Revealing the Universe - check this out.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

Jesus is the paper bag for the universe!

[thesummerqueen]

I think when you realize how small you really are, it actually opens up worlds upon worlds to discover and explore. What ennui we'd develop if Earth really were the entirety of the universe! We're top dogs here - big fish in a little pond. How lucky that we're not even as ants to the rest of the universe...the tiniest ants have an entire planet to discover, and we have an entire cosmos. To me, that's unbearably exciting and we should be encouraged to figure out exactly how to do it and recapture the pioneer spirit that kept people moving ever onward to new countries and landscapes, and now to new planets. Then the universe is less than cold and unfeeling...and instead it's a playground to maneuver through.

[LastPoet]

I think the thought as shifted from a progressive movement to a wealth preservation of those that have it. In earlier centuries, most research was done by reasonably wealthy people, yet today, there must be a point of research, an economic angle. Why is that? What makes one so vain to consider that the knowledge is enough?

[Cyberman]

In general I think you're right. I forget who said this and I'm going to get it horribly wrong but if you throw enough money into developing a car, you'll end up with a new and improved car with whatever mod cons come with such development; but it's still a car. In other words, practically nothing has been added to the sum of human knowledge, apart from novel forms of materials technology or improvements in aerodynamics etc. As you say, unless there is a saleable product at the end of it, research is made out to be little more than an extravagance. You only need to glance at the tabloid media to get a revealing glimpse into how science is viewed by, or at least sold to, the masses; idioms such as "boffins" and "eggheads" are a massive clue.

[Welsh cake]

I agree that street lighting is an important part of our society, but that doesn't mean that the lights need to be so detrimental to the environment.

You either have street lights or you don't. Simple as. With crime and burglaries on the rise I'd rather have the marvels of man-made technology light my way and make me feel a little more secure than what some useless galaxy looks like, that I'm completely indifferent to anyway.

To me, the bigger the universe is, just means there's more of it to ignore.

[thesummerqueen]

I think the thought as shifted from a progressive movement to a wealth preservation of those that have it. In earlier centuries, most research was done by reasonably wealthy people, yet today, there must be a point of research, an economic angle. Why is that? What makes one so vain to consider that the knowledge is enough?

Well, the past isn't a place where we were less beholden to our pocket books. Nerds existed and experimented if they were well-funded by people who thought it was a good investment, or rich men became scientists if it suited them. But if you're asking for the current state of the world. Well.

"We stopped dreaming." - Neil DeGrasse Tyson

[Cyberman]

I agree that street lighting is an important part of our society, but that doesn't mean that the lights need to be so detrimental to the environment.

You either have street lights or you don't. Simple as.

With crime and burglaries on the rise I'd rather have the marvels of man-made technology light my way and make me feel a little more secure than what some useless galaxy looks like, that I'm completely indifferent to anyway.

To me, the bigger the universe is, just means there's more of it to ignore.

Not so simple.


See all that light pouring out upwards? How many burglars go about in helicopters?


Let's try motorways:


Notice all that orange glow being emitted in all directions, including upwards where it serves no useful purpose? As well as being wasteful, it can be dangerous to drivers, having all that glare shining into their eyes.


It doesn't have to be like that. These are full cut-off lights:




Same road coverage, far less pollution and much less direct glare.


If it's crime you're worried about, how does this:


help anyone except the burglar? In contrast, this:


adequately illuminates the property and affords the burglar no shielding in the glare.

That's all dependent on there being a connection between lighting and crime reduction anyway, which is questionable. Studies indicate that lighting may actually increase crime; certainly the fear of crime.

To reiterate, no-one I hope is recommending tearing down all night lighting, for that way madness lies. However, it doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing binary proposition. I don't care whether anyone is interested in obscure galaxies or not, in fact that's a non-factor and a red herring. The issues go far deeper than simply keeping the skies clear; that's merely a happy bonus. The environmental costs alone would make it a real issue for concern, from the threat to wildlife to increased additional greenhouse gas emissions. Factor in the economic costs - for example, the City of Calgary have been retrofitting all their street lighting with lower wattage, flat lens fixtures at a projected saving of $1.7 million per year - as well as the impact on health and it's surprising that this whole mess doesn't get the prominence it deserves.

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

This thread is really bright.

/awfulpun

[IATIA]

This site has a size comparison with the moon to show the very small tiny eensy weensy piece of the sky we are looking at in thesummerqueen's pic.

[Rayaan]