Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

🧵THE OBJECT ORBITING EARTH THAT ASTRONOMERS WONT CALL NATURAL (1/6) A small object called Sar2901 recently passed Earth and entered a temporary orbit around the Earth-Moon system and people are going wild. When the Minor Planet Center looked at the observations, it couldn't decide whether Sar2901 was a natural... mini moon or if it was an artificial object. It has now delayed giving it an official minor planet designation because if they did it would mean accepting that the object is natural and they don't know that it is. That's the official position of the organization responsible for collecting and publishing the orbits of asteroids and comets. Sar2901 is now beyond the reach of any current observations but it should become visible again in November, when astronomers might finally learn what has been moving around us.👇show more

Skywatch Signal

102,981 subscribers

51,508 Aufrufe • vor 3 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

Wissenschaft & Technologie

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Gravity is a lie that was created to convince you that you're stuck to a spinning waterball, flying millions of miles per hour through an empty void of nothingness. If an object is more dense than the surrounding medium, it moves down. If an object is less dense than the surrounding medium, it moves up. If the object and the medium are in equilibrium, then it remains static. The downward direction that density-dominant objects move toward is dictated by the electromagnetic torus field of the Earth. That is literally it. Everything you need to know about why things move up and down. You can go ahead and throw away your mossad fake science textbook now, to save yourself the lost IQ points and "space" fantasy stories.

Gravity is a lie that was created to convince you that you're stuck to a spinning waterball, flying millions of miles per hour through an empty void of nothingness. If an object is more dense than the surrounding medium, it moves down. If an object is less dense than the surrounding medium, it moves up. If the object and the medium are in equilibrium, then it remains static. The downward direction that density-dominant objects move toward is dictated by the electromagnetic torus field of the Earth. That is literally it. Everything you need to know about why things move up and down. You can go ahead and throw away your mossad fake science textbook now, to save yourself the lost IQ points and "space" fantasy stories.

Ben Wehrman

72,916 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Space objects such as meteoroids and asteroids move across the solar system and can collide with both Earth and the Moon. However, the Moon shows far more visible impact marks on its surface. One main reason is that Earth has a thick atmosphere that protects the planet. When many meteoroids enter Earth’s atmosphere, they burn up due to friction before they can reach the ground. This process creates the bright streaks of light we call shooting stars. The Moon, however, has almost no atmosphere, so incoming space rocks are not slowed down or burned up. They travel directly to the lunar surface and strike it at very high speed. Each collision creates an impact crater, throwing dust and rocks outward from the impact point. Over billions of years, thousands of these impacts have covered the Moon with craters. Unlike Earth, the Moon also has no wind, water, or weather to erase these craters, so they remain visible for millions or even billions of years. This is why the Moon looks heavily cratered when we observe it from Earth through telescopes.

Space objects such as meteoroids and asteroids move across the solar system and can collide with both Earth and the Moon. However, the Moon shows far more visible impact marks on its surface. One main reason is that Earth has a thick atmosphere that protects the planet. When many meteoroids enter Earth’s atmosphere, they burn up due to friction before they can reach the ground. This process creates the bright streaks of light we call shooting stars. The Moon, however, has almost no atmosphere, so incoming space rocks are not slowed down or burned up. They travel directly to the lunar surface and strike it at very high speed. Each collision creates an impact crater, throwing dust and rocks outward from the impact point. Over billions of years, thousands of these impacts have covered the Moon with craters. Unlike Earth, the Moon also has no wind, water, or weather to erase these craters, so they remain visible for millions or even billions of years. This is why the Moon looks heavily cratered when we observe it from Earth through telescopes.

The Astronomy Guy

17,500 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

An asteroid the size of three football fields is heading toward Earth It’s the asteroid “God of Chaos,” which is expected to approach the planet in about three years. By space standards, it will pass very close — closer than some satellites — and may even be visible without a telescope. NASA classifies it as a potentially hazardous object, but that doesn’t mean a collision is expected — it simply means it’s being closely monitored.

An asteroid the size of three football fields is heading toward Earth It’s the asteroid “God of Chaos,” which is expected to approach the planet in about three years. By space standards, it will pass very close — closer than some satellites — and may even be visible without a telescope. NASA classifies it as a potentially hazardous object, but that doesn’t mean a collision is expected — it simply means it’s being closely monitored.

NEXTA

187,212 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

When a spacecraft leaves Earth, it doesn’t just fire its engines and head straight to its destination. In many missions, especially those going beyond low Earth orbit, there’s a more subtle and elegant strategy at play, one that uses gravity itself as part of the navigation system. This is often called a gravity assist, or a slingshot maneuver. But in the case of missions like #Artemis II, what’s being used is a closely related idea known as a free-return trajectory. At first glance, it might sound simple: the spacecraft goes to the Moon, loops around it, and comes back. But the physics behind it is anything but simple. Instead of relying on continuous propulsion, the spacecraft follows a carefully calculated path through the gravitational field of the Earth–Moon system. It is launched with just the right speed and direction so that, as it approaches the Moon, the Moon’s gravity bends its trajectory. The spacecraft is effectively flung around the Moon, redirected onto a path that naturally brings it back toward Earth. No major engine burn is needed for the return. Small trajectory corrections may still be required, but gravity does the heavy lifting. That’s the key. This kind of trajectory is not just efficient, it’s also safe. If something goes wrong with the spacecraft’s engines or onboard systems, gravity itself ensures the return. It’s an inherent backup plan, built into the trajectory from the very beginning. The same fundamental idea appears in gravity assists used across the Solar System. When a spacecraft flies past a planet, it can gain or lose speed by exchanging momentum with that planet. From the spacecraft’s point of view, it’s as if it has been accelerated without using fuel. In reality, it has borrowed a tiny amount of orbital energy from the planet itself. That’s how missions like Voyager reached the outer planets, and how probes continue to explore regions far beyond what their onboard fuel alone would allow. But there’s an important distinction. An interplanetary gravity assist is typically used to change speed and direction, often increasing the spacecraft’s energy. A free-return trajectory, like the one used in Artemis II, is designed for something more specific: a path that naturally loops back to Earth without requiring additional propulsion. It’s less about gaining energy, and more about shaping a trajectory that guarantees a return. To understand why this works, it helps to stop thinking in straight lines. In space, motion follows curves defined by gravity. The spacecraft is constantly falling, first toward Earth, then toward the Moon, and then back toward Earth again. What looks like a loop is really a continuous free fall through a changing gravitational landscape. This way of navigating space reveals something deeper. We tend to think of engines as the drivers of motion, but once a spacecraft is on its way, gravity does most of the work. The art of spaceflight is not just about thrust. It’s about knowing when not to use it. #GoodLuck #Artemis NASA Artemis

When a spacecraft leaves Earth, it doesn’t just fire its engines and head straight to its destination. In many missions, especially those going beyond low Earth orbit, there’s a more subtle and elegant strategy at play, one that uses gravity itself as part of the navigation system. This is often called a gravity assist, or a slingshot maneuver. But in the case of missions like #Artemis II, what’s being used is a closely related idea known as a free-return trajectory. At first glance, it might sound simple: the spacecraft goes to the Moon, loops around it, and comes back. But the physics behind it is anything but simple. Instead of relying on continuous propulsion, the spacecraft follows a carefully calculated path through the gravitational field of the Earth–Moon system. It is launched with just the right speed and direction so that, as it approaches the Moon, the Moon’s gravity bends its trajectory. The spacecraft is effectively flung around the Moon, redirected onto a path that naturally brings it back toward Earth. No major engine burn is needed for the return. Small trajectory corrections may still be required, but gravity does the heavy lifting. That’s the key. This kind of trajectory is not just efficient, it’s also safe. If something goes wrong with the spacecraft’s engines or onboard systems, gravity itself ensures the return. It’s an inherent backup plan, built into the trajectory from the very beginning. The same fundamental idea appears in gravity assists used across the Solar System. When a spacecraft flies past a planet, it can gain or lose speed by exchanging momentum with that planet. From the spacecraft’s point of view, it’s as if it has been accelerated without using fuel. In reality, it has borrowed a tiny amount of orbital energy from the planet itself. That’s how missions like Voyager reached the outer planets, and how probes continue to explore regions far beyond what their onboard fuel alone would allow. But there’s an important distinction. An interplanetary gravity assist is typically used to change speed and direction, often increasing the spacecraft’s energy. A free-return trajectory, like the one used in Artemis II, is designed for something more specific: a path that naturally loops back to Earth without requiring additional propulsion. It’s less about gaining energy, and more about shaping a trajectory that guarantees a return. To understand why this works, it helps to stop thinking in straight lines. In space, motion follows curves defined by gravity. The spacecraft is constantly falling, first toward Earth, then toward the Moon, and then back toward Earth again. What looks like a loop is really a continuous free fall through a changing gravitational landscape. This way of navigating space reveals something deeper. We tend to think of engines as the drivers of motion, but once a spacecraft is on its way, gravity does most of the work. The art of spaceflight is not just about thrust. It’s about knowing when not to use it. #GoodLuck #Artemis NASA Artemis

Erika 

235,073 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

Part of the reason they wanted to develop reusable rockets that can land is the Geophysical Event. Part of the elite wants to build a data center and a small hub on the Moon to preserve AI and, with it, all human knowledge. They can control the conditions on the Moon more easily than on Earth, which will be far more active and unpredictable during a geomagnetic excursion and increased cosmic radiation. They would have no rivals on the Moon, nor would the lucky survivors on Earth pose a threat to them there. That's why the Moon is important. It was used in the past as well, which is why there are monolithic structures on the Moon.

Part of the reason they wanted to develop reusable rockets that can land is the Geophysical Event. Part of the elite wants to build a data center and a small hub on the Moon to preserve AI and, with it, all human knowledge. They can control the conditions on the Moon more easily than on Earth, which will be far more active and unpredictable during a geomagnetic excursion and increased cosmic radiation. They would have no rivals on the Moon, nor would the lucky survivors on Earth pose a threat to them there. That's why the Moon is important. It was used in the past as well, which is why there are monolithic structures on the Moon.

Open Minded Approach

62,856 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

I am getting a lot of questions, so have decided to say something. It seems "possible" that 3I/ATLAS will brake, and also change direction toward Earth, as it passes Mars. The gravity of Mars will pull 3I/ATLAS in a direction opposite to where it is now going. The gravity of Mars will also pull 3I/ATLAS slightly to the right by attraction. Now look please at the video shown below, and try to estimate whether 3I/ATLAS will be headed for Earth, after it passes Mars? As planet Earth turns around the Sun toward it? They all must know, but don't want to say. This is very simple orbital mechanics.

I am getting a lot of questions, so have decided to say something. It seems "possible" that 3I/ATLAS will brake, and also change direction toward Earth, as it passes Mars. The gravity of Mars will pull 3I/ATLAS in a direction opposite to where it is now going. The gravity of Mars will also pull 3I/ATLAS slightly to the right by attraction. Now look please at the video shown below, and try to estimate whether 3I/ATLAS will be headed for Earth, after it passes Mars? As planet Earth turns around the Sun toward it? They all must know, but don't want to say. This is very simple orbital mechanics.

Red Collie (Dr. Horace Drew) scientist/inventor

4,478,075 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Based on the principles of physics, it is theoretically possible for a planet to have a donut-shaped structure. To maintain the stability of a donut-shaped Earth, it would need to rotate at extremely high speeds, resulting in shorter day durations. Consequently, the gravitational force at the poles would intensify, approximately twice as strong as at the equator. The Moon would continue to orbit the Earth, as long as it maintains a sufficient distance. If the donut-shaped Earth has no tilt, the inner edges would receive no sunlight, while the outer edges would experience increased sunlight exposure, leading to significant temperature variations and extreme weather conditions. However, if the tilt remains unchanged, both the inner and outer edges would receive adequate sunlight. It is worth noting that a naturally occurring donut-shaped planet is highly unlikely unless advanced extraterrestrial beings decide to create one.

Based on the principles of physics, it is theoretically possible for a planet to have a donut-shaped structure. To maintain the stability of a donut-shaped Earth, it would need to rotate at extremely high speeds, resulting in shorter day durations. Consequently, the gravitational force at the poles would intensify, approximately twice as strong as at the equator. The Moon would continue to orbit the Earth, as long as it maintains a sufficient distance. If the donut-shaped Earth has no tilt, the inner edges would receive no sunlight, while the outer edges would experience increased sunlight exposure, leading to significant temperature variations and extreme weather conditions. However, if the tilt remains unchanged, both the inner and outer edges would receive adequate sunlight. It is worth noting that a naturally occurring donut-shaped planet is highly unlikely unless advanced extraterrestrial beings decide to create one.

Historic Vids

36,252,099 Aufrufe • vor 3 Jahren

The discourse around the Eze penalty last night is fascinating. If nothing else it provides Arteta with an excuse as to how his team has been hard done by and robbed. He loves excuses. It’s a fascinating situation because I actually think the right outcome was reached albeit through the wrong process. Once given on the field under the current rules it shouldn't have been overturned. For that Arsenal can feel aggrieved. Don't forget Arsenal were the beneficiaries of an incredibly soft penalty in Leverkusen. It wasn’t overturned. I find the attached video interesting because it clearly shows how minimal the contact is. The defender doesn’t pin Ezes foot to the ground. Doesn’t smash into it. It brushes down the side of it. It’s where the still pictures of it were wildly misleading. Are we really saying that contact such as that is worthy of a penalty? What’s clear in the video is that Eze has absolutely made the most of the slight contact. I love the straight left leg. A very natural position. It’s a brilliant dive and normally it would have been rewarded. By saying that is a stone wall penalty all we are doing is encouraging such theatrics and cheating. Whenever you hear the words “that was clever” by a commentator they are intimating the player has cheated/made the most of it. We complain about refs all the time but what chance do they have when players are doing stuff like this. Until players are punished properly there is no disincentive for players to keep doing this stuff. I also find it fascinating when you have a foot brushed like this. When you compare it to all the holding/pushing/grappling at other times. Sometimes a contact sport and others not. Is this really what football has become?

The discourse around the Eze penalty last night is fascinating. If nothing else it provides Arteta with an excuse as to how his team has been hard done by and robbed. He loves excuses. It’s a fascinating situation because I actually think the right outcome was reached albeit through the wrong process. Once given on the field under the current rules it shouldn't have been overturned. For that Arsenal can feel aggrieved. Don't forget Arsenal were the beneficiaries of an incredibly soft penalty in Leverkusen. It wasn’t overturned. I find the attached video interesting because it clearly shows how minimal the contact is. The defender doesn’t pin Ezes foot to the ground. Doesn’t smash into it. It brushes down the side of it. It’s where the still pictures of it were wildly misleading. Are we really saying that contact such as that is worthy of a penalty? What’s clear in the video is that Eze has absolutely made the most of the slight contact. I love the straight left leg. A very natural position. It’s a brilliant dive and normally it would have been rewarded. By saying that is a stone wall penalty all we are doing is encouraging such theatrics and cheating. Whenever you hear the words “that was clever” by a commentator they are intimating the player has cheated/made the most of it. We complain about refs all the time but what chance do they have when players are doing stuff like this. Until players are punished properly there is no disincentive for players to keep doing this stuff. I also find it fascinating when you have a foot brushed like this. When you compare it to all the holding/pushing/grappling at other times. Sometimes a contact sport and others not. Is this really what football has become?

Luke Paton

104,573 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Earth + Theia = MOON Once upon a time — about 4.5 billion years ago — Earth wasn't alone. A rogue planet, Theia, nearly the size of Mars, smashed into it at full speed. The result? A fiery collision that could have created the Moon in just a FEW HOURS, not the millennia previously thought. NASA supercomputer simulations show that the Moon wasn't pieced together from space debris, but was instantly born from molten fragments of Earth and Theia thrown into orbit. That's why the Moon is so similar to Earth — it's not just a satellite, it's a sister.

Earth + Theia = MOON Once upon a time — about 4.5 billion years ago — Earth wasn't alone. A rogue planet, Theia, nearly the size of Mars, smashed into it at full speed. The result? A fiery collision that could have created the Moon in just a FEW HOURS, not the millennia previously thought. NASA supercomputer simulations show that the Moon wasn't pieced together from space debris, but was instantly born from molten fragments of Earth and Theia thrown into orbit. That's why the Moon is so similar to Earth — it's not just a satellite, it's a sister.

Black Hole

26,433 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Most of us grew up seeing simplified diagrams of the Hubble Space Telescope and assumed the James Webb Space Telescope follows a similar path around Earth. In reality, it operates in a very different region of space. It is not orbiting our planet in the traditional sense but instead travels around a point about 1.5 million kilometers away known as the Sun–Earth L2 point, keeping pace with Earth as both move around the Sun. This location is often described as a gravitational balance point, but it is not truly stable or neutral. JWST does not sit still there; it follows a controlled orbit around L2 and requires periodic adjustments to stay on course. The result is a delicate, engineered dance between gravity and motion, where the telescope remains aligned with Earth while staying far from its heat and light, allowing it to observe the universe with extraordinary clarity.

Most of us grew up seeing simplified diagrams of the Hubble Space Telescope and assumed the James Webb Space Telescope follows a similar path around Earth. In reality, it operates in a very different region of space. It is not orbiting our planet in the traditional sense but instead travels around a point about 1.5 million kilometers away known as the Sun–Earth L2 point, keeping pace with Earth as both move around the Sun. This location is often described as a gravitational balance point, but it is not truly stable or neutral. JWST does not sit still there; it follows a controlled orbit around L2 and requires periodic adjustments to stay on course. The result is a delicate, engineered dance between gravity and motion, where the telescope remains aligned with Earth while staying far from its heat and light, allowing it to observe the universe with extraordinary clarity.

Cosmos Archive

31,985 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

🔥Another lonesome Russian invader dressed as a penguin was destroyed by the Armed Forces of Ukraine When the MoD of the Russia said that they would issue a new "Arctic" uniform, Private Ivanov did not expect that it was just a prop from an abandoned children's theater. Now he is the only one in the position who looks official - as if he was going to a session in "Madagascar", but instead of "smile and wave" it turns out "freeze and lie down".

🔥Another lonesome Russian invader dressed as a penguin was destroyed by the Armed Forces of Ukraine When the MoD of the Russia said that they would issue a new "Arctic" uniform, Private Ivanov did not expect that it was just a prop from an abandoned children's theater. Now he is the only one in the position who looks official - as if he was going to a session in "Madagascar", but instead of "smile and wave" it turns out "freeze and lie down".

Cloooud |🇺🇦

20,105 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

On January 14, 2005, the Huygens probe descending through Titan’s atmosphere revealed one of the rarest views in space exploration. From Saturn’s moon Titan, Earth and the Moon crossed in front of the Sun as tiny shadows nearly a billion miles away. What makes it even more incredible is how rare the alignment was. A perfectly central Earth and Moon transit from Saturn’s system happens only about twice every 1,000 years. From that distance, our entire planet looked small enough to disappear into the sunlight.

On January 14, 2005, the Huygens probe descending through Titan’s atmosphere revealed one of the rarest views in space exploration. From Saturn’s moon Titan, Earth and the Moon crossed in front of the Sun as tiny shadows nearly a billion miles away. What makes it even more incredible is how rare the alignment was. A perfectly central Earth and Moon transit from Saturn’s system happens only about twice every 1,000 years. From that distance, our entire planet looked small enough to disappear into the sunlight.

Cosmos Archive

35,727 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Palantir CEO Dr. Alex Karp: “If you want to find an object the size of a coke bottle in a desert the size of Texas and need to do it quickly… that is a problem that you will need algorithms and what laypeople call AI to do.”

Palantir CEO Dr. Alex Karp: “If you want to find an object the size of a coke bottle in a desert the size of Texas and need to do it quickly… that is a problem that you will need algorithms and what laypeople call AI to do.”

Jawwwn

559,342 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

I want to believe, but there's too much evidence that not only tells me but shows me that they lied. I feel like low Earth orbit is as far as we can go... 1. The van Allen radiation belt. 2. The disgusted, unexciting, ashamed post moon landing conference with the three astronauts. Their body language, mannerisms, and answers scream that they're lying. 3. The lack of noise of the jet engines in the "videos." 4. How did they get the lunar rover on the spaceship? 5. No craters or dust underneath the spaceship. 6. How did the film the spaceship take off perfectly if nobody was left on the moon to operate the camera, and how was it so perfect if there was a delay? 7. The rockets and the spaceship look like a model. 8. The video of them saying that they are 130,000 miles away from Earth when all they really did was cover up the windows when they are in low earth orbit and film a small portion of Earth from low Earth orbit to simulate that they were far away, but then you find out that they're only in low Earth orbit when they uncover the windows. (Shown in the video below) 9. How we have to redesign the space suits to be able to handle the atmosphere on the moon. 10. The lack of talk and missions to the moon ever since. 11. The numerous blacked out photos from NASA. 12. How an older smartphone has way more technology than the entire spaceship back in 1969, and how we were able to even communicate with them in the spaceship as the one astronaut who passed away before the moon launch specified that they had trouble communicating between buildings and the shuttle on the ground. 13. Not one single astronaut would put their hand on the Bible and say they went to the moon. Why? 14. All the CGI and bubbles caught on NASA videos. 15. All the green screen captures and astronauts on wires in the "shuttle" and on the "ISS." There are so many bloopers and outtakes of astronauts and shuttle hatches malfunctioning, people appearing in the background of videos of the shuttle, people fading in and out, I could go on forever... How would you convince me against the evidence or prove me wrong from the arguments that I have provided?

I want to believe, but there's too much evidence that not only tells me but shows me that they lied. I feel like low Earth orbit is as far as we can go... 1. The van Allen radiation belt. 2. The disgusted, unexciting, ashamed post moon landing conference with the three astronauts. Their body language, mannerisms, and answers scream that they're lying. 3. The lack of noise of the jet engines in the "videos." 4. How did they get the lunar rover on the spaceship? 5. No craters or dust underneath the spaceship. 6. How did the film the spaceship take off perfectly if nobody was left on the moon to operate the camera, and how was it so perfect if there was a delay? 7. The rockets and the spaceship look like a model. 8. The video of them saying that they are 130,000 miles away from Earth when all they really did was cover up the windows when they are in low earth orbit and film a small portion of Earth from low Earth orbit to simulate that they were far away, but then you find out that they're only in low Earth orbit when they uncover the windows. (Shown in the video below) 9. How we have to redesign the space suits to be able to handle the atmosphere on the moon. 10. The lack of talk and missions to the moon ever since. 11. The numerous blacked out photos from NASA. 12. How an older smartphone has way more technology than the entire spaceship back in 1969, and how we were able to even communicate with them in the spaceship as the one astronaut who passed away before the moon launch specified that they had trouble communicating between buildings and the shuttle on the ground. 13. Not one single astronaut would put their hand on the Bible and say they went to the moon. Why? 14. All the CGI and bubbles caught on NASA videos. 15. All the green screen captures and astronauts on wires in the "shuttle" and on the "ISS." There are so many bloopers and outtakes of astronauts and shuttle hatches malfunctioning, people appearing in the background of videos of the shuttle, people fading in and out, I could go on forever... How would you convince me against the evidence or prove me wrong from the arguments that I have provided?

The SCIF

32,347 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

1. stable orbits around black holes are very possible and common, and lots of other things that don’t quite match up with black hole physics, but given the devil is involved i accept it 2. “geostationary orbit” is a term that only applies to a very specific orbit around Earth

1. stable orbits around black holes are very possible and common, and lots of other things that don’t quite match up with black hole physics, but given the devil is involved i accept it 2. “geostationary orbit” is a term that only applies to a very specific orbit around Earth

avery 🪐 tenmartha week!

14,776 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🚨 THE “ALIEN COMET” MOMENT IS HERE — 3I/ATLAS PASSES EARTH NEXT WEEK 🚨 Something extraordinary from outside our solar system is quietly passing by. The interstellar object 3I/ATLAS will reach its closest point to Earth on December 19, 2025, and many headlines are struggling to explain what’s really happening. Here’s the simple truth: 3I/ATLAS is NOT coming toward Earth. Instead, Earth is moving closer to its path as we orbit the Sun. It’s like two cars on different lanes briefly coming closer — dramatic to watch, but completely safe. 3I/ATLAS has already traveled beyond Mars’ orbit and is now heading out of the solar system forever. There is no impact risk. Even at its closest, it will remain hundreds of millions of kilometers away. What makes this moment special isn’t danger — it’s rarity. This object came from another star system, passed through our cosmic neighborhood, and will never return again. This isn’t a warning. It’s a reminder that the universe is vast, mysterious, and full of visitors we’re only just beginning to understand. #3IATLAS #interstellarobject #3Iアトラス

🚨 THE “ALIEN COMET” MOMENT IS HERE — 3I/ATLAS PASSES EARTH NEXT WEEK 🚨 Something extraordinary from outside our solar system is quietly passing by. The interstellar object 3I/ATLAS will reach its closest point to Earth on December 19, 2025, and many headlines are struggling to explain what’s really happening. Here’s the simple truth: 3I/ATLAS is NOT coming toward Earth. Instead, Earth is moving closer to its path as we orbit the Sun. It’s like two cars on different lanes briefly coming closer — dramatic to watch, but completely safe. 3I/ATLAS has already traveled beyond Mars’ orbit and is now heading out of the solar system forever. There is no impact risk. Even at its closest, it will remain hundreds of millions of kilometers away. What makes this moment special isn’t danger — it’s rarity. This object came from another star system, passed through our cosmic neighborhood, and will never return again. This isn’t a warning. It’s a reminder that the universe is vast, mysterious, and full of visitors we’re only just beginning to understand. #3IATLAS #interstellarobject #3Iアトラス

Night Sky Now

155,049 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Arjun Rampal married his girlfriend, Gabriella Demetriades. who is 14 years his junior at the age of 53. What is surprising is that they had been in a relationship since 2018 and already had two sons before tying the knot. Their first son was born in 2019. Their second son was born in 2023. Arjun and Gabriella got married in 2026. But if their sons were to do the same thing in the future, would they object? If they did, the son might ask- "Dad, what did 'you' do?" If they didn't object, this could gradually become a trend. where the father gets married instead of the son.

Arjun Rampal married his girlfriend, Gabriella Demetriades. who is 14 years his junior at the age of 53. What is surprising is that they had been in a relationship since 2018 and already had two sons before tying the knot. Their first son was born in 2019. Their second son was born in 2023. Arjun and Gabriella got married in 2026. But if their sons were to do the same thing in the future, would they object? If they did, the son might ask- "Dad, what did 'you' do?" If they didn't object, this could gradually become a trend. where the father gets married instead of the son.

Preeti

586,172 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen