2012 Poll

thecommander

Do you believe that something big will happen on 21st December 2012?

Big = End of world, fall of all major governments, catastrophic weather worldwide, aliens, etc


Big ≠Moriarty tribunal ending, change in government of a single country, hailstones in Cape Town, localised minor events

samson09

Maybe something major will happen leading up to that date, but right on 21st Dec.? Probably not.

Ponster

What's so special about the date ?

gpjordanf1

it's just another Y2K conn job, theres nothing to it, which has been proven by a poster on the subject already, plenty of proof there, well for me anyway.

Mahatma coat

No

Cosmicaly??????? yeah, I think its probably the best guess date for the procession.

Will the world end??? Probably not;)

will a lot of people freakout??????? Probably:D:D:D

humanji

I'd say there could be a lot of shìt happening, but it will be mainly caused by hysteria. Can't see there being any world ending cataclysms, although I hope so as it will mean I can buy a house and not have to pay back the mortgage! :P

Mahatma coat

No

ah yeah, but solar flares may be anissue, planets cause gravitational pulls on suns and flares hapen from that afaik so if theres an alignment then it may cause a peak and shur Sheithappens, so fears of a Y2K style organised panic are not totaly unfounded

AdamusAdonis

I vote no, though to be fair, I can't see into the future...
Excuse me so.

Mahatma coat

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ah yeah, but solar flares may be anissue, planets cause gravitational pulls on suns and flares hapen from that afaik so if theres an alignment then it may cause a peak ...

Gravitational pulls don't cause solar flares, neither do planetary alignments (or any sort of an alignment for that matter). Solar flares are the result of a sudden release of magnetic energy which was stored in the corona.

DTrotter

Read your horoscopes the day before combined with swinging a crystal over a ley line and you will get an answer. I dread the build up to 2012.

The one nasty thing I see happening on 2012 is mass suicides due to the hype.

DTrotter

King Mob wrote: »

The one nasty thing I see happening on 2012 is mass suicides due to the hype.

As long as they don't take innocent children with them then it's just a case of less morons in the world.

toiletduck

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ah yeah, but solar flares may be anissue, planets cause gravitational pulls on suns and flares hapen from that afaik so if theres an alignment then it may cause a peak and shur Sheithappens, so fears of a Y2K style organised panic are not totaly unfounded

Where did you read that (gravitational pull of planets causing flares)? Never heard it...

espinolman

Mahatma coat wrote: »

ah yeah, but solar flares may be anissue, planets cause gravitational pulls on suns and flares hapen from that afaik so if theres an alignment then it may cause a peak and shur Sheithappens, so fears of a Y2K style organised panic are not totaly unfounded

Well i downloaded a planetarium last night and went forward in time to 21/12/2012 and i looked down on the planets and there was no alignment of the planets !

humanji

espinolman wrote: »

Well i downloaded a planetarium last night and went forward in time to 21/12/2012 and i looked down on the planets and there was no alignment of the planets !

I don't think it's a planetary alignment. I think it's solar systems or galaxies or something, will be aligned and some claim that it's going to act like some sort of galactic tuning fork. I'll try and figure out where I heard that.

edit: and here's a website that might come in handy: http://survive2012.com/

I'm not sure if it's serious or a pisstake, so depending on which way you look at it, it's either informative or hilarious.

Mahatma coat

No

toiletduck wrote: »

Where did you read that (gravitational pull of planets causing flares)? Never heard it...

Well it just made sense, I was watchin something else durin the week about the search for planets around stars and how we know planets are there because of the wobble they cause to the star.

its not a big stretch to theorise that the wobble will have a tidal effect and that this tidal effect may be responsible for the fluctuations and buildup of magnetic energy in the stars atmosphere that cause flares.

Ostrom

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Well it just made sense, I was watchin something else durin the week about the search for planets around stars and how we know planets are there because of the wobble they cause to the star.

its not a big stretch to theorise that the wobble will have a tidal effect and that this tidal effect may be responsible for the fluctuations and buildup of magnetic energy in the stars atmosphere that cause flares.

Elaborate on this theoretical 'tidal effect'

The closest thing to what you are describing is a coronal mass ejection halo which has nothing to do with the surrounding planets

Also, the 'wobble' phenomenon you are describing is an effect on the apparant light called microlensing

bonkey

efla wrote: »

The closest thing to what you are describing is a coronal mass ejection halo which has nothing to do with the surrounding planets

To be more accurate - its not known to have anything to do with the surrounding planets, nor has any mechanism been theorised where it could have something to do with same.

Also, the 'wobble' phenomenon you are describing is an effect on the apparant light called microlensing

IANAAP (I am not an Astro Physicist), but to try and forestall anyone looking up microlensing and discovering that its gravitational in nature...

The microlensing effect, AFAIK, is caused by the distortion the planet on the photons going by it. If we consider the path the light follows from the star to us, then we should intuitively see that the planet's gravitional field will have differiung effects depending on its position. When its in that path, it directly effects photons one way. When its outside that path, it doesn't. In effect, we end up with a repeating pattern, where the light-path is distorted by the planet as it orbits the star.

This is what we see.

It doesn't suggest that thee planet makes the star actually wobble, but rather that it distorts the light that comes to us from the star.

Having said that, it is true that planets exert a gravitational influence on stars that they orbit...albeit a very, very weak one.

Ostrom

bonkey wrote: »

To be more accurate - its not known to have anything to do with the surrounding planets, nor has any mechanism been theorised where it could have something to do with same.



IANAAP (I am not an Astro Physicist), but to try and forestall anyone looking up microlensing and discovering that its gravitational in nature...

The microlensing effect, AFAIK, is caused by the distortion the planet on the photons going by it. If we consider the path the light follows from the star to us, then we should intuitively see that the planet's gravitional field will have differiung effects depending on its position. When its in that path, it directly effects photons one way. When its outside that path, it doesn't. In effect, we end up with a repeating pattern, where the light-path is distorted by the planet as it orbits the star.

This is what we see.

It doesn't suggest that thee planet makes the star actually wobble, but rather that it distorts the light that comes to us from the star.

Having said that, it is true that planets exert a gravitational influence on stars that they orbit...albeit a very, very weak one.

Exactly, my point was that the effect is merely apparent [subjective]

20goto10

21st December 2012 is the winter Solstice....clever people them Mayans.

efla

efla wrote: »

Exactly, my point was that the effect is merely apparent [subjective]

Not exactly.

A star and it's planet (it's more complicated for systems involving more than one planet) orbit their common centre of mass; an orbiting planet can (and does, in many many cases) have an affect on its star's orbit. I believe the branch of astrophysics which deals with this is called astrometry.

Ostrom

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Not exactly.

A star and it's planet (it's more complicated for systems involving more than one planet) orbit their common centre of mass; an orbiting planet can (and does, in many many cases) have an affect on its star's orbit. I believe the branch of astrophysics which deals with this is called astrometry.

As I had understood*, the gravitational effect on the stars orbit by an orbiting mass such as a planet was negligible

I'm addressing the above point where it was claimed there was a relationship between the influence of the orbiting body and mass ejection

*I'm a complete amateur and happy to have this corrected under greater authority - I'm just stuck into the books at the moment and this was one of the last things I came across

efla

efla wrote: »

As I had understood, the gravitational effect on the stars orbit by an orbiting mass such as a planet was negligible

Well, not exactly. The gravitational effect is "large" enough to be used as a valuable tool for extrasolar planet detection. It's called astrometry.

Edit: I'm addressing somebody's saying that planets cannot cause wobbles in the stars they orbit. To address your point, it's true that currently it is thought that planets don't affect the build up and occurance of mass ejection in the stars they orbit.

Ostrom

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Well, not exactly. The gravitational effect is "large" enough to be used as a valuable tool for extrasolar planet detection. It's called astrometry.

As best we know, does this effect operate only visually at the level of the apparent direction of light?

efla

efla wrote: »

As best we know, does this effect operate only visually at the level of the apparent direction of light?

I'm not entirely sure what you're asking; it this doesn't answer it rephrase the question, maybe.

It's not a visual effect; the planet and the star orbit around their common centre of mass (this is typically inside of the star), so, if you were to look at the star from any angle, you would see it moving slightly over and back, in a periodic motion. It's not a visual effect, it's a physical motion.

Ostrom

That answers it, yes.

I was unsure of the extent to which the motion of the star as you are describing could be attributed solely to the planet, and whether or not the motion was an observed movement of the light or an actual movement of the star.

efla

efla wrote: »

That answers it, yes.

I was unsure of the extent to which the motion of the star as you are describing could be attributed solely to the planet, and wheather or not the motion was an observed movement of the light or an actual movement of the star.

Oh right right. Yah, the planet actually moves the star (by very very little), but enough to be noticable to extremely powerful telescopes. You see, it's just as correct to say that the star orbits the planet, as it is to say that the planet orbits the star; because, simply, both statements are wrong: they both, infact, orbit their common centre of mass.

But, you're right in that there are other techniques used which involve the observed frequency of the emitted light etc. (such as the Doppler effect).

6th

I'm happy to kep this here but might invite some of the folks from there to come and give their input?

humanji

There's a section on Wikipedia about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_21_2012

There's a bit about the galactic alignment and also a bit about the date beign wrong. Some people say that according to the Mayan calender, we're only 41,341,049,999,999,999,999,999,994,879 years off the actual end date. Might have to set my alarm for that.

watty

they use VERY sensitive instruments.

For example they can detect the equivalent of a grain of sand passing a car headlamp and the observer miles away..

We are talking about VERY small wobbles and often planets several times larger than Jupiter, that are almost as big as small stars, on quite close orbits.

jonbravo

No

anything with an end date........ is more then likely b/llsh[t, 2016 on the other hand,i feel is more then an important year to us all as time will tell.

Overblood

humanji wrote: »

I don't think it's a planetary alignment. I think it's solar systems or galaxies or something, will be aligned and some claim that it's going to act like some sort of galactic tuning fork. I'll try and figure out where I heard that.

That exact alignment happens every year on dec 21st. Funny the way they don't mention that.

mac_iomhair

No

no one here can tell the future, or else they wouldnt be posting on this stupid site, they'd be picking up yesterdays lotto jackpot and the like.

nostradamus has it sussed!

mac_iomhair

No

Overblood wrote: »

That exact alignment happens every year on dec 21st. Funny the way they don't mention that.

not entirely true, there are more things aligning than what usually happens. (seen it on discovery channel:D)

sub-x

This end of the world theory of 2012 rates up their with the crazy fundamentalist Christians "End Times" theory,purely nonsense

The other side of the theory is based on the idea of a major shift in consciousness which in my opinion is much more plausible,simply because this shift as already begun simply with the increase interest with 2012 as the time draws ever closer.

In the last 10 years we have had similar consciousness shifts as a result of 9/11 and the Y2K.Agreed that Y2K was BS but it did make a lot of people stop and consider how vulnerable we are to and depended on technology as with 9/11 how vulnerable we are to acts of terrorism.

So failing some major event leading up to this date,the only consciousness shift will be the one I have already mentioned.

Ian Xel Lungold-The Mayan Calendar Comes North Part 1

robbie_998

I'll have to make sure im out that day :rolleyes:

sub-x

robbie_998 wrote: »

I'll have to make sure im out that day :rolleyes:

You more than likely will,buying gifts for love ones for a pagan holiday masquerading as a Christian one

Overblood

mac_iomhair wrote: »

not entirely true, there are more things aligning than what usually happens. (seen it on discovery channel:D)

WOW the Discovery Channel. The same channel that has programs about the yeti. What exactly is going to happen with the alignment that's so different to all the other years?

Tech3

No

Moderate reasons for world meltdown:

1. The yellowstone volcano: which erupts every 600,000-700,000 years is overdue a eruption. Thats not all...... its a super volcano which can wipe out around 90% of the population.
   
   
2. It is believed that the suns destablization is caused by an energy cloud. It is expected by russian geophysicists that it will collide with earth between 2010 to 2020 with devastating consequences
   
   
3. We are well overdue a megacatastrophe such as a meteorite hitting the earths surface. In turn the Earth will try to freeze and consequently an ice age will begin wiping out all human life.
   
   
4. Mayan calender. A calender so accurate by Mayans based on astronomical observations cannot be ignored. The date of 21/12/2012 is the end of the calender signalling the end of life and the beginning of a new one.
   
   
5. The sun is reacting heavily by bursting out huge radiation recored in the last few years. It has been observed that this has not happened before in our life time with record readings of solar activity. The earths magnetic field is weaking all the time and solar radiation will eventually wipe out the worlds population in the future. It not IF but WHEN.

Ostrom

Moderate reasons for world meltdown:

1. The yellowstone volcano: which erupts every 600,000-700,000 years is overdue a eruption. Thats not all...... its a super volcano which can wipe out around 90% of the population.
   
   Source?
   
   
2. It is believed that the suns destablization is caused by an energy cloud. It is expected by russian geophysicists that it will collide with earth between 2010 to 2020 with devastating consequences
   
   What is an 'energy cloud'?
   
   
3. We are well overdue a megacatastrophe such as a meteorite hitting the earths surface. In turn the Earth will try to freeze and consequently an ice age will begin wiping out all human life.
   
   Wha???
   
   
4. Mayan calender. A calender so accurate by Mayans based on astronomical observations cannot be ignored. The date of 21/12/2012 is the end of the calender signalling the end of life and the beginning of a new one.
   
   ......
   
   
5. The sun is reacting heavily by bursting out huge radiation recored in the last few years. It has been observed that this has not happened before in our life time with record readings of solar activity. The earths magnetic field is weaking all the time and solar radiation will eventually wipe out the worlds population in the future. It not IF but WHEN.

Reacting to what? (Newtons laws, thermodynamics etc)

By whom using what historical records?

rameire

just wondering did the myans actually predict it would happen on the 21st 12 2012.
or did they predict the date to be the winter solstice of 2012.

if the first im wondering did they take into account the change from the Julian calendar to the gregorian calendar.
thus meaning the end of the calendar is actually the 01st of 01st 2013.
01/01/13.

humanji

rameire wrote: »

just wondering did the myans actually predict it would happen on the 21st 12 2012.
or did they predict the date to be the winter solstice of 2012.

if the first im wondering did they take into account the change from the Julian calendar to the gregorian calendar.
thus meaning the end of the calendar is actually the 01st of 01st 2013.
01/01/13.

The link I posted earlier has a bit about that. I think that the Mayan calender had cycles of X amount of days. That current cycle apparently ends on the 21st or 23rd Dec, taking into acount calender changes and things of that nature.

rameire

humanji wrote: »

The link I posted earlier has a bit about that. I think that the Mayan calender had cycles of X amount of days. That current cycle apparently ends on the 21st or 23rd Dec, taking into acount calender changes and things of that nature.

cheers was trying to google it and couldnt get anything good.

Trail_Blazer

Absolutely not. Why should the world end 12 more years after it was initially supposed to on Y2K?

Blah. It'd be nice for a change if aliens invaded, or something world-wide really DID happen.

"Certainly hope it will. I should could use a vacation from this.... Stupid sh*t, silly sh*t, stupid sh*t. One great big festering neon destruction, etc."

nyarlothothep

No

Trail_Blazer wrote: »

Absolutely not. Why should the world end 12 more years after it was initially supposed to on Y2K?

Blah. It'd be nice for a change if aliens invaded, or something world-wide really DID happen.

"Certainly hope it will. I should could use a vacation from this.... Stupid sh*t, silly sh*t, stupid sh*t. One great big festering neon destruction, etc."

Thats very toolish of you.:P

Anyway I think Maynard is criticizing groupthink as opposed to any belief system although maybe he equates all belief systems with group think? In that case he's a groupthinker too where there is always more than one. The nature of thought, the way in which you arrived at your conclusions is more important. If you believe in a concept, ideal or religion because everyone else does then you are a groupthinker. If you've arrived at such a state based on your own reasoning then you are not, in the sense of the word as it is generally understood, regardless of whether people believe the same things as you. Whether such reasoning is rationally valid is either a yes, no or yes/no.

bonkey

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Thats very toolish of you.:P

Careful.

Smilies are not accepted as a licence to throw insults around

antodeco

I didnt think the whole 2012 thing was about "the end of the world" but more a positive thing? If it is the case it could be any number of things. The whole thing about planet "nubiru" passing every few thousand of years (last time during egyptian times) is more interesting reading. There was a definite change of culture during said Egyptian times. Perhaps it is another "life planet"! I know that this planet was meant to have struck earth a long long time ago cause what is now the moon and asteroid belt. If that is the case, its obvious not going to crash into us anymore or cause global meltdown. Perhaps (with the help of the LHC) some form of time/dimension travel will come into existance. Straying off topic for a second, I know they say that time travel can not exist as we would have visitors from the future, but perhaps time travel can only exist from its inceptial beginning, ie from point of creation to a point in the future, and from the future back to that point. We shall wait and see. Either way, Im looking forward to the 2012 film

suey71

No

I was reading an article by Remote Viewer Ed Dames recently and he said that he had remote viewed 2012. He said that planet X/Nubiru will pass by us on its cycle and its gravitational pull will make the oceans rise to hights of 2000 feet sending tidal waves around the world and drown most of the worlds costal cities. This will be followed by winds of up to 300mph.
Not a nice thought.

thecommander

suey71 wrote: »

I was reading an article by Remote Viewer Ed Dames recently and he said that he had remote viewed 2012. He said that planet X/Nubiru will pass by us on its cycle and its gravitational pull will make the oceans rise to hights of 2000 feet sending tidal waves around the world and drown most of the worlds costal cities. This will be followed by winds of up to 300mph.
Not a nice thought.

You sure it wasnt a review of the preview trailer for 2012 the movie?

suey71

No

Hi thecommander.
I'm not sure how to link an article. but google Ed Dames and 2012 and I'm sure you'll find something on this.
Funnily enough I youtubed 2012 and just saw the trailer, uncanny.

Ostrom

suey71 wrote: »

I was reading an article by Remote Viewer Ed Dames recently and he said that he had remote viewed 2012. He said that planet X/Nubiru will pass by us on its cycle and its gravitational pull will make the oceans rise to hights of 2000 feet sending tidal waves around the world and drown most of the worlds costal cities. This will be followed by winds of up to 300mph.
Not a nice thought.

A quick google tells me this 'planet' is now visible in the night sky, but with no exact location.

Got any coordinates?