Dubstepforum.com

Why on earth out of my window does it look so close to earth?

its a big moon

Ashley wrote:Why on earth out of my window does it look so close to earth?

Do you happen to be currently orbiting earth?

The Wiggle Baron wrote:

Ashley wrote:Why on earth out of my window does it look so close to earth?

Do you happen to be currently orbiting earth?

Sometimes I feel like it but im sitting here looking out of the window in the office and the moon is HUGE...bigger than normal..

Maybe someone shot it with a sniper

havent you heard? it's crashing towards us. they think it'll land in the UK.

the moon is 400 times closer to the earth than the sun and is 1/400th the diameter, making it the exact same size as the sun in the sky to our human perspective which allows for solar eclipses

this is considered to be the biggest coincidence in the universe

Parson wrote:the moon is 400 times closer to the earth than the sun and is 1/400th the size, making it the exact same size as the sun in the sky to our human perspective which allows for solar eclipses

this is considered to be the biggest coincidence in the universe

YES, nice fact

also the moon seems to be bigger when it is closer to the horizon but its an optical illusion

Parson wrote:this is considered to be the biggest coincidence in the universe

Im going to have to disagree with you here sire!

"The fine-tuning of the Universe includes the claim that the constants of the laws of the Universe are such that if they had been slightly different, the Universe would not have been life conducive. More precisely, given the four fundamental forces and basic array of fundamental particles, these forces and particles must have particular values and ratios to each other, otherwise the Universe could not produce life at any stage of its evolutionary development.

1. If the strong nuclear force is increased by 2%, there would be no protons (and hence no atoms) or protons would be bound to diprotons so that stars would burn a billion times faster than the sun.

2. If the weak nuclear force is increased by 3.4%, then there would be no hydrogen in the Universe, for it would have all been converted into helium shortly after the Big Bang. (b) If the weak nuclear force were decreased by 9%, then there would no elements heavier than hydrogen (or possibly no hydrogen at all if neutrons did not decay into protons).

3. If electromagnetism were slightly increased or decreased, stars would be too cold or too hot. Gravity is 1039 weaker than electromagnetism. If it were 1033 weaker, stars would be a billion times less massive and burn a million times faster.

4. Stable nucleides, essential to all biology and chemistry, require neutron-proton mass difference to be about twice the electron's mass (otherwise neutrons would all be turned into protons or vice-versa)."

Also

"If the Universe had a beginning, boundary conditions would be the arrangements and properties of the stuff of the Universe when it began. If the Universe had no beginning, its boundary conditions would be the arrangement and properties of the stuff of the Universe at any given time that determine the Universe's past and future states. If the Universe began with a singularity (as the standard Big Bang model suggests), conditions at the moment of the Big Bang must have values that lie within a very narrow range if the Universe was to be life conducive.

1. If the velocity of expansion were one part in a million greater than its actual value, then no stars or heavier elements would form.

2. If the velocity of expansion were one part in a million, million greater than its actual value, then the Universe would have collapsed before it was cool enough to form the elements.

Hence, the boundary conditions given an expanding Universe from a singularity are calibrated just so as to yield a Universe with the right conditions for the emergence of life."

...

I knew I remembered SOMETHING from philosophy!

(Anyone who cba to read that, its basically that if you changed any of the 4 forces of the univers by even a tiny amount, life could not have...happened)

Edit: btw, my argument is that life is a bigger coincidence

The Wiggle Baron wrote:

Parson wrote:this is considered to be the biggest coincidence in the universe

Im going to have to disagree with you here sire!

"The fine-tuning of the Universe includes the claim that the constants of the laws of the Universe are such that if they had been slightly different, the Universe would not have been life conducive. More precisely, given the four fundamental forces and basic array of fundamental particles, these forces and particles must have particular values and ratios to each other, otherwise the Universe could not produce life at any stage of its evolutionary development.

1. If the strong nuclear force is increased by 2%, there would be no protons (and hence no atoms) or protons would be bound to diprotons so that stars would burn a billion times faster than the sun.

2. If the weak nuclear force is increased by 3.4%, then there would be no hydrogen in the Universe, for it would have all been converted into helium shortly after the Big Bang. (b) If the weak nuclear force were decreased by 9%, then there would no elements heavier than hydrogen (or possibly no hydrogen at all if neutrons did not decay into protons).

3. If electromagnetism were slightly increased or decreased, stars would be too cold or too hot. Gravity is 1039 weaker than electromagnetism. If it were 1033 weaker, stars would be a billion times less massive and burn a million times faster.

4. Stable nucleides, essential to all biology and chemistry, require neutron-proton mass difference to be about twice the electron's mass (otherwise neutrons would all be turned into protons or vice-versa)."

Also

"If the Universe had a beginning, boundary conditions would be the arrangements and properties of the stuff of the Universe when it began. If the Universe had no beginning, its boundary conditions would be the arrangement and properties of the stuff of the Universe at any given time that determine the Universe's past and future states. If the Universe began with a singularity (as the standard Big Bang model suggests), conditions at the moment of the Big Bang must have values that lie within a very narrow range if the Universe was to be life conducive.

1. If the velocity of expansion were one part in a million greater than its actual value, then no stars or heavier elements would form.

2. If the velocity of expansion were one part in a million, million greater than its actual value, then the Universe would have collapsed before it was cool enough to form the elements.

Hence, the boundary conditions given an expanding Universe from a singularity are calibrated just so as to yield a Universe with the right conditions for the emergence of life."

...

I knew I remembered SOMETHING from philosophy!

(Anyone who cba to read that, its basically that if you changed any of the 4 forces of the univers by even a tiny amount, life could not have...happened)

Edit: btw, my argument is that life is a bigger coincidence

thats got nothing to do with the moon

i also don't believe in coincidence

Parson wrote:thats got nothing to do with the moon

Parson wrote:this is considered to be the biggest coincidence in the universe

So nyah nyah nya nyaah nyah

i'm not following you even a little bit here

Parson wrote:i also don't believe in coincidence

I was wondering if this would come up

I swear the more you look at stuff like this, the more it keeps enforcing the idea of a creator/prime mover. Pisses me off cos its such an unsatisfactory end...

well the moon is an anomaly even in the universal sense.

its such a coincidence that it points to a much lesser creator than that of the universe

Just saying I was only disagreeing with you saying that the moon being 1/400th the size of the sun etc. is the biggest coincidence in the universe. I was saying life is! (I know its a petty point, but it wasnt meant to go on this long and I basically just remembered this from philosophy and got keen on reading up on it again )

well what i was getting as is it seems the moon was made by aliens

...I see

(backs away from the conversation slowly...)

if there was a giant cheeseburger circling the earth, there would be no question that it was made by aliens and not god

the moon isn't like any other satellite in the universe with its relationship to the planet it circles