Why is the Universe silent?

nickname · 2008-05-12 06:02:43

cIclops,

I believe the moon stops Earth from random tilts like happen on Mars.
I also believe the moon is the main reason life exists at all on Earth.
Couple of links about each.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4 … heory.html
http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q106.html

cIclops · 2008-05-12 06:20:40

What causes random changes to the axis? Probably giant impacts, the Moon won't stop those.

The day night cycle and the associated temperature changes cause cyclical changes at different strength scales on Earth, many are far stronger than lunar tides. It doesn't seem necessary to have lunar gravity to begin life.

nickname · 2008-05-12 07:55:56

cIclops,

Interesting article about axis change with no moon here.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m … i_13533907

A big moon seems like one of those must have items.

bobunf · 2008-05-12 09:01:50

I hope you noticed the words in these articles like:

“could have, This hypothesis, suggests, Lathe believes, might be, may play, may trigger”

Another way to look at the presence of a large moon is suggested by this paragraph:

“the Moon was still much closer to us than it is now. That, plus the Earth's much more rapid rotation, led to tidal cycles every two to six hours, with tides extending several hundred kilometres inland, says Lathe. Coastal areas therefore saw dramatic cyclical changes”

How can any kind of proto-life form if everything’s flooded out every few hours? Couldn’t one make the argument that a close-in large moon would preclude biogenesis? Dramatic changes every two to six hours? Or every ten million years? Which is better for life? I think I’d go for ten million years rather than two hours.

Of course, considering this paragraph:

“Earth itself may even enter such a chaotic zone when the distance between Earth and a slowly departing moon shifts in 2 billion years from its present-day distance of about 60 Earth radii to 68 Earth radii. Given that variations in tilt angle as small as 2 degrees may trigger ice ages, the forecast for Earth when its axis shifts to an angle of nearly 60 degrees would certainly be bleak.”

Bleak? I find it hard to take these guys too seriously.

In two billion years the Sun’s luminosity will have increased by more than 20%. That works out to a black body temperature increase at Earth’s orbit of more than 50 degrees C. The oceans will have boiled away and the Earth will have been uninhabitable for creatures like us for more than a billion years.

Unless somebody does something about it. In either case, I wouldn’t worry about an ice age two billion years from now.

Don’t these guys know this? Let’s read this stuff a little more critically. It sounds like a bunch of kids playing with a computer simulation. And they know everything you read on the internet is true.

Bob

cIclops · 2008-05-12 10:36:19

Exactly so Bob. Those tales of doom and gloom are nothing to worry about. According to the global warming alarmists the Earth's surface temperature is increasing by 6°C per century, so in about 100,000 years the Earth will be a ball of plasma.

nickname · 2008-05-12 13:54:39

bobunf,

It seems to be scientific consensus that Earth has used up around 90% of it's time in the life zone.

Earth indeed will have it's oceans boil away as the sun warms up.
Long before that happens we will need to migrate.
Doubt if we have 2 billion years before the boil happens, and less than 1 billion before it's time to leave as Earth becomes a hothouse.

Many articles about that on the net, and many more about the link between big moon, stable climate and the development of life to complex forms.

I just post the links i don't write them.
I tend to agree with the analysis of both arguments of moon and life development, but to each person they believe what they want from what they read.

cIclops,

You must be looking for C02 funding.
I have my doubts about C02 being a giant factor in greenhouse warming since reflective cooling from smoke/smog should actually be cooling the world even with increased C02 levels in the atmosphere.
When we stop producing lots of smog and smoke then i would worry about C02.

nickname · 2008-05-12 14:05:52

dicktice,

Wouldn't that be sad if we are it and we destroy ourselves, or revert back to the stone age with our technology because we were to hostile to endure ourselves.

Right now is probably a good time to get on with at least setting up shop somewhere else before we do.

bobunf · 2008-05-13 18:19:17

“Long before that happens we will need to migrate.”

I don’t think migration off the Earth will ever be necessary. Just set up a shield at the L1 LaGrange point between the Earth and Sun, a permanent partial eclipse. A circular mirror with a diameter of 6800 kilometers would eliminate 20% of solar insolation. Should be easy for our descendants, especially with plenty of time to prepare. Might also be useful in case of a nearby gamma ray burst.

Or, moving the Earth might be cheaper (especially since we’ll have oodles of time to do it), and will also protect Earth from the red giant phase the sun will enter in about five billion years. Just be careful not to hit Mars.

Bob

dicktice · 2008-05-13 20:24:33

That's right, nickname: we are really quite a marvelous race of beings, when you come to think about it. We've been able to conceptualize in our minds from the surface of this tiny planet the whole universe of galaxies, in only a few centurie, as a result of our inate curiosity, ability to develop technologies to enhance our senses, and apply mathematical models to make it all understandable. If we wipe ourselves out before spreading out into the Solar System, will there be time enough for another species to develop intelligence enough, with our curiosity, our dexterity, etc. before changing conditions on Earth and its resources make the accomplishment a second time impossible? Perhaps once per Sun is par for the course....

nickname · 2008-05-14 10:08:07

bobunf,

We can do some stop gap measures for sure to prolong our stay on Earth.
Once the sun starts to burn hotter it will also start to fuse more helium.
In doing so the sun will not only become hotter but more erratic in its nature.
We can probably endure a sun at 20% hotter, but not 20% more solar flares with 20% more intensity.

dicktice,

I agree we are an unusual species with a lot of potential.
We also have a pretty dark side that could destroy that.

We are very curious but at the same time afraid of new things.
We are intelligent but have a difficult time in accepting new ideas.

We really do need to make a second home on Mars.
Something as simple as an odd virus could destroy everything we have, we could destroy ourselves or a rock from the sky could reset the life clock.
Will we just sit around waiting for one of those days or be a species that dares to venture forward and into safety for all of life on our little rock.

We might be alone in the universe or we might not, either way if we don't step up we might not get a second chance.
In my opinion right now is the time to take that step while global hostilities are at a minimum, technology is ready and many countries see the same future on Mars.

I think just once in a very long time the universe gets a place that has a potential species, not just once per star or even once in a while on many stars.
Maybe even just the once.

If we take the right steps we could be a species that endures until the end of time all across the universe.
If we don't take the right steps we might be just a footnote in the history of the universe, a failed experiment.

bobunf · 2008-05-14 11:58:28

“We can do some stop gap measures for sure to prolong our stay on Earth.”

I don’t think I’d call extending our stay here by a few hundred million years a stop gap measure.

“Once the sun starts to burn hotter it will also start to fuse more helium.
In doing so the sun will not only become hotter but more erratic in its nature.
We can probably endure a sun at 20% hotter, but not 20% more solar flares with 20% more intensity.”

The sun has been burning hotter every second for about five billion years. Do you have a source for this assertion about instability? My understanding of stellar behaviour is that instabilities do not arise until the last few percent of main sequence burning, which, in the case of our sun, would be another four or five billion years.

I don’t think we really need to worry about things two billion years from now. We’ll either be so advanced that control of the sun will be possible, or we won’t exist.

Bob

bobunf · 2008-05-14 12:01:57

“We really do need to make a second home on Mars.”

You’re probably not going to convince many people by telling them the world is going to end soon. There have been many such predictions.

So, what other reasons are there to go to Mars? I’d suggest working on those.

Bob

nickname · 2008-05-14 12:48:05

bobunf,

Sources for stars fusing helium are all over the Internet, what the stars act like when fusing larger amounts of helium is on most of those sites.

Only 2 reasons to go to Mars in my opinion.
1. because it's there.
2. because it's there and if the Earth did have a cataclysm we would be there also.

No need to convince anyone of going to Mars, the logic of a second home is apparent.
If our society can't see that it's time, then it probably doesn't belong on Mars and should wait for the big rock to fall, or wait for us to go back to throwing rocks at each other.

dicktice · 2008-05-14 15:55:43

nickname:

By the time the Sun begins to "burn brighter" (billions of years from now?) we'll either be long gone: either in the sense of having destroyed ourselves, or having left Earth for other more hospitable planet systems within the galaxy. By the way, your use of the term "universe" with its billion-plus visible galaxies leaves me unmoved. The good old Milkyway Galaxy is big enough for me to contemplate regarding the future....

nickname · 2008-05-14 17:32:38

dicktice,

I agree with that 100 %.
Long before the sun gets to hot we will be gone or gone for good.

I think no matter what we do we don't have much longer as we are now.
Technology one way or another will change us.

We will either leave Earth and change ourselves at the new locations.
Destroy ourselves or be destroyed with change or lack of it.
Alter ourselves reworking our genes.
Alter ourselves with technology.

Lets hope we use up all the space we have in our island galaxy.
1 galaxy is more than big enough for us.
The other 249 billion 999 million 999 thousand 999 galaxies, we will get to much later.
I feel rather small after writing that.

bobunf · 2008-05-14 17:53:05

“Sources for stars fusing helium are all over the Internet”

I don’t think this is much of a source for the assertion about solar instability. And I don’t think anybody will be convinced by this additional unsupported assertion.

A quantitative explanation would be better, such as:

When the temperature of a stellar core reaches 10^8 K, the star ignites helium. This occurs when the star runs out of hydrogen and suffers gravitational collapse. In the case of the sun, this will happen in about five billion years.

Until then, it’s rock-a-bye baby.

Bob

bobunf · 2008-05-14 17:55:02

“No need to convince anyone of going to Mars, the logic of a second home is apparent.”

I suppose that’s why funding is so abundant, and tickets are going on sale next week.

Bob

dicktice · 2008-05-15 07:32:28

Having reread the posts submitted so far in reply to this topic ("Intelligent Alien Life") I still believe that we are the only intelligent species currently inhabiting the Milkyway Galaxy capable of communicating and eventually populating it. Well--so what, if there aren't any others? Once we're away from Earth for a thousand generations, there'll be enough intelligent "alien" forms of our own species out there ... so let's continue the discussion of how to deal with them in the forseeable future.

nickname · 2008-05-15 16:47:40

dicktice,

Who is to say if we are alone or not, right now it looks like we are alone.
Right now technology isn't at a stage that it has much ability to say otherwise though also.
It could be a busy galaxy with lots of communications going on or quiet enough to hear just our own noise.

I think the next 25 years will start to give us a semi good idea if it's quiet or not.

I think that is how we will make contact, with other forms of ourselves.

With a second world of humans on Mars we will have to deal with them, they will be close enough to deal with us if we don't.
I'm sure Mars will set off on it's own path as it gets going and won't need to be told anything.
At other stars if technology never gets us beyond maybe 1/5 LS does it matter what they do?
I think they will do whatever they want, we should just keep our ears open and keep talking to them no matter what they do or become.

If we do eventually head out to the stars the ones going will change for sure on any planet they take up residence.
Even a world very similar to Earth will have a bunch of new natural selection processes that are sure to alter them.

dicktice · 2008-05-17 13:32:29

That's what I thought over 25 years ago! And since I won't be around 25 years from now (sob) you just go ahead and plan for your future. As far as I'm concerned there aren't any intelligences out there to help, which is why I want us to get cracking on our own right now....

nickname · 2008-05-18 04:23:02

dicktice,

Sounds like we have pretty much the same opinion on finding another intelligence.
The jury is still out on if we are intelligent or not also. LOL

With some luck you won't have to wait 25 years for an answer, anytime i think is possible now for an answer.
A signal could be picked up at any time now we are starting to look seriously.

I agree with the lets get going with moving out to the stars.
50 years of silence after a few foot steps on the moon is a pretty poor record.

Finding an ET signal would be a day of reflection for everyone on this planet, we would have to give up some of the myths and beliefs we have and start working as one species on one small planet in the vastness of space.
Would be an interesting day for sure.

dicktice · 2008-05-19 19:10:19

There's no "jury still to be out" on whether we possess intelligence or not--which leaves just us to define "intelligence," and then decide if we have enough of it being educated in the world to develop practical space travel, before it's too late.

nickname · 2008-05-20 07:26:58

dicktice,

Time will tell if we are intelligent or not .
A non bias judge and jury for sure

I believe we will take up residence on the moon, Mars i think will be a struggle to begin with and take much longer than expected for even a small settling.
Stepping from Mars to the next closest place at a near star will be quite a jump, will we ever accomplish that?

The moon might be 20 years before we really setup shop, Mars 50 years or more, the nearest stars i think we are looking at 100's if not 1000's of years before we are ready for that step.
From that point on though humanity would slowly colonize everything possible in our galaxy.

Then the judge and jury (time) would render a decision in our favour.

dicktice · 2008-05-20 09:21:22

You and I are moving closer to each other's point of view regarding humanity's intellgence, but further from the topic of why the universe is silent--which as I have said is because we're the only life presently capable of transmitting electromagnetic rubbish in "our" galaxy. So I guess it's time for me to stop stating the obvious and get back to applying my intelligence to discussing ways and means of launching to and returning spacecraft routinely from orbit as reliably as atmospheric transport aircraft, eh?

nickname · 2008-05-21 08:26:24

dicktice,

I personally believe the future of getting into space will have more to do with magnetics than anything else.

If we had a very high powered induction motor inside a craft and charged the atmosphere around the ship we could form a linear motor to get to space easily.

Something like a space elevator but without the need for the structure as the elevator.

I think something along those lines will be the breakthrough.
We sure are off topic now though.
Sorry to the group for that.
If you would like to start a new section away from this one, I'm more than happy to continue on at that place dicktice.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#51 2008-05-12 06:02:43

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#52 2008-05-12 06:20:40

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#53 2008-05-12 07:55:56

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#54 2008-05-12 09:01:50

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#55 2008-05-12 10:36:19

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#56 2008-05-12 13:54:39

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#57 2008-05-12 14:05:52

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#58 2008-05-13 18:19:17

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#59 2008-05-13 20:24:33

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#60 2008-05-14 10:08:07

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#61 2008-05-14 11:58:28

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#62 2008-05-14 12:01:57

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#63 2008-05-14 12:48:05

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#64 2008-05-14 15:55:43

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#65 2008-05-14 17:32:38

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#66 2008-05-14 17:53:05

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#67 2008-05-14 17:55:02

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#68 2008-05-15 07:32:28

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#69 2008-05-15 16:47:40

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#70 2008-05-17 13:32:29

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#71 2008-05-18 04:23:02

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#72 2008-05-19 19:10:19

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#73 2008-05-20 07:26:58

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#74 2008-05-20 09:21:22

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

#75 2008-05-21 08:26:24

Re: Why is the Universe silent?

Board footer