• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Is our civilization in danger?


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#1 bobdrake12

  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 18 January 2003 - 12:35 PM


Posted Image

Posted Image

How much of a threat are Near-Earth Objects (NEOs)?


What is our greatest threat to our civilization?

Could it be threats from outer space?

Could it be the misuse of technology out of ignorance or greed?

Could the greatest threat to this civilization be occurring within the next 50 years?

Dr. Kaku addresses these questions in an article shown below.

bob

http://www.greatmyst...nterviewmk.html


An Interview with MICHIO KAKU (excerpts)

by Stephen Marshall - Guerrilla News Network

The Prophets Conference New York City - Techniques of Discovery - May 2001



Let’s talk now about zero-point energy. Could you explain what that means? Secondly, is the world not dominated by a certain paradigm of energy cultivation that has certain economic interests who protect it and is there not, at every moment of a paradigm shift, a group who are threatened by that shift? Is there a danger to those people and have they, historically tried to prevent it - like when the Copernican model came in or went out?

Paradigm shifts are wonderful. They are fantastic. We study them in our history books. But they are also very dangerous because some of the proponents of the paradigm shift get executed. There is an elite that protects the old paradigm and they are threatened by the emergence of a new paradigm. For example, take a look at Copernicus. Why did Copernicus write his greatest masterpiece as an old dying man on his deathbed? Because he was no fool. Take a look at Giordano Bruno. Giordano Bruno, the great Italian philosopher, said that the Sun is a star. Now why should the Catholic Church be threatened by a statement that the Sun is a star? Because if the Sun is a star, then stars are suns. And if stars are suns, they may have planets. And if they have planets, then they may have life. And if life exists on these other planets – millions of them – then do they have the Virgin Mary? Do they have Jesus Christ? Do they have the sacraments? Do they have the saints? Do they have the Catholic Church? Do they have salvation? Do they have indulgences? I mean it goes on forever!

So the Catholic Church, being threatened by Bruno, simply burned him alive in the streets of Rome. Rather than have to deal with a million Jesus Christs and Virgin Marys in outer space. Well, paradigm shifts are nasty. However, Einstein introduced several. And now we have to realize that yes, the old paradigm shifts can threaten some people.

Take a look at energy, for example. Nicola Tesla, the great mathematical and physical genius, had some bizarre ideas. One of them for example, was the alternating current. Edison did not like alternating current at all, and was very threatened by the new paradigm of Nicola Tesla. He took advertisements showing that alternating current was dangerous – we use them in the electric chair, they kill people. Well nobody uses DC current anymore in their home. We all use AC. But of course Thomas Edison was very threatened by Nicola Tesla.

Well, Nicola Tesla was a very interesting man. He came up with an idea called zero-point energy. Even the vacuum of nothingness has some kind of energy. He thought that perhaps we could extract that energy for purposes that would threaten the oil companies. Well, we physicists today have found zero-point energy. It’s very small - it’s called the Casimir Effect. It has been measured in the laboratory and believe it or not, we even think the Casimir Effect may be useful for time machines if you have enough energy concentrated at that point. However, it is very difficult. We would have to be at least Type-2 – what we call Type-2 or Type-3 civilizations with fantastic power… galactic power, before we can manipulate this kind of Casimir energy.

But the irony is, we think that we have found dark energy. Dark energy, the energy of nothing, is now thought to be what is driving the galaxies apart. It turns out that Einstein’s equation has a loophole. That even nothingness may have energy associated with it - the energy of nothing - and that energy, we think, is driving the galaxies apart. The latest cosmological data supports what is called the inflationary model and the inflationary model has within it the ability to explain something called dark matter – the energy of nothing - which pushes the galaxies apart, meaning that the universe is probably accelerating – meaning that the universe is not contracting, not expanding in a very simple way, but actually accelerating because of anti-gravity – the anti-gravity of the energy of nothing. So Tesla, in some sense, was prophetic. He pointed to the energy of nothing. People laughed at him.

We still don’t know whether you can extract meaningful energy from it but the irony is he has the last laugh – that the energy of nothing is perhaps driving the expansion of the universe itself. Now let me talk about another paradigm shift. People are talking about energy. We need lots of it. We need nuclear energy. We need more carbon-based energy. We need more fossil fuel plants. And that old paradigm is led, of course, by the oil companies, and they are threatened by perhaps a new paradigm – the paradigm of conservation. Solar energy, wind power, renewable forms of energy that are not dependent on nuclear energy, not dependent on carbon. Well the numbers are very clear. Solar power is within striking distance of coal and oil, and coal and oil create, as we know, the greenhouse effect.

Now I believe that our Earth is making a transition to what’s called a Type-1 civilization. A planetary civilization that harnesses truly planetary power that can control the weather perhaps. Eventually we can become Type-2 – a civilization that controls the power of a star, and uses solar flares for its energy source. Eventually we may become Type-3 – galactic, perhaps harnessing the power of a black hole at the center of the galaxy itself. But the most dangerous transition – the most dangerous paradigm shift – the most dangerous paradigm shift of all is between Type-0 and Type-1.


Before you go on, could you just define a Type-0 civilization because we haven't done that yet.

A Type-0 civilization is a civilization that gets its energy from dead plants, oil and coal. They don’t control the weather. They don’t control earthquakes and volcanoes like a Type-1 civilization. The don’t play with solar flares and ignite dying stars, like a Type-2 civilization. They don’t cruise the lanes of the galaxy like a Type-3 civilization.

We are Type-0.

We are not even on the scale yet. However the transition between Type-0 and Type-1 will take perhaps 100 years and you see evidence of this already. The Internet is a Type-1 telephone system. English will be the language of a Type-1 civilization. The European Union is the beginning of a Type-1 economy. Hollywood, rap music, blue jeans – that’s going to be the culture, like it or not, of a Type-1 civilization.

The oil companies are protecting the old paradigm. The old paradigm of carbon dioxide. The old paradigm which is heating up the planet Earth. The poles are beginning to melt. Alaska is beginning to thaw out. Every single glacier on the planet Earth is receding. Within 30-50 years, there may be no snows of Kilimanjaro. There may be no Alps in which to ski. Greenland will gradually disappear in the next fifty years. We are talking about a catastrophic shift in the weather of the planet. The growing areas – the bread baskets of the world – like the wheat belt and the corn belt could turn into a dustbowl like they were in the 1930s. We are talking about monster hurricanes energized by warming sea water that will devastate coastal cities. We are talking about mosquitoes and malaria creeping northward as the temperatures begin to rise. We are talking about growing areas turning into deserts. We are talking about the weather going north. Canada may become relatively warm and have tremendous heat belts. The United States may eventually have the climate of Mexico and Mexico may have the climate of the Sahara Desert.

Think about this.

That’s the paradigm shift which will take place unless we can break the grip, the death grip, of the oil companies and the petrochemical industry who inject tremendous greenhouse gases in our atmosphere. So why is it when we look in outer space, we don’t see Type-1, Type-2, Type-3 civilizations? There should be 10,000 of them according to astronomer Frank Drake, in our own galaxy. Perhaps and just perhaps, there were 10,000 Type-0 civilizations in our galaxy, but they all self-destructed because a transition from Type-0 to Type-1 is the most dangerous of all transitions. It is the greatest paradigm shift of all because that means we have the power to self-destruct.

The generation now alive – the generation watching this video – that generation is the most important generation that has ever been born – that has ever walked the surface of the Earth because that generation - the generation of today - will determine whether we make the transition from Type-0 to Type-1… to a planetary civilization… to an age of Aquarius. Or whether we pollute our atmosphere with carbon dioxide… whether we irradiate ourselves with the power of uranium. When we go into outer space one day, and we see other civilizations in space. Perhaps we will see dead civilizations. Perhaps we will see atmospheres irradiated with the power of uranium. Perhaps atmospheres too hot to sustain life. Perhaps we’ll see planets that tried to make the transition from Type-1 to Type–2 but never made it. Here we have a warning and that warning is: unless we can control the sectarianism, the nationalism, the fundamentalism, the hatreds and anger that came with our rise from the swamp… unless we can control these passions, we may never make it to the age of Aquarius.

OK. You talked about humans evolving into masters of the universe. By your own definition, if this generation were to realize its potential and aid this paradigm shift in becoming a Type-1 civilization - we would be able to become masters of the universe. Could you define that and tell us about what we should aim for to achieve it?

Some people say: ‘Of what use is the unified field theory? Can I get better sliced bread? Can I get better cable television from the unified field theory?’ Well, let me tell you this. Gravity was the first of the great forces to be worked out by Newton. Newton created a calculus – a mechanics by which to understand the force of gravity. That mechanics helped to unleash the power of steam engines and steam engines, in turn, ushered in the industrial revolution which toppled the kings and queens in feudal dynasties of old – ushering in the age of machines.

Not bad for a theory of gravity.

Then, about 150 years ago, we had the work of Fereday, the work of Maxwell, trying to harness the power of electricity and magnetism. And today we know that our cities are lit up with the power of electromagnetic force. The power that gives us laser beams and the Internet and computers. The power to revolutionize medicine with MRI scans and PET scans and CAT scans. Then we have the two nuclear forces. These nuclear forces not only energize the Sun but they also energize the possibility of nuclear warfare. Hydrogen bombs and atomic bombs – their power derives from these four fundamental forces. And now we are talking about unifying all four fundamental forces into a unified field theory – a theory perhaps based on an equation just one inch long. And what I ask myself is, ‘will we have the wisdom… the wisdom to handle this kind of power… the power to be masters of space and time?’

Now this, of course, is still distant in the future. You would probably have to be at least Type-2 before we could begin to manipulate space and time. You see at the Planck energy – a fantastic energy – ten to the nineteen billion electron volts - one with 19 zeroes after it – that’s the energy of the unified field theory. That’s the energy at which space becomes unstable. If I had a piece of ice for example and heated it up, eventually it would melt, and then the water would boil, then the steam would rise, then the atoms of water itself would disassociate into hydrogen and oxygen, then they would be ripped apart into nuclei and electrons. And if I pump in enough energy, a baby universe may begin to emerge out of your oven. We are talking about cosmic power – the power to be masters of space and time. I hope that one day we have the wisdom – the power of a God and the wisdom of Solomon to go with it – to be able to handle the kind of power that is unleashable once we have the unified field theory.

Edited by bobdrake12, 18 January 2003 - 04:03 PM.


#2 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 18 January 2003 - 12:58 PM

Posted Image

Perhaps, the most dangerous pollution is that which we cannot see.


In his interview, Dr. Kaku discusses the potential that this civilization currently has the power to self-destruct.

We are not talking about the power of self-destructing thousands, or even millions of years from now. We are talking about the power of self destructing today.

This civilization is at a threshold. Will it use its great technology to self-destruct or to move foreward to a Type-1 civilization?

Per Dr. Kaku this civilization could essentially pollute itself to death:


The oil companies are protecting the old paradigm. The old paradigm of carbon dioxide. The old paradigm which is heating up the planet Earth. The poles are beginning to melt. Alaska is beginning to thaw out. Every single glacier on the planet Earth is receding. Within 30-50 years, there may be no snows of Kilimanjaro. There may be no Alps in which to ski. Greenland will gradually disappear in the next fifty years. We are talking about a catastrophic shift in the weather of the planet. The growing areas – the bread baskets of the world – like the wheat belt and the corn belt could turn into a dustbowl like they were in the 1930s. We are talking about monster hurricanes energized by warming sea water that will devastate coastal cities. We are talking about mosquitoes and malaria creeping northward as the temperatures begin to rise. We are talking about growing areas turning into deserts. We are talking about the weather going north. Canada may become relatively warm and have tremendous heat belts. The United States may eventually have the climate of Mexico and Mexico may have the climate of the Sahara Desert.

Think about this.

That’s the paradigm shift which will take place unless we can break the grip, the death grip, of the oil companies and the petrochemical industry who inject tremendous greenhouse gases in our atmosphere.


The question is how fragile is this planet?

Also, how much could the misuse of this civilization's current technolgy be responsible for disease (e.g. cancer possibly due to diets containing too much processed and fried foods high in sugar and fats while low in nutrition), premature death (possibly due to exposure to toxic substances) and even potentially negatively altering the human DNA of future generations?

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 18 January 2003 - 04:09 PM.


#3 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 18 January 2003 - 01:13 PM

In addition to the risk of polluting itself to death, this civilization also has the power to self-destruct through war.

Quoting Dr. Kaku in the article:

We have to realize that physics means power - the power over matter, energy, space and time itself.  It’s a sword.  It’s a sword that could cut against humanity and destroy humanity in a nuclear confrontation. But it’s a double-edged sword.  The other edge of the sword could cut against ignorance, disease and poverty.  Science is a tool.  The question is, who will wield the tool?  Will it be the warmongers?  Will it be the petrochemical industry and the polluters?   Or will it be the will of the people that wield the sword of science?   That is not yet decided.


What is the fate of this current civilization? Will it be decided in this very generation?

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 18 January 2003 - 04:18 PM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#4 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 18 January 2003 - 01:27 PM

What could some of the root causes be for the potential self-destruction of this current civilization?

Per the article:

Here we have a warning and that warning is: unless we can control the sectarianism, the nationalism, the fundamentalism, the hatreds and anger that came with our rise from the swamp… unless we can control these passions, we may never make it to the age of Aquarius.


On the other hand, if this civilzation uses its technolgy in a self-promoting fashion, it could progress technologically to create its own universe(s).

Per the article:

And if I pump in enough energy, a baby universe may begin to emerge out of your oven. We are talking about cosmic power – the power to be masters of space and time. I hope that one day we have the wisdom – the power of a God and the wisdom of Solomon to go with it – to be able to handle the kind of power that is unleashable once we have the unified field theory.


bob

#5 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 18 January 2003 - 01:51 PM

Posted Image

Could a stone-age man comprehend people using computers sending almost instantaneous messages world-wide on the Internet?


Posted Image

Can people in the 21st century envision how to create a universe using Type-4 technology?


If this civilization could successfully advance to a Type-1 civilization, I believe that the so-called insurmountable problems that are envisioned today will melt away as science could eventually progress to technologically solve any problem.

Can we successfully envision the future? To express this concept in a different light, how could a stone-age man comprehend how to solve the complexities of the information age?

Even so, if we think in terms of energy and the potential constructive use of it, we might get a glimpse of what could be.

bob

http://www.mkaku.org/inter1.html

Posted Image


The Physics of Interstellar Travel (excerpts)

The first realistic attempt to analyze extra-terrestrial civilizations from the point of view of the laws of physics and the laws of thermodynamics was by Russian astrophysicist Nicolai Kardashev. He based his ranking of possible civilizations on the basis of total energy output which could be quantified and used as a guide to explore the dynamics of advanced civilizations:

Type I – this civilization harnesses the energy output of an entire planet.

Type II – this civilization harnesses the energy output of a star, and generates about 10 billion times the energy output of a Type I civilization.

Type III – this civilization harnesses the energy output of a galaxy, or about 10 billion times the energy output of a Type II civilization.

A Type I civilization would be able to manipulate truly planetary energies. They might, for example, control or modify their weather. They would have the power to manipulate planetary phenomena, such as hurricanes, which can release the energy of hundreds of hydrogen bombs. Perhaps volcanoes or even earthquakes may be altered by such a civilization.

A Type II civilization may resemble the Federation of Planets seen on the TV program Star Trek (which is capable of igniting stars and has colonized a tiny fraction of the near-by stars in the galaxy). A Type II civilization might be able to manipulate the power of solar flares.

A Type III civilization may resemble the Borg, or perhaps the Empire found in the Star Wars saga. They have colonized the galaxy itself, extracting energy from hundreds of billions of stars.

By contrast, we are a Type 0 civilization, which extracts its energy from dead plants (oil and coal). Growing at the average rate of about 3% per year, however, one may calculate that our own civilization may attain Type I status in about 100-200 years, Type II status in a few thousand years, and Type III status in about 100,000 to a million years. These time scales are insignificant when compared with the universe itself.

Edited by bobdrake12, 18 January 2003 - 02:27 PM.


#6 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 18 January 2003 - 05:13 PM

Could a stone-age man comprehend people using computers sending almost instantaneous messages world-wide on the Internet?


Can people in the 21st century envision how to create a universe using Type-4 technology?


The answer is simple, it is the expression of it, that is difficult. The short answer is yes to both questions. The long answer is the real task, the most important challenge of this moment in watershed social development; and that is the expression of such understanding in a language that is truly universal for humanity.

Reason can overcome irrational behavior but only if the human is given the information in a manner that is individually comprehensible and "reasonably", simultaneously consistent in the message.

The "HOW" question, as in HOW does a culture make the transistion from Type 0 to Type 1? Is only answered by first creating a global dialogue, and that is happening. The second phase is in the content and character of the dialogue. Herein lies the threat of violence.

Could a caveman understand the Internet?

This was a being that could talk across species to another being in a mutual language sufficient to domesticate that species. How would this being understand is more the question, and that would be through definitions that fit their reality, they might call it spirit talking and understand the underlying technology with all the comparative scientific awareness that the average person today would. But instead of calling it science they would just characterize it as magic and go on using it.

Could I as a member of a Type 0 culture imagine the applications of a Type 4 technology. Again why not?

Such mutation is always happening when examining individual advancement in comparison to the larger populations. This is a simple example of the failure of the assumption of uniformity in respect to individual potential but limiting our view to what the populations statistically performs like.

But would it be an easy awareness for a member of any particular cultural level to be confronted with an accelerated development by virtue of the threat to "reason" in the face of overwhelming awareness?

No.

The threat to reason comes from the necessity of facing daunting challenges to previous definitions of how one percieves reality. Our personal psychology becomes adjusted through language to process "reality" in accord with our culturally derived definitions and when those definitions start failing in a momumental fashion most individuals start to emotionally collapse.

This fear also goes toward instigating the violent acting out behaviors as the "threat" is believed (emotionally percieved) from that which is powerful and not understood. Such "believed threat" foments the kinds of compulsive behavior we are now witness to on a global social scale.

But the original question is broader and asks only if the possibility exists for an individual from one lower cultural level to transcend their personal limits and cultural bias to leap forward to another level and that can be seen more optimistically and answered yes.

Is that transisition easy?

Of course not or we wouldn't be in the mess we are already in.

#7 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 18 January 2003 - 05:57 PM

Lazarus Long,

Outstanding! Absolutely outstanding!!!

Posted Image

bob

#8 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 18 January 2003 - 07:00 PM

Thank you Bob.

Now if only it didn't seem like so much of what we exchange were falling on deaf ears.

Reason is also at the heart of self interest, and there is an inherent challenge to greed when the avarice causes self destructive habits (we call these vices) but it is difficult for most people to exchange the habit of acquisition for one that assess self interest in larger perspective.

This a sense that is often fostered by the development of family where by the parent places a greater regard in the welfare of the offspring over their own. This is not however universally experienced and tends to be more a female perspective than male but it is universally present with regard to all cultures and is only seriously challenged under extreme conditions of environmental hardship such as caused by violence/war/tyranny/crime, poverty, and famine/plague/ draught etc.

There is a very old saying: "If wishes were horses beggars would ride". Clearly in this matter we common beggars, you and I. We suplicate among the mass of our fellows and ask them to see how to be another way.

Someday perhaps together you and I will ride but for now it is still the Four Horsemen that rule the field, and you and I beg among the milling throng and the language of destruction is that which most appear eager, willing, and all too able to understand.

#9 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 18 January 2003 - 07:19 PM

Classic Successful Type 0 thought process.

Everything I need to know about life, I learned from Noah's Ark...

One: Don't miss the boat.

Two: Remember that we are all in the same boat.

Three: Plan ahead. It wasn't raining when Noah built the Ark.

Four: Stay fit. When you're 600 years old, some one may ask you to do something really big.

Five: Don't listen to critics; just get on with the job that needs to be done.

Six: Build your future on high ground.

Seven: For safety's sake, travel in pairs.

Eight: Speed isn't always an advantage. The snails were on board with the cheetahs.

Nine: When you're stressed, float a while.

Ten: Remember, the Ark was built by amateurs; the Titanic by professionals.

So far I personally agree with all that has been offered but it is the added eleventh idea that makes it Type 0,

Eleven: No matter the storm, when you are with God, there's always a rainbow waiting.

#10 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 18 January 2003 - 07:55 PM

Posted Image

Burning at the stake is an example of covert control used by a Type 0 civilization


Another Example of a Classic Type 0 Thought Process.

Lazarus Long,

This one comes from Kaku in the article above.

Paradigm shifts are wonderful. They are fantastic. We study them in our history books. But they are also very dangerous because some of the proponents of the paradigm shift get executed. There is an elite that protects the old paradigm and they are threatened by the emergence of a new paradigm. For example, take a look at Copernicus. Why did Copernicus write his greatest masterpiece as an old dying man on his deathbed? Because he was no fool. Take a look at Giordano Bruno. Giordano Bruno, the great Italian philosopher, said that the Sun is a star. Now why should the Catholic Church be threatened by a statement that the Sun is a star? Because if the Sun is a star, then stars are suns. And if stars are suns, they may have planets. And if they have planets, then they may have life. And if life exists on these other planets – millions of them – then do they have the Virgin Mary? Do they have Jesus Christ? Do they have the sacraments? Do they have the saints? Do they have the Catholic Church? Do they have salvation? Do they have indulgences? I mean it goes on forever!

So the Catholic Church, being threatened by Bruno, simply burned him alive in the streets of Rome. Rather than have to deal with a million Jesus Christs and Virgin Marys in outer space. Well, paradigm shifts are nasty.


Then again, if everything revolved around the earth and only intelligent life existed on earth, it just might be easier to explain the Type 0 concept of the Devine King.

Poor Giordano Bruno lived in an era when the authors of the books (which challenged the current paradigm) were burned rather than just having the author's books burned.

bob

http://www.theharbin...71111/birx.html


Posted Image

Giordano Filippo Bruno (1548-1600)

I found it utterly incredible that, during the Italian Renaissance, Bruno as a natural philosopher had developed a cosmology grounded in the concept of infinity. In fact, Bruno's worldview far surpasses those ideas of Cusa, Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler, and Galileo: it argues for an infinite number of stars, planets, and galaxies! Likewise, Bruno was an early spokesman for the emerging science of exobiology. He boldly held that life forms, including intelligent beings, exist on a plurality of worlds elsewhere in this infinite universe.

With steadfast determination, creative thoughts and controversial books, Bruno challenged those entrenched beliefs of the Roman Catholic faith, the Peripatetic biases of his contemporary astronomers and physicists, and that unrelenting authority given to the Aristotelian worldview. Unfortunately, Bruno as ingenious freethinker had a personality that aggravated both the general populace and serious scholars to such a degree that he could never claim a permanent home anywhere during his lifetime; nevertheless, he no doubt saw himself as a citizen of the entire universe.

After many years of solitary wandering through Europe and with reckless abandon, the courageous Bruno returned to Italy in optimistic hope of convincing the new Pope, Clement VIII, of at least some of his controversial ideas. As a consequence of entrapment by the young nobleman Giovani Mocenigo, the self-unfrocked monk was tried and condemned twice (first by the Venetian Holy Inquisition in 1592, and then by the Roman Holy Inquisition in 1593). Bruno's critical writings, which pointed out the hypocrisy and bigotry within the Church, along with his tempestuous personality and undisciplined behavior, easily made him a victim of the religious and philosophical intolerance of the 16th century. Bruno was excommunicated by the Catholic, Lutheran and Calvinist Churches for his heretical beliefs. The Catholic hierarchy found him guilty of infidelity and many errors, as well as serious crimes of heresy. However, Bruno stubbornly refused to recant his lofty vision. He was subsequently handed over to the Italian state, which determined his final fate. The philosopher was imprisoned in the dungeons of the Holy Inquisition in Rome for seven years, denied pen and paper as well as books and visitors, relentlessly interrogated and probably tortured. After enduring this living tomb, he was eventually sentenced to death under the influence of the Jesuit Cardinal Robert Bellarmine. Obstinate to the end, Bruno never recanted his heretical position.

At Rome on February 17, 1600, at the age of 52, the contemptuous and rebellious Giordano Bruno was bound, gagged and publicly burned alive at the stake in the center of the Campo dei Fiori, not far from the Vatican, while priests chanted their litanies. His wind-blown ashes mixed with the very earth that had sustained his life and thought. Three years later, the writings of the apostate monk and intrepid thinker were placed on the Index.

Edited by bobdrake12, 18 January 2003 - 08:03 PM.


#11 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 19 January 2003 - 04:30 AM

Posted Image

The Four Horsemen



Someday perhaps together you and I will ride but for now it is still the Four Horsemen that rule the field, and you and I beg among the milling throng and the language of destruction is that which most appear eager, willing, and all too able to understand.


Lazarus Long,

So far the Four Horsemen seem to still rule.

Perhaps, the historic lessons of the Bruno's have taught the Kaku's (associated with ASP - Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton) to measure their words, but for those who are adroit the message still comes across loud and clear. The question is how many are listening much less listening adroitly?


http://images.google...ges/Rainbow.jpg

Yes, and the general population appears to feed upon the pablum chain letters (such as the ones symbolized by the rainbow) rather than face the clear and distinct dangers that currently confront this civilization. Escapism is so easy to do these days, but is it the best thing to do?

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 19 January 2003 - 04:46 AM.


#12 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 20 January 2003 - 03:21 PM

To desire escape is as natural as any emotion in the face of overwhelming adversity, but even the rat will turn and fight when offered no last alternative avenue. Even a rat will build a redoubt and face its death head on. Escape, if it offers survival, is a legitimate choice for weaker species. We are the descendants of the most humble weakest creatures that walked this Earth and it was their very willingness to hide deep in burrows beneath this Earth that made possible the survival of life after the impact of the last great asteroid. Escapism in itself is not the problem.

The problem is that this brand of escapism is neurotic and not effective at all at avoiding the dangers, only in avoiding the "stress" of the emotions surrounding the threat. It is a counter productive social behavior that foments denial and disdain rather than a rational confrontation toward real threats with an eye toward the development of realistic options.

Ironically, and counter productively, the fostering of escapism has become a "politically correct' behavior as it make the members of any group more comfortable with the contradictions their official policies often contain. But to escape is primarilly valid only if it means that the chances of survival by other means are almost nonexistent. Otherwise it is just cowardice, and we are actively making cowards of our children and each other. But confrontation doesn't automatically mean conflict, either, but I digress.

As in the martial arts, to use the strength of an opponent against them is a valid strategy and escape causes the opponent to come to you. If you do not succumb to panic and hysteria this can offer an opportunity at changing an apparantly certain outcome and creating new possibilities.

Much of the "Feel Good" social fabric is predicated upon existential guilt and complicity that is why it is relatively easy to foster such widespread collective denial, or the second option of this polemic, the transference of blame to a symbolic third party. The scape goating of social subgroups is the fall back position of demogogues that find their "Imperial Robes" dissolvinog.

But is a paradigm shift possible socially or is it only survivors of calamity that can adapt to inescapable new conditions?

There is a lot of fatalism inherent in the above question but there is also the alternative of positive thinking and the hope this can provide. Can we concieve the inconceivable?

Yes.

Are we the masters of our own fate?

We are in constant rebellion against determinism and this is the competition for survival that offers both the greatest opportunity and the most dire threat.

To escape the looming jaws of the seemingly invincible enemy is a but a very small victory but it is the first of many that may bring down the walls of the mightiest opponent.

Yet it is no small irony that the very behavior and psychology of escapism is not leading away from the threat but directly into a trap that is both avoidable and one that could be disabled by the overcoming of this very attitude of denial that so aptly blinds us to the ramifications of our chosen paths, to the repercussions of our controllable choices. Much of what people have been taught to need is not real, much of what they truly need is ignored,

Why does this overt contradiction not startle more into the wakefulness of direct action?

#13 Iolair

  • Guest
  • 3 posts
  • 0

Posted 20 January 2003 - 09:46 PM

"If the dynamics of the universe from the beginning shaped the course of the heavens, lighted the sun, and formed the earth, if this same dynamism brought forth the continents and the seas and atmosphere, if it awakened life in the primordial cell and then brought into being the unnumbered variety of living beings, and finally brought us into being and guided us safely through the turbulent centuries, there is reason to believe that this same guiding process is precisely what has awakened in us our present understanding of ourselves and our relation to this stupendous process. Sensitized to such guidance from the very structure and functioning of the universe, we can have confidence in the future that awaits the human venture."
Thomas Berry, The Dream of the Earth

#14 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 21 January 2003 - 02:51 AM

Yet it is no small irony that the very behavior and psychology of escapism is not leading away from the threat but directly into a trap that is both avoidable and one that could be disabled by the overcoming of this very attitude of denial that so aptly blinds us to the ramifications of our chosen paths, to the repercussions of our controllable choices. Much of what people have been taught to need is not real, much of what they truly need is ignored.


Lazarus Long,

I agree!!!

Let's take the case of Near Earth Objects (NEOs).

Posted Image


Rather than facing up to the NEO threat, it appears that only recommendations have been made been. To-date, apparently no real implementation plan exists for this planet to avoid being hit by a NEO. Thus, it appears that the NEO risk to human and other forms of life still persisits.


bob

http://www.spaceref....r.html?pid=2634

Posted Image


Report Of The Near Earth Objects Task Force Published (excerpts)


Posted Image


Lord Sainsbury, the Minister with responsibility for space, today published the report of the Near Earth Objects Task Force set up in January this year, to look at the potential risk posed by collision of the Earth with Near Earth Objects.

Executive Summary

Enormous numbers of asteroids and comets orbit the Sun. Only a tiny fraction of them follow paths that bring them near the Earth. These Near Earth Objects range in size from pebbles to mountains, and travel at high speeds.

Such objects have collided with the Earth since its formation, and brought the carbon and water which made life possible. They have also caused widespread changes in the Earth's surface, and occasional extinctions of such living organisms as the dinosaurs. The threat has only recently been recognised and accepted. This has come about through advances in telescope technology allowing the study of these usually faint objects, the identification of craters on the moon, other planets and the Earth as a result of impacts, and the dramatic collision of pieces of the comet Shoemaker-Levy 9 with Jupiter in 1994.

Impacts represent a significant risk to human and other forms of life. Means now exist to mitigate the consequences of such impacts for the human species.

The largest uncertainty in risk analysis arises from our incomplete knowledge of asteroids whose orbits bring them near to the Earth. With greater information about them, fairly accurate predictions can be made. The risk from comets is between 10 and 30 per cent of that from asteroids. The advance warning period for a potential impact from a long period comet may be as short as a year compared to decades or centuries for asteroids. Short period comets can be considered along with asteroids.

The threat from Near Earth Objects raises major issues, among them the inadequacy of current knowledge, confirmation of hazard after initial observation, disaster management (if the worst came to the worst), methods of mitigation including deflection, and reliable communication with the public. The Task Force believes that steps should be taken at government level to set in place appropriate bodies - international, European including national - where these issues can be discussed and decisions taken. The United Kingdom is well placed to make a significant contribution to what should be a global effort.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: We recommend that the Government should seek partners, preferably in Europe, to build in the southern hemisphere an advanced new 3 metre-class survey telescope for surveying substantially smaller objects than those now systematically observed by other telescopes. The telescope should be dedicated to work on Near Earth Objects and be located on an appropriate site.

Recommendation 2: We recommend that arrangements be made for observational data obtained for other purposes by wide-field facilities, such as the new British VISTA telescope, to be searched for Near Earth Objects on a nightly basis.

Recommendation 3: We recommend that the Government draw the attention of the European Space Agency to the particular role that GAIA, one of its future missions, could play in surveying the sky for Near Earth Objects. The potential in GAIA, and in other space missions such as NASA's SIRTF and the European Space Agency's BepiColombo, for Near Earth Object research should be considered as a factor in defining a potential threat were found.

Recommendation 4: We recommend that the 1 metre Johannes Kapteyn Telescope on La Palma, in which the United Kingdom is a partner, be dedicated to follow-up observations of Near Earth Objects.

Recommendation 5: We recommend that negotiations take place with the partners with whom the United Kingdom shares suitable telescopes to establish an arrangement for small amounts of time to be provided under appropriate financial terms for spectroscopic follow-up of Near Earth Objects.

Recommendation 6: We recommend that the Government explore, with like-minded countries, the case for mounting a number of coordinated space rendezvous missions based on relatively inexpensive microsatellites, each to visit a different type of Near Earth Object to establish its detailed characteristics.

Recommendation 7: We recommend that the Government - together with other governments, the International Astronomical Union and other interested parties - seek ways of putting the governance and funding of the Minor Planet Center on a robust international footing. including the Center's links to executive agencies if a potential threat were found.

Recommendation 8: We recommend that the Government should help promote multi-disciplinary studies of the consequences of impacts from Near Earth Objects on the Earth in British and European institutions concerned, including the Research Councils, universities and the European Science Foundation.

Recommendation 9: We recommend that the Government, with other governments, set in hand studies to look into the practical possibilities of mitigating the results of impact and deflecting incoming objects.

Recommendation 10: We recommend that the Government urgently seek with other governments and international bodies (in particular the International Astronomical Union) to establish a forum for open discussion of the scientific aspects of Near Earth Objects, and a forum for international action. Preferably these should be brought together in an international body. It might have some analogy with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, thereby covering science, impacts, and mitigation.

Recommendation 11: We recommend that the Government discuss with like-minded European governments how Europe could best contribute to international efforts to cope with Near Earth Objects, coordinate activities in Europe, and work towards becoming a partner with the United States, with complementary roles in specific areas. We recommend that the European Space Agency and the European Southern Observatory, with the European Union and the European Science Foundation, work out a strategy for this purpose in time for discussion at the ministerial meeting of the European Space Agency in 2001.

Recommendation 12: We recommend that the Government appoint a single department to take the lead for coordination and conduct of policy on Near Earth Objects, supported by the necessary inter-departmental machinery.

Recommendation 13: We recommend that a British Centre for Near Earth Objects be set up whose mission would be to promote and coordinate work on the subject in Britain; to provide an advisory service to the Government, other relevant authorities, the public and the media, and to facilitate British involvement in international activities. In doing so it would call on the Research Councils involved, in particular the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council and the Natural Environment Research Council, and on universities, observatories and other bodies concerned in Britain.

Recommendation 14: We recommend that one of the most important functions of a British Centre for Near Earth Objects be to provide, a public service which would give balanced information in clear, direct and comprehensible language as need might arise. Such a service must respond to very different audiences: on the one hand Parliament, the general public and the media; and on the other the academic, scientific and environmental communities. In all of this, full use should be made of the Internet. As a first step, the Task Force recommends that a feasibility study be established to determine the functions, terms of reference and funding for such a Centre.

Edited by bobdrake12, 21 January 2003 - 03:33 AM.


#15 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 21 January 2003 - 03:17 AM

If the dynamics of the universe from the beginning shaped the course of the heavens, lighted the sun, and formed the earth, if this same dynamism brought forth the continents and the seas and atmosphere, if it awakened life in the primordial cell and then brought into being the unnumbered variety of living beings, and finally brought us into being and guided us safely through the turbulent centuries, there is reason to believe that this same guiding process is precisely what has awakened in us our present understanding of ourselves and our relation to this stupendous process.


Iolair,

Thanks so much for your contribution.


http://images.google.../May/galaxy.jpg

Creation is a very beautiful.

I fully believe that if this civilization reaches Type-4 technology that it would be able to create a universe.

I feel the key is for this current civilization's survival is for it to successfully make the the very precarious transition from a Type-0 to a Type-1 civilization. In addition to the self-destruction risks of war and pollution, I believe this civilization needs to take NEO threats seriously.

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 21 January 2003 - 03:22 AM.


#16 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 21 January 2003 - 12:49 PM

My approach Bob on NEO's is to try and change the polemic. Rather than be ignored for being a "harbinger of doom" I am trying to show what a great opportunity and potential profit can be made from developing them and this would have the same tangible outcome of creating a technology that adresses the potential threat.

"When life gives you lemons, make lemonade."

It sounds trite and silly but in fact announcing the threat only seems to serve to stimulate the denial process, so perhaps greed, competitiveness, and thrill seeeking can work when simple reason fails.

I know, I know, it sounds like I am encouraging bad habits but in fact it is much subtler. Remember how it has also been war that has produced many advances in modern medicine? We ignore such paradox at our peril, and puritanical mindsets are dangerously calcified in Old Age or New if they can't see past their stereotypes. [ph34r]

#17 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 22 January 2003 - 01:41 PM

http://images.google...Blindsided3.gif


Lazarus Long,

Have you received any interest from investors on this concept?

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 22 January 2003 - 01:46 PM.


#18 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 22 January 2003 - 05:23 PM

No I haven't but I have not been too serious in my presentation either. I am building some models of new flight design vehicals and I'll use these as proof of concept designs first. Then perhaps I will make a more formal presentation to various groups around the world.

I think we must go private on this and not wait for "Government" to act, the beaurocracy moves too slow to meet this challenge and in fact may be more obstacle than guide.

I am interested in making a team for entry in the X-Prize Challenge. But it takes a lot of capital to play in this game.

http://www.xprize.org/
The X PRIZE Foundation
722-A Spirit of St. Louis Blvd
St. Louis, Mo. 63005
Tel: 636-519-9449
Fax: 314-533-6502

Still it would be fun to put together a team that can meet this challenge and more. The quest for the stars begins with first getting off the ground, then getting off planet, then learning how to adapt to living in the cosmos without the shield of this precious world that we take all too much for granted.

#19 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 18,997 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 22 January 2003 - 08:42 PM

Bob, I enjoyed Kaku's perspectives. Thanks for posting that interview.

I understand that there is some monitoring of near earth objects. Are you of the opinion that there is not enough monitoring? or not enough awareness among the general populace? Or no plan to confront the threat of NEO's?

Where are we most lacking on this this problem...in your opinion?

Iolair...that was a great post on evolution. I feel we are evolving towards a type 1 civilization more than we are "directing" this transition, because the vast majority of people on the planet have no idea the direction we are headed (yet their actions are driving the evolution).

Edited by Mind, 22 January 2003 - 09:08 PM.


#20 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 23 January 2003 - 03:06 AM

Mind,

I am happy you enjoyed the Kaku article! :)

It is a fact that this civilization is not capable of detecting some of the NEOs nearly hitting this planet (as shown by the CNN article below). [ph34r]

Also, I am unaware of one single successful test made to throw a NEO off-course so that it wouldn't collide with this planet. [wacko]

Probably what is lacking most on this issue is the awareness of the general public.

bob


http://www.cnn.com/2.../asteroid.miss/


Posted Image


Posted Image


Surprise asteroid nearly hits home

June 21, 2002 Posted: 9:33 AM EDT (1333 GMT)

By Richard Stenger - CNN


(CNN) -- An asteroid the size of a football field passed extremely close to Earth last week but it remained undetected until days later, according to astronomers.

The space rock missed our planet last week by only 75,000 miles (120,000 km), about one-third the distance to the moon, making the near collision one of the closest ever recorded.

Cruising at 6.2 miles (10 km) per second, the big boulder could have unleashed some major firepower had it struck, according to the NEO (Near Earth Objects) Information Center in Leicester, England.

The destructive force might have been comparable to an asteroid or comet that exploded over Siberia in 1908, which flattened 77 square miles (2,000 square km) of trees, according to the NEO.

But the asteroid, designated 2002 MN, is not in the same league as potential killer rocks measuring more than 0.6 miles (1 km) in diameter, some of which are known to lurk in our space neighborhood between Mars and Venus.

"2002 MN is a lightweight among asteroids and incapable of causing damage on a global scale, such as the object associated with the extinction of the dinosaurs," the NEO center said in a statement.

2002 MN was first spotted on June 17 by scientists with the Lincoln Near Earth Asteroid Research (LINEAR) project in Socorro, New Mexico, three days after it gave the Earth a close shave.

Nevertheless, the big boulder should not pose a risk for some time.

"This asteroid is not something to worry about," said Donald Yeomans, head of the Near Earth Objects program office at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. "We have calculated its orbit several decades into the future and it does not threaten Earth."

The closest near collision in recent decades took place in 1994, when asteroid 1994XL1 passed within 65,000 miles (105,000 km) of our planet.

Edited by bobdrake12, 23 January 2003 - 03:16 AM.


#21 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 23 January 2003 - 01:19 PM

http://pw1.netcom.co...6/doomsday.html


The saga of Asteroid 1997XF

On Tuesday, March 10, 1998, Brian Marsden, Director of the International Astronomical Union's central telegram bureau in Cambridge, Mass., announced that celestial object 1997XF, a 1 to 2 mile wide asteroid, could pass within 30,000 miles of Earth in October of the year 2028.

One day later, scientists from NASA's Jet propulsion Laboratory announced that the asteroid would instead miss Earth by 500,000 to 600,000 miles.

JPL's Paul Chodas said that the chance of it impacting the Earth was "...so unlikely as not to worry about." Essentially, zero.

Do you thnk the scientists really know exactly where this asteroid's going to be 1344 weeks from now! How confident are you about them predicting the exact location of a speeding two mile wide space rock 309 months away? Think about it.

1997XF isn't the only thing we have to worry about. There seem to be more and more too close encounters all the time. Get to know the near misses, and see what would happen if one of them doesn't miss us after all...


The Danger

Posted Image


Astronomers spot asteroids thanks to the light they reflect from the Sun, which means that smaller ones are frequently only discovered when they are very close to the Earth and become visible.

A rock approaching from the southern hemisphere could go undetected.

If one of these were on a collision course, that would leave no time to launch a rocket or missiles to try to deflect or destroy it, or even prepare cities for a potential disaster.

Asteroids are often described as the rubble left over from the building of the Solar System.

They orbit the Sun, but the paths are never eternal, for the trajectories can be deflected by gravitational pull whenever the asteroid passes by a planet or goes around the star itself.

Asteroids are a very remote yet real peril, because they move at such speeds that they unleash terrific energy on impact. The Tunguska event was caused by an object estimated to be 60 metres (200 feet) long. It exploded in the atmosphere with the force of 600 times the Hiroshima bomb.

#22 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 23 January 2003 - 01:54 PM

Not long ago most of you will remember when a comet struck Jupiter after being trapped in the gravity well of that Gas Giant.

Asteroids come in more than one flavor and are lumped into the categorical name "asteroid" because of their common size, composition, and general location. But could you find an asteroid in the Oort Cloud? Probably. Most however would be called planetessimals, or cometary fragments, etc.

Comets are bodies composed of ice/water principally and asteroids are rock/solids. While it is the common hazard coming at us with NEO's we ignore deep space at our peril as well.

I hate sounding like Velikovsky but the idea of a rogue Super Heavy body passing through our system at long period intervals is not so far fetched just because we have never found such a Dark Matter object.

Until illuminated most mater is Dark. Only when the accumulation generates, reflects, or occludes energy do we percieve the object. One form of energy we are trying to get better at measuring is gravity.

One theory for the asteroid belt is that a planet was destroyed between Mars and Jupiter. Don't blithely discard such notions as even Galaxies collide. There are Hubble images to prove this.

Gravity increases the chance of impact by acting as a capturing force. The rest is billiards but Gravity Wells are more pernicious than corner pockets.

For example I associate the long periodicity of Ice Age Events with some kind of phenomenon that operates along a cosmic based clock marked by turns of the entire galaxy.

Why?

Simply because of the coincidence of rotational period with the sequences of ice ages. But the relationship could be many factors from a dark matter gas field to twisted gravity waves emanating from Nova events and debris. The point is that something seems to be following that "clocks" (the rotation of the Milky Way) timing. That Mayan Year of an Age we have discussed elsewhere.

When I look at the face of the Moon and mark the rubble fields, impact craters and tectonic fractures from asteroids that missed the Earth I am grateful for my sister's sacrifice. Those craters aren't theory, they are observable fact. The "when" of their happening is problematic.

It isn't a question of "if" something will come from above to effect our world, it is only a matter of what will come first and when will it happen. Lately it has been Solar Storms and a weakening Natural Radiation Shield but that might also be associated with long term climatological events that reflect the Ice Age we have never officially ended.

The Tunguska Event is argued for good reason to have been a cometary fragment because while all agee it exploded in the atmosphere there are too few tecktites to correspond to the amount of energy released. But if the body was water/ice and vaporized then that would account for the lack of mass object litter that should be found. That blast if above a city would be the equivalent of a major nuclear weapon.

That event didn't happen thousands of years ago. As the number of objects we are aware of and the categories increase, the chances of something we learn about forming a threat is also increasing.

The first thing that must be developed is the ability to get off world better than we are now doing. The search for objects is also not sufficiently engaged, and as for plans well, that is more done by Hollywood than scientists.

#23 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 23 January 2003 - 04:28 PM

Oh yeah. just another statistic but an intersting one regardless: When we look into the sky and see other G-Type stars like Sol they are more often then not associated with a "Binary Star" system.

What if there exists a planet that is on a long elliptic orbit with very great period between perihelion and this body represented the mass of an untriggered star? It wouldn't necessarilly be a "Gas" Giant but composed of heavier, colder elements, elements that didn't fall close to the accretion disk of our star because they almost had sufficient gravity in its own disk to be a star?

Like those asteroids that arrive out of the Noon Day Sun we wouldn't see this object we have to feel it (account for its gravity), or see it occlude sonething, or catch a radio wave emmision like what Jupiter and Saturn give off. But if it is cold highly dense matter and no moving core relative to the crust. Without a strong magnetic signature it might not transmit a strong signal.

The suspicion among Cosmologists is that there does exist a critical mass number with regard to the evolution of stars.

In other words it is based on the amount and mix of stellar debris and gasses going into an accretion disk that determines the type of star system that evolves. Well what if that proportion for a G-Type Star yields binary systems as a general rule but sometimes the mass reflecting a second star is insufficient to ignite and forms a second dark matter type object in a relativistic state with regard to the dominant active star?

Are you all so sure we have looked so well as to find an object that could be over a light year away yet in long period orbit about our sun?

#24 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 January 2003 - 04:44 AM

http://www.sciencene...ts/p00651b.html

Posted Image

What is the danger of a comet or asteroid hitting the Earth?


It depends on what sort of timescale you're thinking about. In the long term, it's bound to happen - there are just too many objects orbiting in space near the Earth's orbit for us to keep on being lucky in the future, and there's plenty of evidence that big impacts have happened in the past. The last one was only in 1908, when an object (probably part of a comet) crashed in the middle of Siberia, wiping out 2,000 square kilometres of forest. Fortunately, the 'Tunguska impact' didn't kill anybody, but if it had landed two hours earlier, it would have destroyed Moscow.

In the short term (within our lifetimes), a major impact probably won't happen. But there is always the possibility of a new comet appearing in the Solar System on a collision course, and new asteroids in Earth-crossing orbits are being discovered all the time - many of them only when they fly within a couple of million kilometres of us (a tiny distance in space). Many of these near-misses are mentioned in the papers, and there was quite a scare a few years ago when astronomers announced that there was a slim chance of Comet Swift-Tuttle actually hitting Earth in 2126 (although luckily they've now changed their minds!)

Scientists from NASA and other space researchers are now turning their attention to this problem. They have come up with a plan for 'Project Spaceguard' - a detailed survey aiming to identify every large object with an Earth-crossing orbit. Armed with this information, and using supercomputers, they would be able to predict in advance the risks of any impacts in the future.

This is the key to saving Earth from any major impacts - spotting them far enough in advance for preparations to be made. If an approaching asteroid or comet was only seen a few days or weeks ahead, then there would be little to do but take shelter and hope for an impact somewhere harmless (not likely!). Any efforts to destroy the object that close to Earth would simply multiply the problem into a shower of smaller impacts.

With several months' or years' warning, then even with todays technology, we might be able to stop the impact. Rather than destroying the object outright, the best option would be to divert its orbit, by a small explosion (or even attaching a rocket to one side of it). Even with a large asteroid, a small correction to its course at sufficient distance would mean it would miss Earth by a safe margin.

©BSS 1993-2002

#25 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 January 2003 - 04:58 AM

One theory for the asteroid belt is that a planet was destroyed between Mars and Jupiter. Don't blithely discard such notions as even Galaxies collide. There are Hubble images to prove this.


Lazarus Long,

Great post!

Could the Milky Way Galaxy also be on a collision course with another galaxy?


bob


http://www.astrograp...nts/GP0011.html

Posted Image

COLLIDING GALAXIES IN CANIS MAJOR


Posted Image

COLLIDING GALAXIES are pairs (or more) of galaxies caught by the tug of their own mutual gravitation attraction. Some colliding galaxies eventually merge to form a new whole, while other colliding galaxies eventually part. In this image, the larger galaxy (on the left) is called NGC 2207, and the smaller galaxy (on the right) is called IC 2163. Strong tidal gravitational forces from galaxy NGC 2207 have stretched and distorted galaxy IC 2163, throwing off streams of gas and dust, stretching for hundreds of thousands of light years, which are just visible on the right side of the image. These two galaxies will continue to pull and tug at one another for several billion years, before they eventually merge together to form a new galaxy.

Edited by bobdrake12, 24 January 2003 - 05:10 AM.


#26 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 24 January 2003 - 05:07 AM

I hate sounding like Velikovsky but the idea of a rogue Super Heavy body passing through our system at long period intervals is not so far fetched just because we have never found such a Dark Matter object.




Posted Image


Lazarus Long,

Could this Super Heavy body return?


bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 24 January 2003 - 05:10 AM.


#27 Saille Willow

  • Guest
  • 112 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Somerset West, Western Cape, South Africa

Posted 24 January 2003 - 08:53 AM

Great posts bobdrake, Lazarus and Iolair.

Not far from where I live, some 200 000 years ago, a blazing meteorite slammed into the earth's crust. The impact formed a deep crater known as Tswaing (Place of Salt). Today this crater is about 1,13 km wide. The crater rim stands up to 60m above the surrounding area. Another, much smaller circular feature is located some 3,5km to the south-east of the main crater.

The Tswaing crater is located in one of the most densely populated regions of the African continent. It is estimated that some 15 million people inhabit the Pretoria-Witwatersrand-Vereeniging complex and it is rapidly expanding. One shudders to think what devastation would have been caused should the meteorite have hit today. Near miss in the perspective of time. But it did not, and today it is a place of great natural beauty. The soda and salt deposits of the crater lake, have attracted people for thousands of years.

I agree with Lazarus; 'If life gives you lemons, make lemonade.' Nature seems to do the same thing. When you look back in time, it seems that huge natural disasters happen at critical times in evolution. The dinosaurs had to go for a new phase in evolution to unfold. Let's just hope we are not modern dinosaurs.

What is the greatest threat to our civilization? In the past, everytime a civilization was wiped out, it was through man's own folly. Even then it was at times, when man had to make a jump in consciousness. Natural disasters actually seem to assist our evolution. Just as on the individual level we are our own worst enemies, so the the human race's greatest threat is itself. The good thing is that because we created our own greatest threat, we can also solve it, if only we would turn our critical gaze inwards. Anyway, man needs a challenge otherwise he grows bored and becomes decadent.

Past history has also shown us that regardless of how the leaders of the day tried to suppress a paradigm shift, it happened anyway.

#28 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 24 January 2003 - 02:07 PM

Thank you for your kind words Saille. It is wonderful to see you back in the forum more regularly.

What is the greatest threat to our civilization? In the past, everytime a civilization was wiped out, it was through man's own folly. Even then it was at times, when man had to make a jump in consciousness. Natural disasters actually seem to assist our evolution.  


Pompeii wasn't of man's making but deciding to live in the shadow of the Volcano was a bad decision we are responsible for. Developing microclimate canyons in the desert South West wasn't a bad thing for the Anasazi to do but it made them too vulnerable to large scale climatic changes that trapped them too far from alternatives so they were forced to abandon their homes. Eastern Islanders weren't trapped on their island when they got there by boat They became trapped when they burned and cut down all available trees for firewood and structures and found they no longer had a sufficient amount to survive with as boat building fishermen. They lost access to their most important resource (the sea) through willful folly and undisciplined excess.

The list is quite long of man's learning curve with regard to disaster and for all our losses it is the volcanic fire at our feet and the frigid wind whipping at our back which has pushed our society to its greatest achievments. One inexorible factor that has weakened or destroyed all societies throughout "history' is decadence and stagnation.

I think that one specific demonstrable change that occurs when making the transition to a Type 1 civilizations is when we no longer wait for environment to dictate the necessity for change. We open our minds and hearts to new vistas without blind fear and accept what we learn with question, concern, and aplomb. All with a hungry desire to learn more.

The global climactic disaster that drove Cro magnon out of Africa 50k years ago also lowered sea levels enough so that this ancestor to us all could walk the shoreline of this vast world to almost every continent and create the diversity and social competition which pushed that creature into the status of modern human.

So we are reaping the whirlwind and what is our greatest challenge to our existence in lieu of a cosmic mystery millions of years into the future? Us. We are the threat to ourselves.

Right up at the top of the list of challenges we must face is our own face staring back at us, the evil doppleganger cultures defining ethical mores in relativistic dichotomy. Unsatisfied with coexistence so that we must dominate or die trying to. Even as it is diversity that has provided our greatest chance of survival in the face of a myriad of environmental challenges it is this very diversity of our species that seems to threaten the bullwork and fabric of most cultural paradigms. Why?

First we have fear. Instinctive fear, blind fear, vengeful fear, and valid fear. History is replete with cultural crime after cultural crime there are no innocents nor innocent bystanders, there are no good guys, what there are, are victors and losers. This is the past, not the future, there is no transition possible under this model. What takes us forward?

Second we have complacency and denial when we think we have won the day.

We must decide on a model for social justice that goes toward rehabilitation, repair, and improvement rather than retribution and punishment. Sound Christian? well it's not (only), it is much more universal. We can go no farther with "an eye for an eye".

There are other examples than just humans, but an important question is: Why would natural Selection, select for a self destructive species?

It sounds counter intuitive but it could be to make the strongest possible creature.

That strength is life's guarantee, a fragile and tenuous shield against events that perhaps destroy worlds that are the proven known real wombs to life.

The good thing is that because we created our own greatest threat, we can also solve it, if only we would turn our critical gaze inwards. Anyway, man needs a challenge otherwise he grows bored and becomes decadent.

Past history has also shown us that regardless of how the leaders of the day tried to suppress a paradigm shift, it happened anyway.  


Some paradigm shifts were evolutionary, as in the example of Cromagnon and Neanderthal. No shiift was ever controlled except in the imagination of the few intelligent enough to ride the wave and not be drowned beneath it.

#29 Lazarus Long

  • Life Member, Guardian
  • 8,116 posts
  • 242
  • Location:Northern, Western Hemisphere of Earth, Usually of late, New York

Posted 24 January 2003 - 03:14 PM

Odds are, that odds are just that, odd.

Statistically probability is not certainty, or relativity and quantum mechanics would say the same things. The problem with external threats to life is that unless we facing a "certain" challenge we tend to dismiss it in its importance based upon "probability".

What are your individual chances of winning a lottery, or being struck by lightning?

Based on this comparison of these two "risks" I should be far more fearful of the sky then planning to spend my winnings. But the half empty glass looks so full to a thirsty man.

In assessing the psychology of disaster we should make the point that fear is useful only until it causes panic and then it is always harmful. But the "probability" is that things we should be fearful of will cause too many people to panic if they "knew" them to be true.

Galaxies collide but yet like ghosts the scale is such that millions and millions of stars merely pass by one another like traffic on the freeway. But collisions do happen, does this mean we should stop all driving? Andromeda and us are on a collision course, should we panic becuase in 3 billion years we may see a major change in the neighborhood?

Making a claim about where the path of a Super Heavy Dark Matter Body without sufficient evidence is just gross speculation and if it leads to hysteria, worse. I will not speculate on impacts from bodies that aren't charted, but I don't mind speculating on the threat of near misses from objects whose gravity is so great that it would generate tidal storms from the Sun and rip at our world with tectonic stress while subjecting us to a downpour of dangerous levels of Solar Storm radiation. We don't have to struck from such a body to feel its effects, we only have to feel its passing.

I would rather wrestle asteroids and round up comets then have to face a dark star, a rogue black hole or neutron core-body travelling at high relativistic velocity or even an area of nebulous gasses that cloud the Sun's radiation causing us to go into a deep freeze.

We are too far from such a stage of development, and we live for too short a period to be able to confront these challenges that occur over "billennia". Right now we are working up to millennium challenges. Let us do what we can and what we can imagine and what we realize that we need to do. Worrying about what we are as yet far too weak to accomplish is only fruitful for the creation of mythological memes.

Luckilly for us we live in the rural areas of our galaxy, out here in the frontiers of the Spiral Arm, the backwoods where there is a little space between us and our closet neighbors. The urban violence of the Sagitarius B is somethig we are a long ways from being able to confront. Will this always be the case? I think we all get a hankering for a visit into Sin City from time to time...

Do you want to look that beast of Material Destruction in the Eye?

[unsure]


Don't blink! :)

I offered the analysis on the possibilty for there being a Planet X as a dense matter sister to our own Sun as merely an example of a viable hypothesis. As Edison said invention is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. Now comes a search. At this we are only just beginning. People think that because we already see so many objects that our maps are obsolete before they are printed that we have found it all. The truth is a relative matter in this. What we have found is the big stuff, the bright stuff and the easiest stuff to see. Now we are finding that the majority of things are smaller, more subtle and will fill our desire for questing for ages to come. We are far from mapping even a thousandth of the objects that exist between us and the nearest star. It is from objects that are within one to two light years that we have the most to be concered about because these are of two principal kinds, long period objects on highly eccentric eliptical orbits that could bring them close to the Sun every so often (thousands to millions of year periodicity) and rogues.

Rogues are out of the blue so to speak and no one will see them until it is too late. They come from the abyss, they could be fragments of Super Nova, objects discharged from collisions, or forces that bend space/time like tidal ribbons causing disruption in regional gravitational stability. We are getting better however at knowing what to look for.

When we go looking for a Planet X, what would we need to be measuring? How would we get the best possible view?

Radar works like sunlight, it illumes the object with radition emanating from a specific known source. Out there past the Ooort Cloud our G Type Sun is too weak for most objects to be illuminated. So what's next?

Occlusion is the shadow seen as it passes before another object. This is good if you are looking for Super Giants close to a distant star but you have a better probability of winning the lottery then randomly catching a dark matter object occluding a star's light on the angle needed to be seen at just the right time, by just the right investigator.

We need to create three new technologies that are being proposed, one based on being able to map and measure gravitational field strength and perturbation with some accuracy. We are a long ways from making these new measuring tools as accurate as we might like but it is has begun and as we gather data and refine the technique it will give the most precise object accounting possible.

Background enhancement and fractel division can also yield a lage amount of data. We have the ability to sort of amplify the energy coming in as background radiation and then use an approach similar to computer enhancement to isolate and improve the image of objects that cause shadows against that background radiation. This is possible sooner then most realize but it also has the concurrent problem of false positives and created data. This is shadow play for astronomers and yes we might be able to see a dragon but the souce may only be a hand manipulating light.

The third is the easiest by far and the one that is happenning right now, new telescope technology both off world and on. Creating a stereoscopic Heliocentric Satellite Telescope System that combines focal and multiple spectral imagry from extremely widely spaced sources and then processes this data here on Earth is a dream that requires large scale international cooperation.

The first tests of multiple image sourcing have all gone extremely well and there are plans to combine data streams now for Earth based telescopes on various parts of the planet. But putting the equivalent of three Hubbles, or Chandras out a symetrically opposing points in the solar system and outside Earth orbit would create a parallax effect that simple cannot be achieved on Earth. This approach would yeild extremely precise data about distance, age, shape, velocity, and much about the Universe.

I don't fear what I don't know about, I fear not knowing.

Oh yeah, and nearly everyday somewhere, someone wins the lottery and someone is struck by lightning.

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Advertisements help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. [] To go ad-free join as a Member.

#30 bobdrake12

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,423 posts
  • 40
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 25 January 2003 - 01:43 AM

Not far from where I live, some 200 000 years ago, a blazing meteorite slammed into the earth's crust. The impact formed a deep crater known as Tswaing (Place of Salt). Today this crater is about 1,13 km wide. The crater rim stands up to 60m above the surrounding area. Another, much smaller circular feature is located some 3,5km to the south-east of the main crater.



Posted Image

Tswaing Crater, South Africa

Saille Willow,

Great to hear from you and thanks for sharing! I didn't know about the Tswaing crater. :)

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 25 January 2003 - 02:41 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users