humbled by our tiny size relative to the cosmos, our brains can none the less comprehend, to some extent, just how large the Universe we inhabit is. This is hopeful, since, as the astrobiologist Caleb Scharf of Columbia University has said: ‘In a finite world, a cosmic perspective isn’t a luxury, it is a necessity.’

Conveying this to the public is the real challenge faced by astronomers and science-fiction writers alike.

I respond to what I put in black, the universe we saw it in a way like the round earth, but we forget the top and bottom that is infinity too.

The Universe (capitalized because it is the name of ours) appears to be an exploding sphere, from radio telescopic data.

The extent of it is finite not infinite.

However we have no idea of what lies beyond it.

There could be other universes (not capitalized because now it is a word not a name).

What Erupted From 4D Created Light, Energy, Matter, and Space Itself

What if it has an infinite capacity to create its own space, like man can build a bridge and then drive where it was undriveable before?

 

[Dalia]

Our Universe is too vast for even the most imaginative sci-fi | Aeon Ideas

The US astronomer Neil deGrasse Tyson once said: ‘The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.’ Similarly, the wonders of the Universe are under no obligation to make it easy for science-fiction writers to tell stories about them. The Universe is mostly empty space, and the distances between stars in galaxies, and between galaxies in the Universe, are incomprehensibly vast on human scales. Capturing the true scale of the Universe, while somehow tying it to human endeavours and emotions, is a daunting challenge for any science-fiction writer. Olaf Stapledon took up that challenge in his novel Star Maker (1937), in which the stars and nebulae, and cosmos as a whole, are conscious. While we are humbled by our tiny size relative to the cosmos, our brains can none the less comprehend, to some extent, just how large the Universe we inhabit is. This is hopeful, since, as the astrobiologist Caleb Scharf of Columbia University has said: ‘In a finite world, a cosmic perspective isn’t a luxury, it is a necessity.’

Conveying this to the public is the real challenge faced by astronomers and science-fiction writers alike.

I respond to what I put in black, the universe we saw it in a way like the round earth, but we forget the top and bottom that is infinity too.

The Universe (capitalized because it is the name of ours) appears to be an exploding sphere, from radio telescopic data.

The extent of it is finite not infinite.

However we have no idea of what lies beyond it.

There could be other universes (not capitalized because now it is a word not a name).

It has no answer to this question because even if he would have other universes when the end?
Perhaps infinite nothingness?Like math not start or end.

 

[Old Rocks]

The main premise for me is how science fiction tries to reconcile the universe, space travel, aliens, and so on, into something realistic and believable.

Exactly. And how it expands the horizons for those of us that remember our first science fiction book, and when the stars became something more than points of light in the sky.