- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Originally posted by sonhouseIt's gone red giant, so it's not burning hydrogen (at least not as its primary source of power) it is now somewhere on the sequence of elements leading to iron.
That's what I was talking about. It could cause trouble if it was within 200 light years of Earth but at 600 I think we are safe if it offs itself. The main question is how much hydrogen does it have left to burn? When it runs out the fit will hit the shan!
It will start creating iron in its last day, at some point that day it will try to burn iron.
That's where the stuff hits the fan :-)
your probably ok if more than 100 ly away from the explosion, but better safe than
a toasty crispy thing.
-Removed-stop following him around and calling him an idiot.
not that he isn't one. just that the act of following him around could be better spent on anything else.
on an unrelated note, i must congratulate dasa on this last bit of idiocy. this was funneh. and because it wasn't a wall of text, it was digestible.
Originally posted by DasaThe ENTIRE universe is 2 billion miles wide? That is interesting since we have already sent probes out past 10 billion miles already and there is much more left to cover.
Where are you getting your information from? Surya Siddhanta has been translated by hundreds of unqualified persons.
The original Sanskrit version of Surya Siddhanta is perfect - but who is getting hold of it and attempting to decipher it is anyone's guess.
Actually there is practically no qualified person to completely and accurately translate it a ...[text shortened]... and the edge of the universe is calculated to be twenty-five koti yojanas (two billion miles).
Those Vedas are about as wrong as anything else you have said. If you really believe the universe is 2 billion miles wide you need to take a look at modern astronomy. It's not like we are just looking through telescopes anymore. We are out there with actual machines.
You need to seriously rethink all this brainwashing you have undergone or you are not going to be able to even life a normal life on Earth.
1 edit
Originally posted by DasaYou claim the Vedas are the absolute truth.
The word koti means ten million, and a yojana is eight miles. The diameter of the universe is fifty koti yojanas (four billion miles). Therefore, since the sun is in the middle of the universe, the distance between the sun and the edge of the universe is calculated to be twenty-five koti yojanas (two billion miles).
If something you claim to be the absolute truth has one error in it, then it is NOT the "absolute truth", and you should stop advertising it as such.
The nearest star is over 24 trillion miles away. And that's only the nearest star. For the Vedas to claim that the entire universe is 4 billion miles wide is absolutely ridiculous and shows us all just how much "truth" is in your Vedas.
If it cannot even get a measurable number correct, then can we seriously expect it to get more serious unmeasurable spiritual matters correct?
Originally posted by SuzianneAh yes, jolly good. Gone are the days of being compared to a hog or a dog or a camel or an ass or being called dishonest for saying I'm not like a hog or I'm not like a dog or I'm not like a camel or I'm not like an ass. 😵
If something you claim to be the absolute truth has one error in it, then it is NOT the "absolute truth", and you should stop advertising it as such.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
Well technically the nearest star is 8 and a bit light minutes away (the sun) but otherwise
yes the next star is vastly further away. (and I am being picky, I know but this thread started
with dasa differentiating between our local star and any other stars.)
2 billion miles sounds like allot (and it is if you were trying to walk it) and would have been
an unimaginable distance to ancient people who hadn't even fully come to terms with the
size of the earth. But it is slightly less than 3 light hours and takes you from the sun just out
past the orbit of Uranus or something like 22 AU (1 AU being the earth sun distance)
In astronomical terms this is so tiny, that if you were comparing the size of the visible universe
to the size of the earth, a sphere of 2 billion miles radius is to the universe, as a circle of
1 Micrometre [1E-6m] diameter is to the size of the Earth [appx 40,000km circumference].
(its actually worse than that but I simplified in the vadas favour)
It is true that anything claiming (or being claimed to have) perfect knowledge, and absolute truth
is evidently not perfectly true or a container of perfect knowledge if even one thing in it is found not
to be true.
And if the knowledge claimed is not perfect, then it all must be subject to testing, and reason.
In which case why not ditch the thing entirely, and simply go with logic and reason in the first place.
btw, this also applies equally to the bible and any and all other holy books.
Originally posted by googlefudgeSo Dasa must now assert that the lying cheating scientists have got the orbit of Pluto all wrong. Being about 32AU (at present) it is half the size of the universe too far away!
2 billion miles sounds like allot (and it is if you were trying to walk it) and would have been
an unimaginable distance to ancient people who hadn't even fully come to terms with the
size of the earth. But it is slightly less than 3 light hours and takes you from the sun just out
past the orbit of Uranus or something like 22 AU (1 AU being the earth sun distance)
And Voyager 1 at over 110.7AU is in another universe! (or about 5.5 universes away). Those lying cheating scientists really need to check their measuring sticks again!
Originally posted by twhiteheadThis is like the argument that a rose by any other name would smell as
Oh no! Your getting confused about definitions again. The fact that a scientist (or anyone else for that matter) calls something by a given name, does make it (for the purpose of communication with that scientist) something by that name.
So if a scientist calls a star a sun, (or a pink unicorn), then while conversing with that scientist it does make the star a sun (or pink unicorn).
aweet. So no matter what the name is it must be one that distinquishes
it as what we call the sun. Because it is different and with a different
purpose than the stars. So it would be incorrect to call a star the sun
when the sun is unique from all the stars. The sun provides a service
to mankind that the moon and stars can not.
Originally posted by SuzianneGive Dasa the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps the Vedas were written
You claim the Vedas are the absolute truth.
If something you claim to be the absolute truth has one error in it, then it is NOT the "absolute truth", and you should stop advertising it as such.
The nearest star is over 24 trillion miles away. And that's only the nearest star. For the Vedas to claim that the entire universe is 4 billion ...[text shortened]... then can we seriously expect it to get more serious unmeasurable spiritual matters correct?
before the universe had expanded into the empty space as far as it
has today.
Originally posted by RJHindsBut isn't every star unique? So the uniqueness of our particular sun is hardly relevant. And surely it's quite conventional to refer to them all as either suns or stars? What is this "incorrect" thing you think is going on here?
So it would be incorrect to call a star the sun when the sun is unique from all the stars.
Originally posted by RJHindsDasa doesn't want any benefit of any doubt. With all his talk of truth and qualification, he wants us to express our certainty in him and his beliefs even before he's willing to fully explain what it is we should be certain about. Doubt, for Dasa, doesn't enter into it.
Give Dasa the benefit of the doubt.
Originally posted by RJHindsSo is this just another example of you being stuck inside a myth? The sun is not at all unique. How could it since the clouds that generate stars come mostly with the same composition? For instance, the closest stars to the sun is the trinary Alpha Centauri, one member of which is almost a twin sister of the sun, almost exactly the same size, almost exactly the same amount of energy coming off it, almost the same age, pretty much the same color of light coming off it as the sun. If we were magically (we being the whole solar system) to have our stars switched with that one in the Alpha Centauri group, most people wouldn't even notice the difference, maybe a bit less light would reach Earth but that would be about it.
This is like the argument that a rose by any other name would smell as
aweet. So no matter what the name is it must be one that distinquishes
it as what we call the sun. Because it is different and with a different
purpose than the stars. So it would be incorrect to call a star the sun
when the sun is unique from all the stars. The sun provides a service
to mankind that the moon and stars can not.
The sun is NOT unique. In fact in the size structure of all stars, our sun clocks in at about the 90 % tile area in terms of mass. Our sun is on the large size of average when you add up all the red and white dwarf's, and such.
The cloud that generated our sun has been identified and the stars that are like the sun are scattered over a volume of about 1500 light years.
Originally posted by FMFStars provide starlight, but our sun provides sunlight. Without this
But isn't every star unique? So the uniqueness of our particular sun is hardly relevant. And surely it's quite conventional to refer to them all as either suns or stars? What is this "incorrect" thing you think is going on here?
sunlight the earth would be a dead planet. So in this sense alone
the sun is unique from the stars.
Originally posted by sonhouseIt would do no good for me to reply to such ignorance since you are of
So is this just another example of you being stuck inside a myth? The sun is not at all unique. How could it since the clouds that generate stars come mostly with the same composition? For instance, the closest stars to the sun is the trinary Alpha Centauri, one member of which is almost a twin sister of the sun, almost exactly the same size, almost exactly ...[text shortened]... ied and the stars that are like the sun are scattered over a volume of about 1500 light years.
the opinion that you are so much wiser than me. Being four years older
does not necessarily make you wiser even if you have more knowledge.
You have to know how to evaluate that knowledge my dear sir.