A true to scale model of the Solar System

  • 32 Replies
  • 6714 Views
*

JerkFace

  • 11057
  • Looking for Occam
A true to scale model of the Solar System
« on: August 31, 2015, 01:05:25 AM »
In the words of Douglas Adams,   space is big...    really big..   

This is an accurate scale model of the solar system,  where the moon is just one pixel in size.   

http://joshworth.com/dev/pixelspace/pixelspace_solarsystem.html




Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #1 on: August 31, 2015, 05:28:50 AM »
Scrolled through the whole thing!

Very empty. Very big. A whole new experience. Damn. Can't comprehend.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #2 on: August 31, 2015, 11:36:59 AM »
I've seen that before, it's quite amazing.

Space contains a lot of space who'd of thunk it.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #3 on: August 31, 2015, 03:20:54 PM »
Quite scary actually. Puts into perpective just how small and isolated planet earth is. This is just the Solar System, it is difficult to then try and imagine the distance to our nearest star or things on a galactic scale.

*

JerkFace

  • 11057
  • Looking for Occam
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #4 on: September 02, 2015, 05:10:27 AM »
I was surprised by how far out Neptune is,    compared to Jupiter it's  way way out there.   A lot further than I had imagined.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #5 on: September 02, 2015, 05:54:59 AM »
Very interesting diagram. I don't believe it's accurate, but nonetheless.
It does raise some questions though (Why so much emptiness when the forces at play are very active? Why did anything form at such distances? etc), but overall an impressive visualization.
Here for the scientific development of a Flat Earth model. Happy to be proven wrong, as I hope you are too.

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #6 on: September 02, 2015, 11:43:27 PM »
Very interesting diagram. I don't believe it's accurate, but nonetheless.
It does raise some questions though (Why so much emptiness when the forces at play are very active? Why did anything form at such distances? etc), but overall an impressive visualization.

It is as accurate as you can get with the small size of it and the accuracy of measured distances. The distances just add to the credibility of how our solarsystem formed. All that space between planets and the star shows how big the original proto-disk was and how much mass that was used to form the star and the planets without them interfering and crashing into each other or getting sucked into each other.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #7 on: September 03, 2015, 04:05:44 AM »
It is as accurate as you can get with the small size of it and the accuracy of measured distances. The distances just add to the credibility of how our solarsystem formed. All that space between planets and the star shows how big the original proto-disk was and how much mass that was used to form the star and the planets without them interfering and crashing into each other or getting sucked into each other.

I'd assume you mean how much volume was in the original proto-disk. The weight (pedantic, I know, but mass is defined by the gravitational influence acting on an object, which would be hard to gauge if there was just a disk like that) actually makes it a bit more questionable, because it does show the disk was large, but it also shows that the majority of it was drawn into specific locations, thanks to gravity, even if those locations were comparatively miniscule compared to the Sun.
I remember seeing a theory that Pluto was a captured comet, which may be wrong, but at least it exempts Pluto from the problem. Even so, it'd be very tricky to justify such small pockets of the risk maintaining any presence.
Here for the scientific development of a Flat Earth model. Happy to be proven wrong, as I hope you are too.

?

tomfi

  • 58
  • Do some math
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2015, 01:36:02 AM »
Ive been on "planetary trail" this year.... model 1: 1 000 000 000

http://www.astrohk.cz/planetarni_stezka/indexen.php

It gives feeling of the distance and size nicely.... i suggest to find one in your neighborhood, its nice walk :)

Sure, I understand its just "RE model", but maybe somebody is interested to really "walk the distance" ... its better then just scrolling mouse wheel :)
Please give me working sunset calculation that works with FE model !

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #9 on: November 17, 2015, 12:26:49 AM »
Ive been on "planetary trail" this year.... model 1: 1 000 000 000

http://www.astrohk.cz/planetarni_stezka/indexen.php

It gives feeling of the distance and size nicely.... i suggest to find one in your neighborhood, its nice walk :)

Sure, I understand its just "RE model", but maybe somebody is interested to really "walk the distance" ... its better then just scrolling mouse wheel :)

You could also check the worlds largest model of the solar system, "Sweden Solar System". It's a scale 1 : 20 000 000 model of our solar system, still being expanded with dwarf planets and comets. It uses Globen in Stockholm (a large arena) as the sun, with the planets and dwarf planets and other objects to scale as statues spread out over Sweden:

http://www.swedensolarsystem.se/en/
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

ronxyz

  • 414
  • technologist
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #10 on: November 17, 2015, 12:53:12 AM »
It does not look like a very practical way to make a solar system. I have read a good number of opinions that all that space is the whole point of the ball Earth theory. To make you feel insignificant and small and a total random bit of nothing. Come home to the flat Earth where life is good and the community is the whole solar system in your back yard.

If the Earth is a ball why don't we fall off the bottom?

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2015, 01:13:38 AM »
It does not look like a very practical way to make a solar system. I have read a good number of opinions that all that space is the whole point of the ball Earth theory. To make you feel insignificant and small and a total random bit of nothing. Come home to the flat Earth where life is good and the community is the whole solar system in your back yard.

Yes, because a massive conspiracy where people get threatened to death if they tell the truth and the government somehow impossibly steals money from from every citizen in the world, even though they are not american, which is the basis of a flat earth, and where science fails and nothing ever can be explained, where scientists are all bad people lying to us, is sooo much better. And insignificance does not equal to a bad life. It just means that space is a lot bigger than we thought, than we can think of.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

ronxyz

  • 414
  • technologist
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #12 on: November 28, 2015, 12:38:59 AM »
If you know these things why do you continue to delude yourself? A person of your learning would be a great help in deciphering the world as it is.
If the Earth is a ball why don't we fall off the bottom?

*

Frank Lee

  • 318
  • Truth has no agenda. Science does.
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #13 on: November 28, 2015, 03:19:54 AM »
I guess if you can believe the moon's gravity can move all of earths oceans around, I guess you can
believe anything. Dang, if only people could wrap their minds around how unique we are. All these models are fantastic, but, I do not know how anyone can accept we are so insignificant, To each his/her own.
Science is religion for people who will not be subject to a supreme Creator. Free choice is love.

*

ronxyz

  • 414
  • technologist
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #14 on: November 28, 2015, 04:43:54 PM »
One of the things that is said by many who become aware of the ball Earth delusion is that when they go outside it seems like a friendlier place, like they belong there. A certain sense of relief.
If the Earth is a ball why don't we fall off the bottom?

?

tomfi

  • 58
  • Do some math
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2015, 06:07:59 AM »
I have read a good number of opinions that all that space is the whole point of the ball Earth theory. To make you feel insignificant and small and a total random bit of nothing. Come home to the flat Earth where life is good and the community is the whole solar system in your back yard.

Why you need to feel insignificant or small?

Universe  just explains that you cannot move moon, you cannot move sun, you cannot travel to nearest star using our technologies... is it something that makes you small or insignificant? Do you really need to have "huge power" to feel good?



=====================================
On the other side... speaking about RE conspiracy to control people, why do it so complicated way?

If somebody wanna to control people, he don't tell people, that he is so un-powerful and small, and that you are exactly the same as your rulers. To rule people, you tell them that there is some huge force that is able to kill them or that this poor life you live is just a way to some another much better life (or if you are credible, you may say "its way to immorality"). Then if people will believe you...  You will say "Im the delegate of that force, and I command you!!!! And don't try to disobey, because the HUGE FORCE (that you don't understand) will bring DOOM and then, you will confess why you don't listen to our commands."...


Yes still its easier to rule people the way you say that you are God or son of God (pharaoh),  you may decide to kill millions and just say "that's my will"... you don't have to say "that's Gods else will" (because it brings questions: Is it really Gods will?... if you tell "that's my will" there is no question about it...  its easier to force people to do what you wanna from son of God position... you dont need to tell them "god see it and he will judge you afterlife"... you just say them "Im God and I think you did wrong, you die and no other life for you [period]".


I don't say "God doesn't exist". What I say is that that most powerful force seen on our planet, and most powerful force of our history is Church. I mean the organization, not the religion.

Church may DO you "insignificant and small and a total random bit of nothing" from point blank if you don't behave right way, think right way or do your job. Why depress people about their insignificance? And how you control somebody who thinks "It doesn't meter"?
Please give me working sunset calculation that works with FE model !

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2015, 05:44:17 AM »
Since when is 1 in 7.5 billion "friendly", especially when we all hate each other?
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #17 on: December 06, 2015, 02:32:50 AM »
Since when is 1 in 7.5 billion "friendly", especially when we all hate each other?

You might hate everyone, but I doubt the majority of humans hate each other. 

*

Frank Lee

  • 318
  • Truth has no agenda. Science does.
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #18 on: December 06, 2015, 04:14:15 AM »
Since when is 1 in 7.5 billion "friendly", especially when we all hate each other?

You might hate everyone, but I doubt the majority of humans hate each other.

I for one don't hate anyone. It is not in my best interest.
Hate will eat you up, break you down, cast you out and leave a dung heap where it lays.
But, i guess dung makes a good fertilizer for those who wish to grow!   :-*
Science is religion for people who will not be subject to a supreme Creator. Free choice is love.

*

Stanton

  • 236
  • Pizza Earth with Extra Cheese
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #19 on: February 12, 2016, 07:09:46 PM »
. . . pedantic, I know, but mass is defined by the gravitational influence acting on an object

weight is a measure of mass under gravitational influence.

mass is independent of force.



unless that is also some conspiracy.





.






You shills REALLY need to watch your vocabulary.


?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #20 on: February 13, 2016, 03:15:42 AM »
. . . pedantic, I know, but mass is defined by the gravitational influence acting on an object

weight is a measure of mass under gravitational influence.

mass is independent of force.



unless that is also some conspiracy.





.

Umm what? These quote aren't even quotes, why'd you post this?
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

Stanton

  • 236
  • Pizza Earth with Extra Cheese
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2016, 05:31:30 PM »

. . . pedantic, I know, but mass is defined by the gravitational influence acting on an object

weight is a measure of mass under gravitational influence.

mass is independent of force.



unless that is also some conspiracy.





.

Umm what? These quote aren't even quotes, why'd you post this?





I'd assume you mean how much volume was in the original proto-disk. The weight (pedantic, I know, but mass is defined by the gravitational influence acting on an object, which would be hard to gauge if there was just a disk like that) actually makes it a bit more questionable, because it does show the disk was large, but it also shows that the majority of it was drawn into specific locations, thanks to gravity, even if those locations were comparatively miniscule compared to the Sun.
I remember seeing a theory that Pluto was a captured comet, which may be wrong, but at least it exempts Pluto from the problem. Even so, it'd be very tricky to justify such small pockets of the risk maintaining any presence.



I apologize for quoting only the pertinent portion of the post.
I assumed people would read the entire thread before adding their own post.

In the future, I will quote the entire post and highlight the portion that is in conflict with reality.



Back to my statement . . .

weight is a measure of mass under gravitational influence.

mass is independent of force.











You shills REALLY need to watch your vocabulary.


*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #22 on: February 15, 2016, 06:21:46 PM »
I apologize

We tend to forgive people for being dumb around here. 

*

MrDebunk

  • 358
  • Chaotic good
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #23 on: February 15, 2016, 06:32:12 PM »
I apologize

We tend to forgive people for being dumb around here.

I forgive you for being dumb.
M R D E B U N K (the reboot)

Quote from: totallackofintelligence
You sound like shill.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #24 on: February 15, 2016, 06:33:34 PM »
I apologize

We tend to forgive people for being dumb around here.

I forgive you for being dumb.

Two dumbs do not make a right. 

*

MrDebunk

  • 358
  • Chaotic good
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #25 on: February 15, 2016, 09:07:35 PM »
I apologize

We tend to forgive people for being dumb around here.

I forgive you for being dumb.

Two dumbs do not make a right.

WHAAA

the opposite of dumb is not right. we all know that one person is rekking the flat earth, the other is an idiot kissing a twerking flat earth's butt.
M R D E B U N K (the reboot)

Quote from: totallackofintelligence
You sound like shill.

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #26 on: February 15, 2016, 09:11:11 PM »
I apologize

We tend to forgive people for being dumb around here.

I forgive you for being dumb.

Two dumbs do not make a right.

WHAAA

the opposite of dumb is not right. we all know that one person is rekking the flat earth, the other is an idiot kissing a twerking flat earth's butt.

Where you dropped on the head as a child?  I am just trying to figure out how you got this messed up in the head. 

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #27 on: February 22, 2016, 12:54:21 AM »

. . . pedantic, I know, but mass is defined by the gravitational influence acting on an object

weight is a measure of mass under gravitational influence.

mass is independent of force.



unless that is also some conspiracy.





.

Umm what? These quote aren't even quotes, why'd you post this?





I'd assume you mean how much volume was in the original proto-disk. The weight (pedantic, I know, but mass is defined by the gravitational influence acting on an object, which would be hard to gauge if there was just a disk like that) actually makes it a bit more questionable, because it does show the disk was large, but it also shows that the majority of it was drawn into specific locations, thanks to gravity, even if those locations were comparatively miniscule compared to the Sun.
I remember seeing a theory that Pluto was a captured comet, which may be wrong, but at least it exempts Pluto from the problem. Even so, it'd be very tricky to justify such small pockets of the risk maintaining any presence.



I apologize for quoting only the pertinent portion of the post.
I assumed people would read the entire thread before adding their own post.

In the future, I will quote the entire post and highlight the portion that is in conflict with reality.



Back to my statement . . .

weight is a measure of mass under gravitational influence.

mass is independent of force.
That is not what I said. That is what FEScientist said. You messed up the names.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

*

MrDebunk

  • 358
  • Chaotic good
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #28 on: February 23, 2016, 08:46:48 PM »
I apologize

We tend to forgive people for being dumb around here.

I forgive you for being dumb.

Two dumbs do not make a right.

WHAAA

the opposite of dumb is not right. we all know that one person is rekking the flat earth, the other is an idiot kissing a twerking flat earth's butt.

Where you dropped on the head as a child?  I am just trying to figure out how you got this messed up in the head.

I betcha I got less hit in the head than Steve Harvey.
M R D E B U N K (the reboot)

Quote from: totallackofintelligence
You sound like shill.

*

Stanton

  • 236
  • Pizza Earth with Extra Cheese
Re: A true to scale model of the Solar System
« Reply #29 on: March 18, 2016, 08:32:54 PM »
I apologize

We tend to forgive people for being dumb around here.


Then... I forgive you.


Attributing a quote to the wrong person was an editing error on my part.
Not the end of the world (or the edge for that matter).    ;D




Back to my statement . . .

weight is a measure of mass under gravitational influence.
mass is independent of force.



I'm not sure why you are all jacked-off about something that has nothing to do with you.
I also don't care.

You shills REALLY need to watch your vocabulary.