PDA

View Full Version : 'Big Dipper'



Zim
09-29-2014, 12:30 PM
I'm looking at the constellation last night, and it looks twice as big as it did when I was younger, possible explanations:

i)We have travelled half the distance to it or away from it since then.
ii)The atmospheric shape has altered, again, and the curvature of the airspace molecular configurations created a lense bend causing illusionary expansion.
iii)Major technology industry replaced the starry sky with machine satellite grids and photovoltaic panelling and/or sheets on the outside, affectivrly absorbing all outer space light sources, and the ones we see now are artificially created satellites with controlled orbits, which are slightly askew of their space cartographic counterparts they are immitating.
iv)You are high on drugs and that is effecting my depth perception by proximity.
v)The drugs I took never really wore off.
vi)The movie The Matrix is not fiction and someone made it that way just for fun.
vii)The 'Eagle's Emminations' have for some reason caused slight indigestion resulting in bloating.
viii)Bears really are omnivorous, one managed to swallow the U, refer to answer vii.
ix)It is a giant life-blood ladel coming to scoop us up.
x)I could do this all day and I just dreamed up the whole thing and it isn't happening to anyone else.
xi)The Celestial temples of the Heavens melted and dispersed, but are trying really hard to go back to their original states and positions.
Thoughts, comments, hypothesis, alternate explanations welcome in this thread.

VEL
09-29-2014, 12:54 PM
Maybe it just looks bigger cause you are taller now and are closer to it! ;p
Also I have been trying to mess with the fabric of time and space so maybe I accidently did it?

Zim
09-29-2014, 01:12 PM
Human eyes are said to stay the same size from birth to death regardless of other organ growth, and the relative distance from my height to the ground is too slight for that to be a factor, as the constellation's apparent size would so very, very slightly changed upon laying on the ground to look, making my height of vantage almost zero, that I wouldn't notice a difference with my naked eye.

Your second notion, however, is definitely a factor. :)

Shane
09-29-2014, 01:26 PM
The big dipper is actually a alien mothership coming to invade Earth. Be careful.

rock_nog
09-29-2014, 02:53 PM
Well I can safely eliminate the first possibility. The stars of the Big Dipper, despite their appearance, are all at different distances to our planet. Alkaid, the star at the end of the handle, is 101 light years from Earth, Megrez, the point at which the handle joins the ladle, is 58 light years away, etc. Any major shift in our position close to or farther away from the constellation would therefore result in the stars not aligning in the same way as we currently observe them to. It is a coincidence of our position in the Cosmos that the constellation takes the shape that it does, and any other position would result in a different shape. Therefore, we can conclude that we cannot be significantly closer to the constellation than we were when you were a child. That and the solar system does not travel nearly fast enough through space to bridge such distances within a human lifetime. In fact, our speed through the Cosmos is only .22c (c being the speed of light), hardly fast enough to cover the distance in a human lifetime.

Zim
09-29-2014, 03:24 PM
I love how you wrote "only" .22c!

Given that triangular geometric conjecture states that the sum of all angles in a triangle is always 180 degrees:
Where a is the distance from Ursae Majoris Alkeid to Earth, and b is the distance from Ursae Majoris Alkeid to Ursae Majoris Dubhe, and distance c is the distance from Ursae Majoris Dubhe to Earth. Angle C is at Earth's location, angle A is at Alkeid's location, and angle B is at Dubhe's location, we can assert that the following statements are possible explainations.

While distance b has apparently visibly doubled over time from vantage point C;
Distances a, b, and c have possibly changed by n or -n;
Angles A, B, and C have possible changed by N or -N;
Due to the following possible mathematical reasoning:

Alkeid and Dubhe have moved further apart, distance b has increased, the Universe is "expanding," altering angle C to a larger degree;

Distances a and c decreased, Alkeid and Dubhe have moved closer to point C, distance b is still the same, altering angle C to a larger degree, the Universe is not "expanding" but instead a few bodies got closer to Earth for some reason.

Points A, B, and C have all moved further apart rationally equally, distances a, b, and c changed by n equally, angles A, B, and C remained the same, the Universe is "expanding," the luminosity of the stars changes relatively to the vacuum effect of void space around them increasing as well, increasing luminosity of points A and B due to natural elemental property disbursement properties, less external pressure and friction dampening photon travel.

Points A, B, and C moved closer together rationally equally, distances a, b, and c changed by -n equally, angles A, B, and C, are the same, the Universe is "shrinking," the luminosity of the stars decreases relatively to the elemental natural disbursement properties increasing mass pressure exertion from neighboring systems' fusion, increasing the star's fusion rate, decreasing luminosity due to external pressure of neighboring star systems, dampening photon travel.

Makes it seem like proof that Newton was right, without the ol' throw a ball up and it lands on my head trick.

Also interesting to me to note that while S/U=N, N is in the same ballpark as arctan, where:
S is 22c, the approximate speed of Earth through the cosmos in relation to the speed of light,
and U is the approximate circumference of the Planet Earth.
Approx. 40,480 miles per second, which might seem like a breakneck speed for any intents or purpose, the equation, involving light kinetics caused by radioactive fusion and potential masses with refractive, reflective, and absorption qualities on Earth actually creates a circle's angle, which is the strongest type of structure.

COCKBLAZER
09-29-2014, 06:43 PM
i love all this astronomical math talk
you should seemy big dipper
even hawking cant figure it out

Shane
09-29-2014, 11:15 PM
lol

Zim
10-11-2014, 10:15 PM
Eeeeeew. Nah!