The Size of Our World

[galtgulch]

Here is a link to a graphic depiction of the relative size of our World in comparison to other celestial bodies observed within sight of our wandering orb.

http://www.howbigistheworld.com/

There is something comforting to think that the Earth orbits the Sun in a near circular orbit. It is crucial that the orbit be such that temperature extremes are minimal. If the orbit were more elliptical then the planet would endure much hotter temps if the orbit carried the Earth closer to the Sun but also much colder temperatures as the planet moved farther from the Sun as well. The planet would be uninhabitable.

The closed curve of the Earth's orbit around the Sun is just relative as seen by someone viewing from the vantage point of the Sun.

Actually the Sun moves in its own orbit around the galaxy so the actual orbit of the earth is more circuitous as it never completes and closes to form an ellipse at all. Not to mention that the galaxy itself moves as well.

Enjoy the ride!

gulch

[Alfonso Jones]

Here is a link to a graphic depiction of the relative size of our World in comparison to other celestial bodies observed within sight of our wandering orb.

http://www.howbigistheworld.com/

There is something comforting to think that the Earth orbits the Sun in a near circular orbit. It is crucial that the orbit be such that temperature extremes are minimal. If the orbit were more elliptical then the planet would endure much hotter temps if the orbit carried the Earth closer to the Sun but also much colder temperatures as the planet moved farther from the Sun as well. The planet would be uninhabitable.

The closed curve of the Earth's orbit around the Sun is just relative as seen by someone viewing from the vantage point of the Sun.

Actually the Sun moves in its own orbit around the galaxy so the actual orbit of the earth is more circuitous as it never completes and closes to form an ellipse at all. Not to mention that the galaxy itself moves as well.

Enjoy the ride!

gulch

gulch -

Thanks for this post.

Interesting - - - I know many people who would start gushing in an unintelligible way about how this makes them feel humble. My reaction, on the other hand --- I'm impressed that humans can sort these things out! That they can measure such distances.

Bill P

[Darrell Hougen]

Here is a link to a graphic depiction of the relative size of our World in comparison to other celestial bodies observed within sight of our wandering orb.

http://www.howbigistheworld.com/gulch

Apparently, there are some much larger stars:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Star-sizes.jpg

http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/message...c.asp?p=7556769

However, as I recall, there are many more stars that are smaller than the Sun than are larger than it is. Unfortunately, I can't find a good link verifying that fact.

Darrell

[Selene]

THANK YOU DARRELL!

:thumbsup:

Perfect for children and child like adults like me.

I already sent it to my home schoolers.

Thanks again.

Adam

[Brant Gaede]

Here is a link to a graphic depiction of the relative size of our World in comparison to other celestial bodies observed within sight of our wandering orb.

http://www.howbigistheworld.com/

There is something comforting to think that the Earth orbits the Sun in a near circular orbit. It is crucial that the orbit be such that temperature extremes are minimal. If the orbit were more elliptical then the planet would endure much hotter temps if the orbit carried the Earth closer to the Sun but also much colder temperatures as the planet moved farther from the Sun as well. The planet would be uninhabitable.

The closed curve of the Earth's orbit around the Sun is just relative as seen by someone viewing from the vantage point of the Sun.

Actually the Sun moves in its own orbit around the galaxy so the actual orbit of the earth is more circuitous as it never completes and closes to form an ellipse at all. Not to mention that the galaxy itself moves as well.

Enjoy the ride!

gulch

And don't forget the precession-stabilizing presence of the moon! The tilt of the axes would be more extreme without that and it is doubtful we would be here at all. Plus it took +4 billion years of planetary and biological evolution. Forget about effectively searching for highly intelligent life out there in outer spaces. It's there, I'm sure, but probably in another galaxy of whom Ayn Rand said were "the unknowable beings." Fortunately (!?) we've got each other to love and hate.

--Brant

Edited May 9, 2009 by Brant Gaede

[Selene]

Brant:

Do you have the surrounding paragraph to that phrase or put it in context, please.

"...of whom Ayn Rand said were 'the unknowable beings.'"

Adam

Edited May 9, 2009 by Selene

[Brant Gaede]

I can't. I wish I could. It's a true quote. It's probably in the AR Letter. If someone has a searchable CD that might do it. Search "galaxy." "...the unknowable beings of another galaxy."

--Brant

Edited May 9, 2009 by Brant Gaede

[Selene]

Brant:

Ahh, ok so the reference was definitely to "sentient life" elsewhere in the universe.

I would expect a mind of her caliber would have no problem with it being a highly, virtually certain probability.

Thanks that helped and I will try some searches in my weird way.

That's more than helpful.

Adam

[shadesofgrey]

Here is a link to a graphic depiction of the relative size of our World in comparison to other celestial bodies observed within sight of our wandering orb.

http://www.howbigistheworld.com/gulch

Apparently, there are some much larger stars:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Star-sizes.jpg

http://www.tigerdroppings.com/rant/message...c.asp?p=7556769

However, as I recall, there are many more stars that are smaller than the Sun than are larger than it is. Unfortunately, I can't find a good link verifying that fact.

Darrell

There are, mostly as a result of "smaller" stars being more stable than larger ones. That is, they don't STAY larger for as long as the smaller ones stay smaller secondary to novas and supernovas.

[Selene]

Here is a link to a graphic depiction of the relative size of our World in comparison to other celestial bodies observed within sight of our wandering orb.

http://www.howbigistheworld.com/

There is something comforting to think that the Earth orbits the Sun in a near circular orbit. It is crucial that the orbit be such that temperature extremes are minimal. If the orbit were more elliptical then the planet would endure much hotter temps if the orbit carried the Earth closer to the Sun but also much colder temperatures as the planet moved farther from the Sun as well. The planet would be uninhabitable.

The closed curve of the Earth's orbit around the Sun is just relative as seen by someone viewing from the vantage point of the Sun.

Actually the Sun moves in its own orbit around the galaxy so the actual orbit of the earth is more circuitous as it never completes and closes to form an ellipse at all. Not to mention that the galaxy itself moves as well.

Enjoy the ride!

gulch

Yep i use it all the time. But the link is broken for me hmmm

Edited December 4, 2009 by Selene

[shadesofgrey]

Here is a link to a graphic depiction of the relative size of our World in comparison to other celestial bodies observed within sight of our wandering orb.

http://www.howbigistheworld.com/

There is something comforting to think that the Earth orbits the Sun in a near circular orbit. It is crucial that the orbit be such that temperature extremes are minimal. If the orbit were more elliptical then the planet would endure much hotter temps if the orbit carried the Earth closer to the Sun but also much colder temperatures as the planet moved farther from the Sun as well. The planet would be uninhabitable.

The closed curve of the Earth's orbit around the Sun is just relative as seen by someone viewing from the vantage point of the Sun.

Actually the Sun moves in its own orbit around the galaxy so the actual orbit of the earth is more circuitous as it never completes and closes to form an ellipse at all. Not to mention that the galaxy itself moves as well.

Enjoy the ride!

gulch

gulch -

Thanks for this post.

Interesting - - - I know many people who would start gushing in an unintelligible way about how this makes them feel humble. My reaction, on the other hand --- I'm impressed that humans can sort these things out! That they can measure such distances.

Bill P

Well not humble obviously, but it has a way of making one feel SMALL. That, and it makes me start thinking about space elevators and whatnot seeing that, as of now, we have no where else to go and our track record on planet maintenance has not been all that impressive thus far.

Edited December 4, 2009 by shadesofgrey

[Christopher]

Nice post. Last night (coincidentally) I spent a lot of time looking up the age of the universe and our planet. I was running the numbers back and forth in my head, and you really can't do that without feeling a sense of awe.

Age of Universe: roughly 12.x billion years

Age of Earth: roughly 4.3 billion years

Age of homo-sap: 100,000 years

Age of civilization: 6000 years?

Age of Industrial civ: 200 years

Age of Information: 20 years?

We are talking crazy numbers.

[syrakusos]

And don't forget the precession-stabilizing presence of the moon! The tilt of the axes would be more extreme without that and it is doubtful we would be here at all. Plus it took +4 billion years of planetary and biological evolution. Forget about effectively searching for highly intelligent life out there in outer spaces. It's there, I'm sure, but probably in another galaxy of whom Ayn Rand said were "the unknowable beings." Fortunately (!?) we've got each other to love and hate. --Brant

Well, Mars has only two captured rocks and nearly the same tilt as Earth. Venus has no moon and no tilt. The Earth-Moon "dual planet" system is unique in our solar system and might be unusual for all we know.

I believe -- personal belief -- that Luna was captured by Terra as a result of the event that tore Pluto (and Chiron) from Neptune.

There is something comforting to think that the Earth orbits the Sun in a near circular orbit. It is crucial that the orbit be such that temperature extremes are minimal. If the orbit were more elliptical then the planet would endure much hotter temps if the orbit carried the Earth closer to the Sun but also much colder temperatures as the planet moved farther from the Sun as well. The planet would be uninhabitable.

That seems like a teleological fallacy. See, for instance, The Mote in God's Eye by Niven & Pournelle. While it is true that above a critical temperature chemical bonds that we depend on cannot maintain, up to that point, many alternatives are possible. Creatures from an "upright" planet might theorize that their perfectly warmed and cooled planet allows life, grateful that they do not have the life-killing 23.5-degree tilt of their lifeless neighbor.

As for other life forms entirely, I often wonder if the stars are not alive, large objects, even if "simple" compared to our cells, very large enough that their structure could support complexity -- and they might well be very much more complex than we know.

Personally -- again, a belief that I am reticent to argue for -- I am see truth in Carl Sagan's Contact and Arthur C. Clarke's Sentinel, that absent the Abrahamic "God" the universe nonetheless has wonderous creatures in it ... and they have been here. When I consider the range and richness of life forms just here on Earth, I wonder if beings as powerful as Olympians and as immature as Bevis and Butthead have not been here ... more than once...

[tjohnson]

As for other life forms entirely, I often wonder if the stars are not alive, large objects, even if "simple" compared to our cells, very large enough that their structure could support complexity -- and they might well be very much more complex than we know.

Check out World at the End of Time by Frederick Pohl if you like Sun-creatures.

Edited December 4, 2009 by general semanticist

[tjohnson]

And don't forget the precession-stabilizing presence of the moon! The tilt of the axes would be more extreme without that and it is doubtful we would be here at all. Plus it took +4 billion years of planetary and biological evolution. Forget about effectively searching for highly intelligent life out there in outer spaces. It's there, I'm sure, but probably in another galaxy of whom Ayn Rand said were "the unknowable beings." Fortunately (!?) we've got each other to love and hate.

--Brant

One theory I heard was that our moon was formed in a giant collision of 2 planetoids in which much of the mass of one (moon) was transferred to the other (earth). This resulted in a planet with a large enough mass that it could keep it's atmosphere from escaping into space like what is thought happened to Mars.

[shadesofgrey]

Nice post. Last night (coincidentally) I spent a lot of time looking up the age of the universe and our planet. I was running the numbers back and forth in my head, and you really can't do that without feeling a sense of awe.

Age of Universe: roughly 12.x billion years

Age of Earth: roughly 4.3 billion years

Age of homo-sap: 100,000 years

Age of civilization: 6000 years?

Age of Industrial civ: 200 years

Age of Information: 20 years?

We are talking crazy numbers.

You may enjoy A Brief History of Nearly Everything by Bill Bryson. One of the better books I've read. It covers biology, astronomy, quantum mechanics all in a very entertaining, easy-to-read, but very thorough format.