r/BeAmazed • u/Nukeroot • Jul 14 '24
Science We are on an awesome cosmic roller coaster.
648
u/MineNowBotBoy Jul 14 '24
Just remember that you’re standing on a planet that’s evolving and revolving at nine hundred miles an hour, that’s orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it’s reckoned, the sun that is the source of all our power. The sun and you and me and all the stars that we can see are moving at a million miles a day in an outer spiral arm, at four hundred thousand miles an hour in the galaxy we call the Milky Way.
167
u/Somone-Who-Isnt-Me Jul 14 '24
And every sperm is sacred!
43
10
10
38
32
u/Nukeroot Jul 14 '24
This is really the crazy part. This video does not take into account all the other ways we are moving. It seems to be a miracle that we are just not blown to bits.
17
u/zedascouves1985 Jul 14 '24
Space is very big and empty. It's actually a miracle that stuff hits each other sometimes.
9
u/sagan_drinks_cosmos Jul 14 '24
We just detected the first known interstellar object moving through the solar system in 2021. A cigar-shaped rock called ‘Oamuamua, it whipped inside our orbit and around the Sun at many times the speed of comets and asteroids, then was gone within months.
Since then, we’ve detected about 7 such objects each year. None have been known to impact solar system bodies.
3
u/MineNowBotBoy Jul 14 '24
You might think it’s a long way down the road to the chemist, but that’s peanuts compared to space.
→ More replies (9)12
u/KaiSaya117 Jul 14 '24
It also incorrectly displays orbit. Those are typically elliptical and not circular.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Technical-Outside408 Jul 14 '24
I reckon there's lots of elliptical orbits that look circular to the human eye.
→ More replies (12)2
u/philolippa Jul 14 '24
So is everything moving or do the black holes stay in one place?
5
→ More replies (1)2
u/Beherbergungsverbot Jul 14 '24
There is no ‚one place‘ on large scale. Things have relative speed to each other. Also universe expands and things move away. Black holes are just very heavy things that move too. One might be aiming at our solar system and we might not see it coming.
273
u/PainStrange3708 Jul 14 '24
I don't know but I think i read somewhere that it's not correct.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
214
u/DonkyShow Jul 14 '24 edited Jul 14 '24
https://youtu.be/1lPJ5SX5p08?si=HBV4RzgXA3y-OAJS
Edit: PBS video does a good breakdown. I looked for a simpler explanation but this is pretty good.
33
19
6
5
3
→ More replies (2)3
73
u/idkmoiname Jul 14 '24
None of these two point of views is actually more true than the other. They're just different reference frames, nothing else.
4
18
u/DragonsClaw2334 Jul 14 '24
It's correct as far as a stepping stone to getting to greater understanding of how everything is connected.
Like how kids in elementary school are taught the first more of we orbit the sun. Then later the sun orbits in the galaxy is added. Then based on the level of information you need for your life or career more things get added.
None of this is wrong it's just levels of understanding. You can't dump all of that info on children or even highschool kids.
→ More replies (3)17
u/henriuspuddle Jul 14 '24
Not wrong, but it's a little deceptive. Same as how we don't feel the earth spinning or careening through the galaxy. Relative motion.
→ More replies (1)5
237
u/Mun0425 Jul 14 '24
Both are the same. Only one is 3d
62
u/bleep_blorp_boop Jul 14 '24
The first one depicts orbits to be circular. But orbits are actually elliptical, but I couldn't really see that in the 3D version since the angles/transitions are terrible.
50
u/Mun0425 Jul 14 '24
And the scale is ridiculously off
35
u/black_sand3 Jul 14 '24
You just can't show the solar system with a realistic scale. Even if the sun is 3mm in size, you still end up with almost 10m average distance to Neptune.
15
u/OmegahShot Jul 14 '24
the human mind is really bad at understanding how much space is between planets, we need more bananas for scale
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)15
u/sanct1x Jul 14 '24
In regards to Earth's orbit, it is elliptical, but its eccentricity of 0.0167 is close enough to zero that it's nearly circular.
"Today, the Earth’s orbital ellipticity is nearly circular at 0.0167, but that still causes 6% more insolation during Earth’s closest approach to the Sun than when it is farthest away."
"Subsequent scientific studies showed that Earth’s orbital eccentricity varies from nearly circular (e = 0.000055) to a maximum ellipticity of 0.0679, which is just still just barely elliptical."
So you probably wouldn't notice a difference between a circle and an ellipse with an eccentricity of 0.0167.
Just thought it'd be useful for people to know instead of imagining an oval or some shit.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)2
u/TheTopNacho Jul 14 '24
It's more than that. It explains why you don't see plates orbiting in different planes. They all seem to go in the same XY plane, and Z plane. I always wondered if planets could orbit in different Z planes. This model explains why that would be relatively impossible. The 2d model does not.
→ More replies (1)
89
u/LucaDarioBuetzberger Jul 14 '24
This is not remotely what it lookslike. The only thing it did was adding a third dimension to the visuals. But now, the proportions are wrong in 3 dimensions instead of 2. But yeah, everything is moving.
27
u/NotDiCaprio Jul 14 '24
Let's sum it up. I count 4, but probably missing some:
- Circles instead of ellipses,
- orbitting velocity,
- relative distance and
- relative size of the objects
20
u/Makeshift-Moose Jul 14 '24
Also the plane of the solar system is not 90deg to the motion of the sun.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Daniil_Dankovskiy Jul 14 '24
The biggest problems are, firstly, that on this video orbits ate not on the same disk as they are supposed to be. Here they go behind sun and other planets sometimes which never happens. Secondly, the dish is at an about 60⁰ in relation to the direction we're moving and not perpendicular
7
u/Creator13 Jul 14 '24
Let's not pretend the proportions were right in the 2d image...
→ More replies (1)
29
u/Accomplished_Elk_220 Jul 14 '24
Does EVERYTHING have to have shit music with it? Is that where we are? Is that our attention spans?
10
8
14
u/9Epicman1 Jul 14 '24
But all motion is relative. So you could say thats not how it works where is Milky Way moving towards? Where is the Local Group moving towards? Where is the Galactic super cluster moving towards?
→ More replies (1)
7
u/Karma_1969 Jul 14 '24
This video is wrong and I wish people/bots would stop posting it.
→ More replies (1)
6
u/SmukrsDolfnPussGelly Jul 14 '24
lmao, what the actual fuck is this music. So fucking unnecessary, downvoting for that alone.
10
u/klmdwnitsnotreal Jul 14 '24
Why does everything orbit on the same plane?
27
u/henriuspuddle Jul 14 '24 edited Jul 14 '24
Because the solar system formed from a spinning dust cloud which, through rotation, flattened into a disc. The sun formed at the densest part (the center), and the remainder of the dust clumped up into rocks, then to a huge number of planetoids and other leftover bits. These crashed into each other and formed the planets, moons, asteroids, comets, etc., that we see today. More or less.
3
2
u/montxogandia Jul 14 '24
And whats the origin of the spinning dust cloud? an explosion from other solar system?
2
u/henriuspuddle Jul 15 '24
Yes, usually a shockwave from a nearby supernova. Stars tend to form close to each other and move apart
→ More replies (2)2
u/DaddyLoves_you Jul 14 '24
Is the Big Bang what we believe caused the dust cloud to start spinning initially?
2
u/henriuspuddle Jul 15 '24
I imagine that had something to do with it early on, but dust clouds/nebulae are essentially independent now. There are primordial clouds and also clouds created by dead/dying stars. They just hang out in an static state until something like a supernova stirs them up enough to start clumping together.
4
u/somedave Jul 14 '24
It isn't a very accurate animation though, the scale and ellipticity of the orbits are off, which is perhaps a decision to make it more viewable, but the planets seem to lag behind the sun which simply isn't true. If you looked from a certain angle some would be lagging behind but then others would be leading the motion.
11
u/RobNybody Jul 14 '24
I always felt, with absolutely no science knowledge or basis, that if we could be truly still, like not orbiting the sun, not orbiting the centre of the galaxy etc, time would stop. Is it even possible to be completely still in an expanding universe? Would time stop if the universe stopped expanding? Probably not, idk, but it's weird to think about.
12
u/gloop524 Jul 14 '24
time is the temporal distance between something happening and the next thing happening. so if nothing happens, there is no time. 0 Kelvin required.
there is a theory that in the space between galaxies where virtually nothing is happening that time has little effect and that the universe is larger than we think because everything can move faster there.
4
u/sanct1x Jul 14 '24
Moving "faster" is indicative of time elapsing though. "Faster" has no meaning without time. Speed, acceleration, and velocity, are all derivatives of time. I'm not arguing - just not sure I understand the message you're trying to convey.
2
u/gloop524 Jul 14 '24
the 2 paragraphs are separate. in the second paragraph, i said time has less effect because there is virtually nothing happening between galaxies. there are millions of miles of nul space which is nothing but the distance between things that have expanded away from each other without adding new materiel. you may call it stretched space if you want, some people do.
→ More replies (2)3
u/BurnerPhoneProfile Jul 14 '24
All motion is relative. It is defined in relation to a fixed reference frame. If a ball is thrown at you at a constant speed in your reference frame you are still and the ball comes towards you. In the reference frame of the ball it is still and you are coming towards it. It in the reference frame of the sun both you and the ball are hurtling around.
It is impossible to be still as it begs the question of what you are still in relation to.
3
u/TakeyaSaito Jul 14 '24
Isn't this still incorrect? the planets should be orbiting along the same plane the sun is traveling, not 90 degrees ofset.
2
u/Psychological_Ad2094 Jul 14 '24
You’re half right, the planetary orbits should be offset by roughly 60° to the system’s orbit.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/Edictum_ Jul 14 '24
Yeap, our sun is also moving through space...orbiting a balck hole in our galaxy...which is in a cosmic dance with another galaxy that will eventually merge into one and then start dancing with another. This will continue to happen until heat death and then the whole universe collapses in on itself and then boom! Another big bang and the birth of a whole new universe. Or in other words, aahhhhhh!!!!
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/Xyex Jul 15 '24
Lemme guess, it's the corkscrew nonsense?
Watches
Yup. The corkscrew nonsense is bullshit. The solar system is not moving "up" relative to the orbital plane. The video is lying.
2
u/DEFCON_moot Jul 14 '24
Respectfully, I have corrected my understanding of this old meme and come to recognize it's geometrically impossible given stellar parallax and a number of other factors; the TYCHOS could be a more accurate system, although still in development.
1
1
1
1
u/ReposadoAmiGusto Jul 14 '24
Like a SPECIAL BEAM CANNON!!! Oh damn Akira Toriyama had it right all along!!
1
u/magirevols Jul 14 '24
It interesting how the building block of our cells are the same shape of our solar system, spiraling
2
u/sunnyBC4 Jul 14 '24
Yes I always found this looks like double helix DNA since Vsauce showed this. Like the movement literally shapes us
1
1
u/Unlucky_Committee786 Jul 14 '24
It really works like in the first animation, if you have only solar system as a reference frame...
1
1
u/NumaNuma92 Jul 14 '24
Despite the high speed we travel, it takes 230 million years to orbit the milky way.
1
u/shatterd_ Jul 14 '24
I know a lot of ppl who claim the sun rotates around earth..
→ More replies (1)
1
1
u/HypnoticName Jul 14 '24
Actually, solar system is moving in a galaxy, but the galaxy is moving as well. So, there is another few vectors in the actual arbit
1
1
u/IMAPRO_d-_-b Jul 14 '24
Doesn’t seem like it when astronauts are outside fixing their space stations floating around. I just wanna know like, At what point are we “outside the car” and fly off/out into the void? You get me?
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
Jul 14 '24
So does it loop back on itself within the galaxy?
How does everything stay within a particular 'area'
1
1
1
1
1
u/MatthiasWM Jul 14 '24
But that’s only true if you use our universe as a reference. If you look at us from another universe, the motion gets even more complex.
1
u/strapOnRooster Jul 14 '24
I'm pretty sure the orientation of our solar system is not a perfect 90 degrees either, so both depictions are equally bullshit.
1
1
u/fetfree Jul 14 '24
I remember when the 3d depiction was posted for the first time on the net. I remember strongly disagreeing with it.
1
u/flying_bufalo Jul 14 '24
Maybe we are just a massive organic spaceship meant to travel for billions of years before we reach our destination
1
1
u/Enthustiastically Jul 14 '24
No, no, no! The planets are not trailing behind the motion of the sun. They're (almost) all in a fairly flat disc, because this is just how angular momentum works: solar systems form through an accretion disc.
1
1
u/Namez83 Jul 14 '24
Are we even sure the sun travels in a linear path? However, it does bring new meaning to a circle jerk doesn’t it?
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/tutoriii Jul 14 '24
Isnt the sun also going circles around something else? And that something else is also going circles around something else? In that case, the sun’s trajectory wouldn’t be a straight line as shown in the video!
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/KaiserSozes-brother Jul 14 '24
From my limited understanding, this would only explain and represent the orbit around the milky way.
the expansion of the universe happens to the space between the solar systems and galaxy's meaning all the bits and pieces move away from one another similar to the raisins in raisin bread as it raises.
1
u/Lazy_and_Sad Jul 14 '24
Galileo is weeping right now
Both are the same, just with different reference frames. It's not more correct to depict the movement of our solar system relative to the center of mass of the galaxy than relative to its own center of mass.
1
u/TerryZYX Jul 14 '24
Its even more complex than this. The whole galaxy is moving into the andromeda nebula as long I heard and read about this.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Latterlol Jul 14 '24
We are just advanced mold on a rock swirlin around a star shooting through space
1
u/Square-Tangerine-784 Jul 14 '24
I’m going to look silly sitting in traffic with my arms up going: Weeeee! But maybe someone else will get it
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/haeressiarch Jul 14 '24
We are heading towards Andromeda Galaxy. Unfortunately one of us will live long enough to see the cosmic spectacle of "Galaxy cannibalism" when they met. btw. This animation is totally wrong. What is right is that it suggests there is a galactic motion. We are in a spiral galaxy arm. Can't ignore that part of the motion. Whole cluster of galaxies where milky way is (local group) is also in movement. To simplify, we are moving (solar system) up and down on the arm of our Galaxy, while rotating around sagitarius A* while at the same time being dragged towards the center of the Galaxy down the arm, while we mobe towards Andromeda galaxy innthe cluster which also spins. And speeds and distances are really absurd when you try to imagine. we indeed are in a cosmic fun park but this animation ignores all of this.
1
1
1
u/davidtree921 Jul 14 '24
I don't think I have ever met anyone who thinks the sun is stationary. Where tf is OP from?
964
u/Impossible-Dingo-742 Jul 14 '24
Where are we headed?