Page 3 of 5

Posted: 10 Jan 2007, 23:30
by Neddie
I'm not talking about soft economics, where currency rules the fate of the project. I'm talking about the resource limitations of Earth.

Posted: 10 Jan 2007, 23:41
by Zoombie
As in fossile fules, hard metals and so on?

Thats why we have to go into space. There is evidence that there are enough resourses in the asteroid belt, Mercury and other planets to sustain the humain race for millions of years. There's going to be a 'hump' of loss while we struggle into space, but then the material will come back to earth.

The only thing keeping us from space is money and effort. But thats what's keeping the humain race from many things.

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 01:40
by manored
P3374H wrote:
Quanto042 wrote:Somewhere between 250 Million - 1 Billion Years, The Moons orbit decays to the point that it slings itself away from the earth, causing the earth's axis to wobble uncontrolably..
It's unclear what will happen as the moon's orbit destabilizes - it is quite possible it will either crash into us, or slowly break apart giving earth a saturn-like set of rings.
If the moon is getting away that sloly, I dont think it would affect the earth axis and neither make it explode or crash on us (unleash someone puts on the Majoras mask! ).

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 06:32
by Quanto042
manored wrote:
P3374H wrote:
Quanto042 wrote:Somewhere between 250 Million - 1 Billion Years, The Moons orbit decays to the point that it slings itself away from the earth, causing the earth's axis to wobble uncontrolably..
It's unclear what will happen as the moon's orbit destabilizes - it is quite possible it will either crash into us, or slowly break apart giving earth a saturn-like set of rings.
If the moon is getting away that sloly, I dont think it would affect the earth axis and neither make it explode or crash on us (unleash someone puts on the Majoras mask! ).
Answering both peetah's and zoombies posts,

peetah: the moon controls not just the tides but also how much variance there is in the earth's rotational axis. No moon, no axis control, which means we start wobbling all over the place. And no, the moon won't crash into us, its getting farther and farther away.

zoombie: Yes, Our Galaxy and the Andromeda are really far appart, but they also follow a set gravitational path, similar to that of a binary star system. BUT because the Andromeda Galaxy is sooooooo much bigger than ours (somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 times the size), it has that much more gravity and as a result, in 3 billion years (2 billion years before the sun blows up) our two galaxies will collide into eachother and form a super galaxy. Our star system has four possible fates from there:

1. We get sucked into Andromeda's super black hole.

2. We smash into another star.

3. We get flung out of both galaxies and become an orphan star system with no galaxy to call home.

4. Nothing really dramatic happens and we survive the merger unscathed.

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 07:35
by Peet
And no, the moon won't crash into us, its getting farther and farther away.

So says your source. It's a controversial topic, it is unwise to choose one possibility over another at this point.

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 09:37
by Quanto042
P3374H wrote:And no, the moon won't crash into us, its getting farther and farther away.

So says your source. It's a controversial topic, it is unwise to choose one possibility over another at this point.
Dude, NASA has a laser measuring device watching it. Its moving away by 4 cm a year. Its not going to just change its mind and come towards us.

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 15:32
by BlackLiger
Quanto042 wrote:
manored wrote:
P3374H wrote: It's unclear what will happen as the moon's orbit destabilizes - it is quite possible it will either crash into us, or slowly break apart giving earth a saturn-like set of rings.
If the moon is getting away that sloly, I dont think it would affect the earth axis and neither make it explode or crash on us (unleash someone puts on the Majoras mask! ).
Answering both peetah's and zoombies posts,

peetah: the moon controls not just the tides but also how much variance there is in the earth's rotational axis. No moon, no axis control, which means we start wobbling all over the place. And no, the moon won't crash into us, its getting farther and farther away.

zoombie: Yes, Our Galaxy and the Andromeda are really far appart, but they also follow a set gravitational path, similar to that of a binary star system. BUT because the Andromeda Galaxy is sooooooo much bigger than ours (somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 times the size), it has that much more gravity and as a result, in 3 billion years (2 billion years before the sun blows up) our two galaxies will collide into eachother and form a super galaxy. Our star system has four possible fates from there:

1. We get sucked into Andromeda's super black hole.

2. We smash into another star.

3. We get flung out of both galaxies and become an orphan star system with no galaxy to call home.

4. Nothing really dramatic happens and we survive the merger unscathed.
I ARE LIKING OPTION 3 or 4! <_<

Also, before anyone says I'll be long dead by then, I don't intend to become immortal through my actions, I intend to become immortal through living forever <_<

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 16:56
by Peet
Quanto042 wrote:
P3374H wrote:And no, the moon won't crash into us, its getting farther and farther away.

So says your source. It's a controversial topic, it is unwise to choose one possibility over another at this point.
Dude, NASA has a laser measuring device watching it. Its moving away by 4 cm a year. Its not going to just change its mind and come towards us.

Yes, which proves it's unstable. It could be large-scale oscillatory motion.

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 18:25
by manored
If the moon is in one orbit that is taking it away, it wont change direction unleash something really big happens and change its orbit, and most things I think that could do that already have apocaliptic effects :-) .

And BlackLiger unleash you become completly immortal (immortal enough to survive those catastropic events), you wouldnt live forever anyway since an infinite amount of time means that there is an infinite amount of deadly things that can happen to you :-) .

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 22:47
by BlackLiger
manored wrote:If the moon is in one orbit that is taking it away, it wont change direction unleash something really big happens and change its orbit, and most things I think that could do that already have apocaliptic effects :-) .

And BlackLiger unleash you become completly immortal (immortal enough to survive those catastropic events), you wouldnt live forever anyway since an infinite amount of time means that there is an infinite amount of deadly things that can happen to you :-) .
Thats specified in the living forever thing :P

Posted: 11 Jan 2007, 23:35
by 10053r
While you are correct that the moon going away would seriously screw up the climate, the collision with Andromeda is actually not a big problem because stars might collide with us or we might get sucked into a black hole or we might get flung out far away. The chances of a star colliding with us, or getting sucked into the massive black hole are incredibly tiny. In fact, I think I read that galaxies collide all the time without ONE single stellar collision.

The real problem is that the vast clouds of dust will collide and set off some serious star production, which will lead to a bunch of supernovae a few 10s of millions of years later, which will sterilize both galaxies. The chance of that happening is pretty near 100%. So we should hope that our star gets flung away. If it doesn't, we might have to do the flinging ourselves.

Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 15:37
by manored
Lets destroy andromeda :twisted: !

Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 16:10
by SwiftSpear
10053r wrote:While you are correct that the moon going away would seriously screw up the climate, the collision with Andromeda is actually not a big problem because stars might collide with us or we might get sucked into a black hole or we might get flung out far away. The chances of a star colliding with us, or getting sucked into the massive black hole are incredibly tiny. In fact, I think I read that galaxies collide all the time without ONE single stellar collision.

The real problem is that the vast clouds of dust will collide and set off some serious star production, which will lead to a bunch of supernovae a few 10s of millions of years later, which will sterilize both galaxies. The chance of that happening is pretty near 100%. So we should hope that our star gets flung away. If it doesn't, we might have to do the flinging ourselves.
Why would supernovies sterilize the galaxies?

Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 16:54
by Strategia
Novae emit lots of gamma radiation, if there is a larger number of them near each other at the time they go nova the amount of gamma rays is massive and known as a gamma ray burst (or GRB) which can sterilize neighbouring systems, and if this happens on a galactic scale it's bye-bye hairless monkeys.

Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 17:13
by AF
Thats not what horizons says. Horizons says that GRB are when superheavy stars form and burn through their fuel too fast, then collapse very quickly into blackholes. The fast rate of collapse induces 2 powerful jets of EM radiation from the blackholes temporarily, aka your GRB's. Calculations show that fi ti was a supernovae or several then the required mass to generate that type of blast in a 360* radius would involve an impossible amount of mass according to e=mc^2.

Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 21:06
by manored
AF wrote:Thats not what horizons says. Horizons says that GRB are when superheavy stars form and burn through their fuel too fast, then collapse very quickly into blackholes. The fast rate of collapse induces 2 powerful jets of EM radiation from the blackholes temporarily, aka your GRB's. Calculations show that fi ti was a supernovae or several then the required mass to generate that type of blast in a 360* radius would involve an impossible amount of mass according to e=mc^2.
Then lets just spray we dont get in the way of those Jets! :-)

Posted: 12 Jan 2007, 23:14
by Comp1337
srsly. Just face the radiation like a man, its so small what can it do to hurt you when youre so big?
pansies

Posted: 13 Jan 2007, 11:09
by Quanto042
On top of all that, galaxies merge all the time, our galaxy was formed by a merger of tons of smaller ones. (Many small ones still orbit us as I type.) Ultimately, as far as galactic ecosystems are concerned, a merger is a good thing, it creates so much new star birth its insane. Even if the emmediat merger results in cataclysmic destruction at that moment (at least its a moment in universal terms, it actually happens very slowly) life will likely pop up on the new worlds created from the ashes of the old.

Posted: 13 Jan 2007, 22:33
by BlackLiger
Comp1337 wrote:srsly. Just face the radiation like a man, its so small what can it do to hurt you when youre so big?
pansies
Surgeon Nutjobs warning: RADIATION CAN SERIOUSLY SHRINK YOUR PENIS

Posted: 14 Jan 2007, 00:41
by manored
Quanto042 wrote:On top of all that, galaxies merge all the time, our galaxy was formed by a merger of tons of smaller ones. (Many small ones still orbit us as I type.) Ultimately, as far as galactic ecosystems are concerned, a merger is a good thing, it creates so much new star birth its insane. Even if the emmediat merger results in cataclysmic destruction at that moment (at least its a moment in universal terms, it actually happens very slowly) life will likely pop up on the new worlds created from the ashes of the old.
Its good for the universe, not for us... we dont gain much with the bornage of new races, but we lose a lot with our extermination :-) .