Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Black Holes.

Re: Black Holes.
December 04, 2013, 08:10:47 AM
It is interesting that scientists who most clearly exhibit comfort in admitting their lack of knowledge are usually far more likely to tend toward mysticism. An approach of a lesser (the scientist) coming to understand the greater (spacetime) could be compared to the mystic approach of enlightenment. I've read many religious scientists state that they view their work as an attempt to increase their knowledge of God and describe it in terms approaching meditation or prayer.

However, as a godless materialist, I find the mystic approach to be nearly unintelligible.
Liberalism is moral syphilis.

- Jonathan Bowden

Re: Black Holes.
December 04, 2013, 08:32:38 AM
Unintelligible is as it should be.
The scientist wishes to fit reality into his understanding of it. He uses force.
The mystic waits while reality becomes clear to him. It explains itself to him, in its own time.

Squawk!

Re: Black Holes.
December 04, 2013, 08:59:55 AM
What's your take on myths? Mystics have a long history of inventing explanations that appeal to their sensibilities while simultaneously being false.

How does one know that he is in touch with reality and not his own neurosis?
Liberalism is moral syphilis.

- Jonathan Bowden

Re: Black Holes.
December 04, 2013, 07:07:55 PM
You have extensive knowledge of mystics and their neuroses?
I'd be happy to continue this discussion with you when you're in a more generous mood.
As it happens, my own generosity of spirit is currently less than it might be, so if you'll excuse me, I will withdraw now and swallow some more morphine...

Squawk!

Re: Black Holes.
December 04, 2013, 07:16:59 PM
I have enough knowledge of the 3 Abrahamic religions to label parts of them neurotic, yes. I wouldn't claim judgment on others.
Liberalism is moral syphilis.

- Jonathan Bowden

Re: Black Holes.
December 06, 2013, 07:39:02 PM
An intermediate between a planet and star was located. Add more mass and the nuclear oven starts. Take away mass and the oven can't run. I like the idea of planets, at least the gas giant kind but quite possibly almost any type, as potential stars. Maybe they will eventually come up with a single comprehensive table for all matter based on mass ranging from quarks all the way up to the class A super giant. Doesn't mass determine elemental composition + density from which we get a stellar spectral type?

Quote
Astronomers have found a distant planet so strange, that according to current planet formation theories, it shouldn’t even exist.

The planet is 11 times Jupiter’s mass and orbits its star at an incredible 650 times the average Earth-Sun distance.

Named HD 106906 b, the planet is unlike anything in our own solar system and doesn’t fit with any existing planet formation theories.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2519418/The-planet-shouldnt-exist-Bizarre-world-orbiting-star-staggering-distance-leaves-astronomers-baffled.html

”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

Re: Black Holes.
December 06, 2013, 07:55:38 PM
An intermediate between a planet and star was located. Add more mass and the nuclear oven starts. Take away mass and the oven can't run. I like the idea of planets, at least the gas giant kind but quite possibly almost any type, as potential stars. Maybe they will eventually come up with a single comprehensive table for all matter based on mass ranging from quarks all the way up to the class A super giant. Doesn't mass determine elemental composition + density from which we get a stellar spectral type?

Quote
Astronomers have found a distant planet so strange, that according to current planet formation theories, it shouldn’t even exist.

The planet is 11 times Jupiter’s mass and orbits its star at an incredible 650 times the average Earth-Sun distance.

Named HD 106906 b, the planet is unlike anything in our own solar system and doesn’t fit with any existing planet formation theories.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2519418/The-planet-shouldnt-exist-Bizarre-world-orbiting-star-staggering-distance-leaves-astronomers-baffled.html



I like how they say that it shoudn't exist, as if they knew all of the mysteries in the universe. If I were a god, I would pop up random things out of nowhere just to fuck up the scientists if they get too arrogant.
“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” -Krishnamurti

''I have studied many philosophers and many cats. The wisdom of cats is infinitely superior.''  -Hippolyte Taine

Re: Black Holes.
December 06, 2013, 08:57:35 PM
You are a god, and you do say random things that fuck everybody up.
In their arrogance, of course.
While the few remaining humbletons immediately recognize your own unique state of humbleosity.
Squawk!

Re: Black Holes.
December 06, 2013, 10:34:01 PM
There are tons of good myths to be developed around the pop science versions of black holes. Just another vehicle for truth, yeehaw.

Re: Black Holes.
December 07, 2013, 03:41:22 AM
An intermediate between a planet and star was located. Add more mass and the nuclear oven starts. Take away mass and the oven can't run. I like the idea of planets, at least the gas giant kind but quite possibly almost any type, as potential stars. Maybe they will eventually come up with a single comprehensive table for all matter based on mass ranging from quarks all the way up to the class A super giant. Doesn't mass determine elemental composition + density from which we get a stellar spectral type?

Quote
Astronomers have found a distant planet so strange, that according to current planet formation theories, it shouldn’t even exist.

The planet is 11 times Jupiter’s mass and orbits its star at an incredible 650 times the average Earth-Sun distance.

Named HD 106906 b, the planet is unlike anything in our own solar system and doesn’t fit with any existing planet formation theories.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2519418/The-planet-shouldnt-exist-Bizarre-world-orbiting-star-staggering-distance-leaves-astronomers-baffled.html

Wow dude. This has floored me. This universe is not our own, no matter how much we'd like to think so. We are only guests. Unwelcome, most of the time, it seems.

Re: Black Holes.
December 07, 2013, 07:42:00 PM
It may seem deliberately hostile toward us. But taking a different point of view we might recognize the fragility of life because it so specifically adapted to our unique terrestrial conditions. That can be humbling. If we want to expand our habitat then we have to lean on our intelligence to overcome the alien environments out there. Genius is our asset and not celebrity and popularity or appearances of charity and pity for the unfortunate. Our priorities are screwed up.
”The Revolution ends by devouring its own children” – Jacques Mallet du Pan, 1793

Re: Black Holes.
December 07, 2013, 08:16:25 PM
Only a human could look out into the night sky and come up with the idea of owning it.
There is almost infinite space for us, right here on our planet, even if our numbers become almost infinite...

Lao Tzu speaks of The Master as being content to remain where he is, all the days of his life, without the need to go anywhere else. He can do this because he is content, and at peace. I have discovered his words to be true: having been a great explorer and adventurer, always needing to discover places new,  now I rarely feel like going anywhere else. I have no inclination to travel.

Combine that with the almost-reality of being able to absorb/manufacture all necessary nutrition from sunlight and oxygen, which spiritual adepts have always been able to do, how much space does humanity really need?

The most important thing - far more so than migrating to the stars - is to become appreciative and responsible for the environment we were born into.

Squawk!

Re: Black Holes.
December 08, 2013, 02:49:08 AM
That is important, crow.

It is pretty far out to listen to people talk about how important it is for humans to colonize distant planets. Even worse, one of the main justifications I hear is that our Terran home lacks sustainable resources, and can't support human life indefinitely. As if other planets would offer indefatigable resources.