Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Our mysterious moon


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Do you have any evidence or is this just another of your garbage blatherings of no value?

Mountain sides of it. lol.

Edited by openozy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
3 hours ago, stereologist said:

Completely false. Astrologers do not calculate. They make up stuff. Astrology has failed and will never ever be anything other than a pre-science guess that turned out to be wrong

 

This is not about astrology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Abramelin said:

This is not about astrology.

I realize that. I did not introduce astrology into the thread.

I do question the article which is used as the foundation of this thread. It makes claims which are false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, stereologist said:

I realize that. I did not introduce astrology into the thread.

I do question the article which is used as the foundation of this thread. It makes claims which are false.

Ok. We did go a bit off topic.

But you were the first to mention astrology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Abramelin said:

Ok. We did go a bit off topic.

But you were the first to mention astrology.

Incorrect. It was coil in post #12.  I stand by my statement that I did not introduce astrology into this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, stereologist said:

As I thought you  have nothing. It was just garbage blathering.

As I said

 

4 hours ago, openozy said:

Mountain sides of it. lol.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, stereologist said:

Incorrect. It was coil in post #12.  I stand by my statement that I did not introduce astrology into this thread.

Yeah, you're right. I must have read Coil's post so fast, I even forgot it was there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Abramelin said:

Yeah, you're right. I must have read Coil's post so fast, I even forgot it was there...

No problem. I'm sure you noticed that the claims of the Moon were similar to claims about the GP where claims of exact turn out not to be exact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as an aside: I've practised astrology for like 15 years.

But that was ages ago.

Let's say that 'I lost faith', heh.

But despite that, I have experienced really odd things during that time.

 

----

 

Edit:

Here's what I once posted on another board, many years ago. And scroll down till you see 'Abramelinn', with double -n- :

LINK

Btw., also check my other story further down.

 

Edited by Abramelin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

It's fkg amazing: no one read that link, heh.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2020 at 2:01 AM, ChrLzs said:

Well, 'J.P Robinson', amongst the first couple of claims you make, you say that the Moon is "precisely 400 times smaller than the Sun".

No, it isn't.  The ratio of Sun/Moon size is ~403.

Then you say it is "exactly 400 times closer to the Earth".

No, it isn't.  The ratio of the Sun/Moon distance is ~389.

Hi Chuck. Can you please direct us to the figures you are working with? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Various sources can be used, from NASA to ESA thru Roscosmos thru various countries astronomy associations, and they all tend to agree.  My approach is to Wiki each item one a time and then look at other links to verify the numbers.

Sizes and distances have to be averaged, as the objects are not perfectly round, and the distances vary over time and season (elliptical orbits).

Note that many of these numbers can be measured and verified to a reasonable degree using amateur level equipment and good old trigonometry...

 

If there's a particular one you wish to discuss/dispute, let me know and I'll go through it.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

Various sources can be used, from NASA to ESA thru Roscosmos thru various countries astronomy associations, and they all tend to agree.  My approach is to Wiki each item one a time and then look at other links to verify the numbers.

Sizes and distances have to be averaged, as the objects are not perfectly round, and the distances vary over time and season (elliptical orbits).

Note that many of these numbers can be measured and verified to a reasonable degree using amateur level equipment and good old trigonometry...

 

If there's a particular one you wish to discuss/dispute, let me know and I'll go through it.

 

I'm not wishing to dispute anything. I was just wondering if you could run the numbers and maths by us. No worries if you don't feel so inclined. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SeekTruth said:

I'm not wishing to dispute anything. I was just wondering if you could run the numbers and maths by us. No worries if you don't feel so inclined. 

No problems, it's a fair question.  I'm busy as all hell right now, but I'll be back when I can. B)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, here's a start, with some randomly selected citation websites...

JP Robinson said:

Quote

The Moon revolves at exactly one hundredth of the speed that the Earth turns on its axis.

Really?  OK, let's break that down.  The first thing we need to do is determine what type of Moon 'revolving' has been chosen - if it's revolving around the earth that is being referred to, then its orbital velocity is 1.02 km/s.  The earth turns on its axis once every 24 hours which results in a speed at the equator of about 1,600 km/s, but that speed varies down to zero at the axial poles...  I don't see any 'exactly one hundredth of the speed' there.  I've possibly not understood what he's getting at - does anyone know what Robinson is referring to?

Cite - https://earthsky.org/earth/why-cant-we-feel-earths-spin/

 

Quote

It is also precisely 400 times smaller than the Sun

The Sun's mean diameter is 1,392,700 km.  The Moon's mean diameter is 3,474.2 km.

Cite - https://spaceplace.nasa.gov/sun-compare/en/

Cite - https://www.space.com/18135-how-big-is-the-moon.html

The ratio is 400.892 - to three sig figs, that's 401 times.  NOT 'precisely 400 times'.

 

Quote

and exactly 400 times closer to the Earth.

The Moon averages 384,400 km from earth.  The Sun averages 149,597,870 km.

Cite - https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/topics/how-far-away-moon

Cite - https://www.space.com/17081-how-far-is-earth-from-the-sun.html

Note that both those numbers vary throughout the year - they're both elliptical orbits..

The average ratio is 389.17.  Wow, that's definitely NOT 400.. let alone "exactly".

If one can cherry pick and have that sort of allowance of error, pretty much anything can be made into a match...

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

OK, here's a start, with some randomly selected citation websites...

JP Robinson said:

Really?  OK, let's break that down.  The first thing we need to do is determine what type of Moon 'revolving' has been chosen - if it's revolving around the earth that is being referred to, then its orbital velocity is 1.02 km/s.  The earth turns on its axis once every 24 hours which results in a speed at the equator of about 1,600 km/s, but that speed varies down to zero at the axial poles...  I don't see any 'exactly one hundredth of the speed' there.  I've possibly not understood what he's getting at - does anyone know what Robinson is referring to?

Cite - https://earthsky.org/earth/why-cant-we-feel-earths-spin/

 

The Sun's mean diameter is 1,392,700 km.  The Moon's mean diameter is 3,474.2 km.

Cite - https://spaceplace.nasa.gov/sun-compare/en/

Cite - https://www.space.com/18135-how-big-is-the-moon.html

The ratio is 400.892 - to three sig figs, that's 401 times.  NOT 'precisely 400 times'.

 

The Moon averages 384,400 km from earth.  The Sun averages 149,597,870 km.

Cite - https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/topics/how-far-away-moon

Cite - https://www.space.com/17081-how-far-is-earth-from-the-sun.html

Note that both those numbers vary throughout the year - they're both elliptical orbits..

The average ratio is 389.17.  Wow, that's definitely NOT 400.. let alone "exactly".

If one can cherry pick and have that sort of allowance of error, pretty much anything can be made into a match...

 

Thank you. Would it be at all accurate to suggest that during a full solar eclipse (not dealing with average distances), the sun is 400 times the distance from earth than is the moon?

 

This was pretty neat: https://spaceplace.nasa.gov/total-solar-eclipse/en/

 

Edited by SeekTruth
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SeekTruth said:

Would it be at all accurate to suggest that during a full solar eclipse (not dealing with average distances), the sun is 400 times the distance from earth than is the moon?

Sort of.  It's a complex topic.  The Sun and moon's distances vary.  If the moon is closer to earth, and the Sun is further away, then the moon will easily cover the Sun and the eclipse will be longer than normal.  If the moon is further from earth and the Sun ic closer, then it will be an 'annular' eclipse where the moon is too small to cover the Sun and there is a ring effect.  So there is a wide range of variable distances, the ratio is somewhere between 380x and 415x.  Or thereabouts.  If you are really interested, you can look up the relevant apogees and perigees and see the range and work out the exact ratio for a partucular eclipse for yourself, but frankly I don't see much point.

 

Numerology is bunkum.   Yes, it's a nice coincidence that the Moon is (currently) about the right size and distance to give us aesthetic eclipses.  But that's the thing about coincidences and synchronicities.  If it wasn't that, there would be guaranteed to be something else where someone spots some numbers that sorta kinda almost vaguely match up to something else.  If you get to pick which things you like, and also throw in conversions from Imperial to Metric to Ancient Egyptian, ..etc, then 'success' is a no-brainer.

And the rest of the article is equally flawed - we've covered the "Moon is Hollow" silliness previously.  It just isn't.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

I do believe the moon may have been artificially created, but regardless, I do believe it was placed strategically and deliberately where it is now - by whom I can't guess - but everything is too perfect for all of this to be 'natural'. Perhaps there is something inside the moon. Why haven't they explored at depth? Why hasn't any nation up there closely investigated the suspicious areas such as where bright flares have been reported? I was shooting a rapid series of photos of the moon several years ago, trying to get the best image and something very odd happened on one image the moon changed - the shots before and after were all the same - but on one image something inexplicable happened as though the dark patches shifted. I can't explain it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2022 at 11:34 AM, AnnaNova said:

I do believe the moon may have been artificially created, but regardless, I do believe it was placed strategically and deliberately where it is now - by whom I can't guess - but everything is too perfect for all of this to be 'natural'. Perhaps there is something inside the moon. Why haven't they explored at depth? Why hasn't any nation up there closely investigated the suspicious areas such as where bright flares have been reported? I was shooting a rapid series of photos of the moon several years ago, trying to get the best image and something very odd happened on one image the moon changed - the shots before and after were all the same - but on one image something inexplicable happened as though the dark patches shifted. I can't explain it.

How can this be the case when it is clear than the Moon has move in its orbit over the last 400My?

It has been doing that for far longer, but the evidence only covers the last 400My

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2022 at 8:34 AM, AnnaNova said:

I do believe the moon may have been artificially created, but regardless, I do believe it was placed strategically and deliberately where it is now - by whom I can't guess - but everything is too perfect for all of this to be 'natural'. Perhaps there is something inside the moon. Why haven't they explored at depth? Why hasn't any nation up there closely investigated the suspicious areas such as where bright flares have been reported? I was shooting a rapid series of photos of the moon several years ago, trying to get the best image and something very odd happened on one image the moon changed - the shots before and after were all the same - but on one image something inexplicable happened as though the dark patches shifted. I can't explain it.

Do you still have these images? Would you mind sharing them here for forum members to check out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Trelane said:

Do you still have these images? Would you mind sharing them here for forum members to check out?

AnnaNova wrote 4 posts on the first day and has not been back since.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
On 1/17/2020 at 1:58 PM, joc said:

NASA astronauts have tested the Moon's density on several occasions using seismic equipment and have reported officially that the Moon rings like a bell when struck.

Apparently the rest of the article leads into the Hollow Moon Theory. :rolleyes:

 

NASA interview

mm: What do you think about hollow Moon theory? Is there any evidence that confirm this?

Renee_Weber: None of our results support that theory.
 

I was also was intrigued by this, and have done a search. Apparently NASA did say 'the moon rang like a bell' when seismic activity was measured, but they did not mean the moon was hollow like a bell. I think it vibrated longer than the Earth would, becuase it does not have a liquid core which acts like a damper or shock absorber.

Edited by Silver
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2022 at 4:34 PM, AnnaNova said:

... I was shooting a rapid series of photos of the moon several years ago, trying to get the best image and something very odd happened on one image the moon changed - the shots before and after were all the same - but on one image something inexplicable happened as though the dark patches shifted. I can't explain it.

Cheese mould growing perhaps?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.