A coincidence that bothers me
 

I've heard it described as a "stunning stellar coincidence" that the moon exactly covers the sun during a solar eclipse. The actual "coincidence" is that the sun, which is 400 times larger than the moon, just happens to be 400 times further away from the earth than the moon.

A fourth grader can point out that the shapes of continents on a world map fit together like puzzle pieces.
In the past this was dismissed as merely a fantastic coincidence. Then came the discovery of plate tectonics.

"Fantastic" or "stellar" coincidences bother me. It seems to me that when something looks to be a "fantastic" or "stellar" coincidence theres probably a correct explanation, not dependent on chance.

Stu

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

if you were to illustrate the coincidence that the sun is 400x the size of the moon and also 400x further away from Earth, how would you do it?

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

Ok I guess I'll crosspost my reply here - before NT bans everyone involved.


I believe the current theory is that the moon formed when the early earth, and another large planetary object collided. A chunk flew off from the collision and became the moon. The rest conglomerated to form the earth. Also the leftover heat from this collision is what gives the earth it's molten core.

So it's hard to see how any pattern could exist if the moon is really just a random chunk of stuff that came out of a big collision. But who knows.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
if you were to illustrate the coincidence that the sun is 400x the size of the moon and also 400x further away from Earth, how would you do it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would use MS PAINT.

Stu

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you were to illustrate the coincidence that the sun is 400x the size of the moon and also 400x further away from Earth, how would you do it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would use MS PAINT.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Diorama using only edible parts obv. Candy coated solar system FTW.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon you can find some data much more significantly closer if you just keep looking. Must try harder.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon you can find some data much more significantly closer if you just keep looking. Must try harder.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the numbers have at least 6 decimal places. Unless the numbers are wrong, the answer can't be much closer than what I figured, unless I screwed up somewhere.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon you can find some data much more significantly closer if you just keep looking. Must try harder.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the numbers have at least 6 decimal places. Unless the numbers are wrong, the answer can't be much closer than what I figured, unless I screwed up somewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]
not the precision of the measurements but the quantity of them. Measure enough paramteres of enough objects and you'll find any plenty of 'significant' closeness.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

Drift over time? At some point they must have been exact or will be.

With stellar/planetary sizes, I think you can cred it as an insignificant difference.

You wouldn't be able to reassemble the continents now without some serious magma help or silly putty anyway.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

i mean, you could say it is a bigger coincidence that earth is a habitable planet; it is just the right distance, size and atmosphere to support life

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

life as we know it, that is

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon you can find some data much more significantly closer if you just keep looking. Must try harder.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the numbers have at least 6 decimal places. Unless the numbers are wrong, the answer can't be much closer than what I figured, unless I screwed up somewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]
not the precision of the measurements but the quantity of them. Measure enough paramteres of enough objects and you'll find any plenty of 'significant' closeness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh my bad. I thought you were disagreeing with me.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon you can find some data much more significantly closer if you just keep looking. Must try harder.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the numbers have at least 6 decimal places. Unless the numbers are wrong, the answer can't be much closer than what I figured, unless I screwed up somewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]
not the precision of the measurements but the quantity of them. Measure enough paramteres of enough objects and you'll find any plenty of 'significant' closeness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh my bad. I thought you were disagreeing with me.

[/ QUOTE ]
So did I [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I agree with you disagreement with the op but thought you were saying that if they were significantly closer then that would have implications.

chez

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon you can find some data much more significantly closer if you just keep looking. Must try harder.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the numbers have at least 6 decimal places. Unless the numbers are wrong, the answer can't be much closer than what I figured, unless I screwed up somewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]
not the precision of the measurements but the quantity of them. Measure enough paramteres of enough objects and you'll find any plenty of 'significant' closeness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh my bad. I thought you were disagreeing with me.

[/ QUOTE ]
So did I [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] I agree with you disagreement with the op but thought you were saying that if they were significantly closer then that would have implications.

chez

[/ QUOTE ]

Hold it! Kennedy and Lincoln DO have 6 letters ... explain THAT !

luckyme

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

Neither the orbit of the Moon around the Earth nor the Earth around the sun are circular, so there isn't even a single ratio.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've heard it described as a "stunning stellar coincidence" that the moon exactly covers the sun during a solar eclipse. The actual "coincidence" is that the sun, which is 400 times larger than the moon, just happens to be 400 times further away from the earth than the moon.

A fourth grader can point out that the shapes of continents on a world map fit together like puzzle pieces.
In the past this was dismissed as merely a fantastic coincidence. Then came the discovery of plate tectonics.

"Fantastic" or "stellar" coincidences bother me. It seems to me that when something looks to be a "fantastic" or "stellar" coincidence theres probably a correct explanation, not dependent on chance.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

The Moon is receding from earth by like 3cm per year or so. Just wait a while and this coincidence goes away forever.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

The Moon used to be much closer to the Earth and is moving away. It just happens to be at this time that it appears to be the same size as the Sun.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've heard it described as a "stunning stellar coincidence" that the moon exactly covers the sun during a solar eclipse. The actual "coincidence" is that the sun, which is 400 times larger than the moon, just happens to be 400 times further away from the earth than the moon.

A fourth grader can point out that the shapes of continents on a world map fit together like puzzle pieces.
In the past this was dismissed as merely a fantastic coincidence. Then came the discovery of plate tectonics.

"Fantastic" or "stellar" coincidences bother me. It seems to me that when something looks to be a "fantastic" or "stellar" coincidence theres probably a correct explanation, not dependent on chance.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

The Moon is receding from earth by like 3cm per year or so. Just wait a while and this coincidence goes away forever.

[/ QUOTE ]
but that means the OP was correct, just got the wrong date. Spooky stuff!

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

Why did you make this dishonest thread? This doesn't actually bother you, you're just trying to make a point to show that your stance on creationism is correct.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
The Moon used to be much closer to the Earth and is moving away. It just happens to be at this time that it appears to be the same size as the Sun.

[/ QUOTE ]

The coincidence is that it is happening at the same time that humans come into existence on this planet. What makes it a big deal is that from a geologic time perspective humans have existed on this planet for only a tiny iota of an instance. The earth and moon come from the original cast.

I suspect that its a pretty huge long shot for life to develope on any planet. Of all the planets that develope life, I suspect its a huge long shot for that life to evolve intelligence equal to that of modern human beings.

[ QUOTE ]
Why did you make this dishonest thread? This doesn't actually bother you, you're just trying to make a point to show that your stance on creationism is correct.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm comfortable with the ideal that the universe and that which it contains, came into existence via a process of emergence. However since you bring up the point, I will agree that the more astronomical long shots that come in, the more you have to consider the possibility of an active designer.

What kind of parlayed long shots would you need to see come in before you began to think it was more likely the universe was designed rather than emerged?

Stu

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
i mean, you could say it is a bigger coincidence that earth is a habitable planet; it is just the right distance, size and atmosphere to support life

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's another coincidence(although this one doesn't bother me too much). The currently accepted theory for the formation of our moon is that at one time the earth was struck by another Mars sized planet. When this Mars sized planet collided with earth it had to do so at a very specific angle otherwise a moon would not have formed. I've heard this collision described as "a very lucky shot".

Stu

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
Here's another coincidence(although this one doesn't bother me too much). The currently accepted theory for the formation of our moon is that at one time the earth was struck by another Mars sized planet. When this Mars sized planet collided with earth it had to do so at a very specific angle otherwise a moon would not have formed. I've heard this collision described as "a very lucky shot".

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Another look states that the moon which at that time was separate from the sun separated from the earth thus leaving 3 distinct bodies, sun, earth, moon.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]

God rounds.

EDIT: Liberally.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon you can find some data much more significantly closer if you just keep looking. Must try harder.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the numbers have at least 6 decimal places. Unless the numbers are wrong, the answer can't be much closer than what I figured, unless I screwed up somewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]
not the precision of the measurements but the quantity of them. Measure enough paramteres of enough objects and you'll find any plenty of 'significant' closeness.

[/ QUOTE ]

As anyone who argues about sports can surely attest.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Using wikipedia numbers I get that the sun is 389.17 times as far away as the moon. The sun is 400.67 times as big.

If they were significantly closer I would agree, but those numbers are far enough apart that it's just a coincidence and probably has no real implications.

[/ QUOTE ]
C'mon you can find some data much more significantly closer if you just keep looking. Must try harder.

[/ QUOTE ]

All the numbers have at least 6 decimal places. Unless the numbers are wrong, the answer can't be much closer than what I figured, unless I screwed up somewhere.

[/ QUOTE ]
not the precision of the measurements but the quantity of them. Measure enough paramteres of enough objects and you'll find any plenty of 'significant' closeness.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh my bad. I thought you were disagreeing with me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you know that the ratio of the size of Jupiter to the size of Texas is NOT a multiple of 6? WTF is up with that, ya know?

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i mean, you could say it is a bigger coincidence that earth is a habitable planet; it is just the right distance, size and atmosphere to support life

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's another coincidence(although this one doesn't bother me too much). The currently accepted theory for the formation of our moon is that at one time the earth was struck by another Mars sized planet. When this Mars sized planet collided with earth it had to do so at a very specific angle otherwise a moon would not have formed. I've heard this collision described as "a very lucky shot".

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Imagine all the planets that werent so lucky.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

Hi Vhawk

[ QUOTE ]
LOL. Imagine all the planets that werent so lucky.

[/ QUOTE ]

Planets don't experience luck, people do. Life and the human race are the ones who benefited from the "luck" of that cosmic shot.

Stu

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]

Hi Vhawk

[ QUOTE ]
LOL. Imagine all the planets that werent so lucky.

[/ QUOTE ]

Planets don't experience luck, people do. Life and the human race are the ones who benefited from the "luck" of that cosmic shot.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL imagine all the possible life that wasnt so lucky.

Happy?

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

And of course when shown that these numbers are not so elegant as you thought, you will reject your hypothesis - am I correct?

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]

What kind of parlayed long shots would you need to see come in before you began to think it was more likely the universe was designed rather than emerged?


[/ QUOTE ]

are we counting how close 389.17 and 400.67 are as a coincidence?

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
are we counting how close 389.17 and 400.67 are as a coincidence?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the numbers were only stated to explain why one observes this:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/New...rs_eclipse.jpg

The coincidence that bothers me is that the moon appears to exactly cover the sun at the same time humans appear on the planet. The actual numbers are not meaningful to the casual observer. In this discussion the actual numbers are only useful to people who want to ignore what is obvious.

Stu

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

That we have a reason to invent the word 'eclipse' bothers you?

Seriously?

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
The coincidence that bothers me is that the moon appears to exactly cover the sun at the same time humans appear on the planet.

[/ QUOTE ]

you mean the coincidence that you want other people to be bothered by? the one you don't think is a coincidence and doesn't really bother you?

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
are we counting how close 389.17 and 400.67 are as a coincidence?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, the numbers were only stated to explain why one observes this:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/New...rs_eclipse.jpg

The coincidence that bothers me is that the moon appears to exactly cover the sun at the same time humans appear on the planet. The actual numbers are not meaningful to the casual observer. In this discussion the actual numbers are only useful to people who want to ignore what is obvious.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't you have a pic where the moon exactly covers the sun? That'd be a better start.

luckyme

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
That we have a reason to invent the word 'eclipse' bothers you?

[/ QUOTE ]

No Hitch1978, I am not bother that we had to invent a word to describe one celestial object passing in front of another celestial object. I'm bothered by the fact that during a typical solar eclipse observed on from the earth, the moon exactly covers the sun.


Stu

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That we have a reason to invent the word 'eclipse' bothers you?

[/ QUOTE ]

No Hitch1978, I am not bother that we had to invent a word to describe one celestial object passing in front of another celestial object. I'm bothered by the fact that during a typical solar eclipse observed on from the earth, the moon exactly covers the sun.


Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

I apologise.

I am clearly misunderstanding something, could you please define the word 'exactly' as used in your post.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

And preferably if he could give us a rough estimate of "all the possible things in the universe" so we could get a better idea as to whether this coincidence is really that amazing. If there are only like 10 possible things in the universe, the fact that one of them is this DOES seem like a pretty huge coincidence.

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

[ QUOTE ]
And preferably if he could give us a rough estimate of "all the possible things in the universe" so we could get a better idea as to whether this coincidence is really that amazing. If there are only like 10 possible things in the universe, the fact that one of them is this DOES seem like a pretty huge coincidence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure even that works. Some card has to be on top of the deck.

For a coincident to act as an alert to a new understanding it needs to go against some framework expectation. The Jack of Spades appearing as the top card in the only deck that we gave to Jack Shovel does nothing for my sense of wonder.

The moon covering 'exactly' :-) all the sun, one half of the sun, or double the sun, or 1/pi of the sun or all the sun except an area the size of pluto, or ...
None of those violate any postion/size of the moon expectations and so stir no 'hmmmmmmm....' moments.

luckyme

Re: A coincidence that bothers me
 

And yet I'd be pretty impressed if "vhawk" was emblazoned in moon dust on the dark side.