I bet you didnt know that

BaZmO*

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

They just move into an area, destroy it and move on.

I was more referring to eyestalk ablation to induce egg production in females.

New Home

Jesus. That's so cruel.

BrokenArrows

barrymanilow wrote: »

The Moon is retreating from the Earth at a rate of about 1 inch a year .

If you could time travel back to the Jurassic period when Dinosaurs existed and looked up at the moon on a clear night it would appear 4 times larger in the sky than it does now due to it being closer to the Earth at that time in Earths history.

It wouldn't appear 4 times larger.

The moons distance varies by a few percent regularly and it's barely noticeable.

dxhound2005

Every year and in every country in the world more male babies are born than female.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

900 million years ago, a day on Earth was 18 hours long.

Water John

Ah you would definitely notice Lunar Perigee, very bright and larger, esp on horizon.

Capt'n Midnight

Anders Shy Aircraft wrote: »

900 million years ago, a day on Earth was 18 hours long.

We only know that because there were 486 days in a year back then.

mzungu

Nokia first started business as a paper printing company back in 1865.

4068ac1elhodqr

The moon-earth ratio, is very popular across music, architecture and design.



From the great pyramid builders to the early Chinese music structure (C-256) that searched for a tone embedded in cosmic structure.
Western scales tradtionally availed of A-432, but was later changed to a standard of A-440.

IvyTheTerrific

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Every year and in every country in the world more male babies are born than female.

Especially after any major conflicts, when more male babies are born. There are several theories as to why this may be ( such as couples have more sex when the man returns from conflict, or a gene which is only active in males) but nothing had been proven yet.

On the other hand, after a major traumatic event (like the September 11 attacks) , significantly more male foetuses than female are miscarried. This also is unexplained.

lan

RiderOnTheStorm wrote: »

The Earth is spinning (bet you did know that!). So the force it sucks you down with (ie big G) is slightly lessened by the spin effect of planet which is pushing you away...the net effect is little-g. Everyday "gravity". Everything you try and measure on this planet will have gravity of g. Regardless of its mass. The bigger the thing, the more it should be attracted to the planet (big-G), but the spin pushes it away more...so it balances out as little-g. Always. This is why when you drop a penny and a bowling ball from top of leaning tower of Pizza (or whatever Galileo dropped), they hit the ground at same time. Same experiment on the moon gives different results (no spin there).

I’m open to correction here, but I think that’s wrong. Bigger (well, more massive) things ARE attracted to Earth more strongly. The reason they fall at the same rate as lighter things is that rate of acceleration is proportional to mass (F=MA). The heavier something is, the more force it takes to move it. So gravity exerts a larger force, but the larger mass balances it out and we end up with the same acceleration, g.

Fourier

Alanna Thousands Valley wrote: »

The moon-earth ratio, is very popular across music, architecture and design.

The ratio is often named the golden ratio and is around 1.618.

Just as pi often pops up if there is a circle present somewhere (often its not obvious immediately where in the situation the circle is), the golden ratio often pops up in places where a certain kind of ellipse shows up (again it is not always obvious there is an ellipse involved).

However its frequency is often over stated, it doesn't really show up in the Pyramids, the Parthenon or Renaissance paintings as is often claimed, nor in astrophysics. Some articles for example say it shows up in black holes and the orbits of planets, but this isn't really true.

It does show up in flowers, essentially because they are building an ellipse with their petals.

Fourier

RiderOnTheStorm wrote:

Gravity here on Earth is represented in equations as "g" (aka little-g). There is other gravity in the universe too of course. Gravitational attraction between planets, planets & stars, planets & moons, etc. This is called G (aka big-G). There is force between you and the planet (G) but your mass is very small (despite what you see in the mirror). But it is there.

The Earth is spinning (bet you did know that!). So the force it sucks you down with (ie big G) is slightly lessened by the spin effect of planet which is pushing you away...the net effect is little-g. Everyday "gravity". Everything you try and measure on this planet will have gravity of g. Regardless of its mass. The bigger the thing, the more it should be attracted to the planet (big-G), but the spin pushes it away more...so it balances out as little-g. Always. This is why when you drop a penny and a bowling ball from top of leaning tower of Pizza (or whatever Galileo dropped), they hit the ground at same time. Same experiment on the moon gives different results (no spin there).

lan wrote: »

I’m open to correction here, but I think that’s wrong. Bigger (well, more massive) things ARE attracted to Earth more strongly. The reason they fall at the same rate as lighter things is that rate of acceleration is proportional to mass (F=MA). The heavier something is, the more force it takes to move it. So gravity exerts a larger force, but the larger mass balances it out and we end up with the same acceleration, g.

So a couple of things.

Big G is Newton's Gravitational Constant. It's just a number that appears constantly in equations for gravity, I'll make a comment about it at the end.

Little g is as RiderOnTheStorm said the gravitational pull of the Earth (or more generally whatever planet you are talking about). However it isn't a result of Newton's constant being cancelled by the Earth spinning. It's simply how hard the earth pulls down on you. The reason things fall slower on the moon is just that the moon has less mass and hence less gravity. Nothing to do with the moon's spin.

Now to Ian's other point.

This is correct in Newtonian Physics. Every object has an inertial mass (what everybody just calls mass) which measures how hard it is to accelerate. Most forces, like electromagnetism, have to fight against this mass to move something. Gravity however does not. The reason why it does not and why heavier things fall at the same rate as lighter ones was not discovered until 1915 in General Relativity.

General Relativity also explains why Newton's Gravitational Constant has the value it does, but I'll cover it in a later post.

As a side note special relativity also explains why the speed of light has the exact value it does, but I'll cover that in the same post.

bnt

I did some quick calculations, and the effect of the Earth's rotation on your weight is really tiny, something like 0.035%. For an 80 kg person, that translates to losing 28 grams, or about an ounce.

Water John

Standing near the poles, eliminates the spin effect.
So how fast are we travelling in space? 10,600mph around the the sun. 165mph if standing at the equator. I subract the 165 from the 10,600. So 10,435?

I know there are other motions, including the universe expanding .

4068ac1elhodqr

Fourier wrote: »

The ratio is often named the golden ratio and is around 1.618.

Just as pi often pops up if there is a circle present somewhere (often its not obvious immediately where in the situation the circle is), the golden ratio often pops up in places where a certain kind of ellipse shows up (again it is not always obvious there is an ellipse involved).

However its frequency is often over stated, it doesn't really show up in the Pyramids, the Parthenon or Renaissance paintings as is often claimed, nor in astrophysics. Some articles for example say it shows up in black holes and the orbits of planets, but this isn't really true.

It does show up in flowers, essentially because they are building an ellipse with their petals.

The earth-moon specific ratios (recrepical locks) are slightly different (even if inter-related), to that more common everyday golden mean or pi/Phi (1.61803398875).

A few important numbers are 1.2727, 3.66 and 2732.
All giving values for harmonic work in music and design.

Earth diameter + Moon diameter = 1 + .272 (3/11) = 1.272* = 14/11.

* The number 1.272 is a key number it approximates the area ratio of a square to its inscribed circle (1.27323) and the √ϕ function (1.27202); and 14/11 (1.27273)

The diameter (ratio) of Earth to Moon (7,920/2,160) = 3.66^

^ 3.66 is also important, with earth having 366 approx orbits in a year.
366hz is the sound of the Chinese huangchung (yellow bell) perfect cosmic tone.

The earth-moon Radius Ratio: 0.273 ± (or 0.27264) Yes (4–pi)/pi = 0.2732 so yes there is a more direct connection to the golden mean in this example.

± equates to the Moon Revolution period (days) 27.32.
273 is the average human gestation period. 27.3 days the menstrual cycle.
273 days from the summer solstice to the vernal equinox.
Great Pyramid’s height to half its base is 1.273:1
2,730,000 is the circumference of the Sun in miles.
Sun Synodic Period: 27.2753 days.



There are also harmonic relations to the earth-moon pair with oxygen-hyrogen atoms (above) and bond angles of liquid water (chacana). Sacred geometry is seemingly everywhere, even if there are some close approximations.

Fourier

Alanna Thousands Valley wrote: »

There are also harmonic relations to the earth-moon pair with oxygen-hyrogen atoms (above) and bond angles of liquid water (chacana). Sacred geometry is seemingly everywhere, even if there are some close approximations.

I could go into your examples in detail, some of the figures are wrong, some of the equations don't fully make sense to me, but just as an example:

2,730,000 is the circumference of the Sun in miles.
Sun Synodic Period: 27.2753 days.

Look at this. Miles is one unit of measurement, days another. Day is one spin of the Earth, a mile is a unit ultimately resulting from Roman measurements. What does it matter for the Sun that two properties of it have "27" in front when measured in particular units. Sure switch to kilometers and one isn't valid, change to a day on Venus and it isn't either.

There is an intricate set of mathematical properties to the world, but they're not as simple as just numbers.

4068ac1elhodqr

Fourier wrote: »

Look at this. Miles is one unit of measurement, days another. Day is one spin of the Earth, a mile is a unit ultimately resulting from Roman measurements. What does it matter for the Sun that two properties of it have "27" in front when measured in particular units.

Sure switch to kilometers and one isn't valid, change to a day on Venus and it isn't either.

There is an intricate set of mathematical properties to the world, but they're not as simple as just numbers.

Yes some technicalities, but for example take look a Venus as you've mentioned.

Venus orbits the Sun in 224.695 days while Earth orbits the Sun in 365.242 days, creating a ratio of 8/13 (both Fibonacci numbers) or 0.615 (roughly phi -1).

Probably another technicality (assuming Pluto & Ceres as dwarf 'planet' status), is the average mean orbital distances of each successive planet in relation to the one before it, approximating phi.

Assuming Mercury = 1, it follows: 1 / 1.86 / 1.38 / 1.52 / 1.81 / 1.88 / 1.84 / 2.00 / 1/56 / 1.30. T=16.18736/10 bodies = 1.618.

Plenty of things can be queried, but is it fair to say there may be some 'universal' patterns, loops or recrepical locks present, or even to go as far as to support intelligent universal design at play?

SimonTemplar

At the Bank station in the London Tube, there is a corridor with a large metal arch:



This isn't decorative or structural. This is actually part of the original tunneling equipment that was left buried about 18 meters underground in 1898. It remained buried until that corridor was built at the same location in 1987 to connect the station to the Dockland Light Railway

mzungu

The term oxymoron is itself an oxymoron (oxy means sharp, and moron means dull).

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

mzungu wrote: »

The term oxymoron is itself an oxymoron (oxy means sharp, and moron means dull).

It's what's called an Autological word (describes itself) and can also be translated from the original Greek as keenly stupid or pointedly foolish.

gozunda

John Joseph Patrick Ryan (1920-1998)




(Stage name Jack Lord) Better known as the character Steve Mcgarrett in his starring role in the CBS television program Hawaii Five-O, which ran from 1968 to 1980.

According to Jack, his mother's family, the O'Briens, came from Tipperary, while the Ryans came from County Cork 

Capt'n Midnight

Alanna Thousands Valley wrote: »

Plenty of things can be queried, but is it fair to say there may be some 'universal' patterns, loops or recrepical locks present, or even to go as far as to support intelligent universal design at play?

In a word resonance.

Mercury has years that are 1.5 times as long as its days. So every two years there are three days. If you are Scottish that means it's Hogmanay most of the time.

Humans are very good at finding patterns where none exist.

Johannes Kepler had a book abou how the orbits of planets matched the sizes of Platonic Solids , think cubes and other dice shape.

Later on with better observations and maths he came up a better model. Today we still use Kepler's laws of planetary motion.

Carry

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Humans are very good at finding patterns where none exist.

That's how our brains are wired.
We need patterns to make sense of a complex and confusing world. If we don't find patterns we find mystery or god(s) or ideologies. Personally I prefer patterns...

That's probably how science started, as well as religion - the search for meaning=patterns=sense, to master a world we don't understand.

In physics, especially astrophysics and as far as I know in maths there is always the one (or serveral) big unkown(s) most scientists try to get to grips with.

There are patterns alright, but not everywhere. Sometimes the world is just chaos (I'm sure, Fourier can explain the chaos theory )


Socrates said famously: I know that I know nothing.
But at least we have this thread to know a little bit more .

BaZmO*

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

In a word resonance.

Mercury has years that are 1.5 times as long as its days. So every two years there are three days. If you are Scottish that means it's Hogmanay most of the time.

Humans are very good at finding patterns where none exist.

Johannes Kepler had a book abou how the orbits of planets matched the sizes of Platonic Solids , think cubes and other dice shape.

Later on with better observations and maths he came up a better model. Today we still use Kepler's laws of planetary motion.

That’s why bookies are never poor.

4068ac1elhodqr

BaZmO* wrote: »

That’s why bookies are never poor.

Or just basic maths, showing their favourable pricing, and therby risk reduction/elimination.

e.g. Eng vs Spain in this Saturday's soccerball (EUFA) at 19:45.
In the (two-way) specific market, of 'draw no bet', at a very popular bookster you can choose between the 'glorious' prices of Eng:1.8, or Spain:1.91.

Only 2.0 {decimal price} would indicate you 'could' double your investment.

Only by specific insight, knowledge, skill, or other means can you hope to gain an advantage over trader's calculations. e.g. Always back a Trump at 9.0+ when the market contains a Clinton, as direct opposition at 1.10.

BaZmO*

That’s the point. Bookies actually do the maths. Punters tend to go with gut feeling. One of the reasons why soccer ball is such lucrative market for bookies.

Capt'n Midnight

Sharks are carnivorous.

But nearly 2/3rds of the diet of Bonnethead sharks is seagrass.

mzungu

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Sharks are carnivorous.

But nearly 2/3rds of the diet of Bonnethead sharks is seagrass.

In other shark news, a recent study of 18 Greenland sharks found that they were at least 272 years old. This makes the Greenland shark the longest-living vertebrate known to science.

gozunda

Big Tooth

The largest shark lived between 23.8 and 5.3 million years ago. Estimates show that
megalodon (ie Big tooth) was 40 to 50 feet in length and weighed around 48 tons.

The giant sharks teeth ranged from three to seven inches in length. The jaws spanned seven feet tall by six feet wide and probably fed on large marine mammals, such as whales.


Carcharodon megalodon