#celestial mechanics

[sbflux-art]

🌕Moonchild🌕

[lindahall]

Pierre-Simon Laplace

Pierre-Simon Laplace, a French mathematician, was born Mar. 23, 1749.

read more...

[aegishjalmur]

finally got my desktop icons set up the way I wanted them! it was a pain but worth it LOL. having it cycle thru is nice, even if the colors aren’t exact

[quranindex]

Discover Quran Verses about #Celestial mechanics @ https://quranindex.info/search/celestial-mechanics [36:38-40] #Quran #Islam

[ijcmcrjournal]

Origin and Physical Properties of the Black Hole by Orlov S*

Abstract

A new physical model is proposed for the appearance of an astronomical object - the Black Hole. It is shown that the Black Hole is the center of the cosmic, etheric, gravitational torsion. An equation for determining the radius of this object based on the theory of vortex gravity is presented. A substantiation is proposed that the force of gravity on the surface of the Black Hole does not depend on the mass of this Black Hole. The mass of the Black Hole can not be determined. A contradiction is shown in the Schwarzschild solution by the definition of the radius of the Black Hole.

Keywords: theory of vortex gravitation, celestial mechanics.

Introduction

According to many astrophysicists, astronomical object the Black Hole (BH) is an area in the space which gravitational attraction is so great that light quanta can't leave it even. Researchers believe that Black holes could result from catastrophic gravitational collapse of a massive star at that historical moment when it dies. At collapse - catastrophic compression of a star - intensity of gravity over its surface becomes so terribly big that the space surrounding a star - time is displaced. This star disappears from the Universe and there is only strongly bent area of space - to time. The border of this area is called as gravitational radius. Spherically a symmetric black hole it is equal in the elementary case to Shvartsshild's radius. Theoretically possibility of existence of such areas of space - time follows from some exact solutions of the equations of Einstein, first of which was received by Karl Shvartsshild in 1915 [1].

Where, rs – the radius of the Black Hole, M – the mass of a black hole, with - the velocity of light, G=6.672 ∙10 -11 N∙m2/kg2 – a gravitational constant. We will consider objectivity of a hypothesis of an origin of the Black hole on the example of similar object which is in the center of our galaxy. In work [2] the radius of this BH which is called the Sagittarius A * is determined –

At such radius and the corresponding volume, the mass of this BH has to be on the basis of a formula (1) about 1039 kg. Then density of the Black Hole in the center of our galaxy has to be about 5 kg/m3! ? On the basis of the classical equation about a mutual attraction gravitation force on a surface of the Sagittarius A * is equal

F =  6.8 x 104 M

Agree, it is impossible to call this Black hole "catastrophically squeezed", and gravitation forces on its surface  "terribly big". It is obvious that the theoretical explanation of an astronomical phenomenon of the Black hole doesn't correspond to physical parameters. In addition, equation (1) is mathematically absurd. In it, the quantities (G) and (c) are constants. Therefore, the mass of the Black Hole (M) is directly proportional to its radius (r). In fact, the mass of any body is always proportional to its volume. The volume is proportional to the radius of this body in the cube (r3). Then the mass must also be proportional to the radius in the cube. From this discrepancy with the laws of mathematics of equation (1) it follows that the density of the Black Hole (P) is inversely proportional to the root of its cubic radius. P ~ r-1/3

Example, On the basis of formula (1), we shall determine the mass of the Black Hole with a radius equal to 1 m.

Then the density of this black hole is

This density is several orders of magnitude greater than the density of the nucleon. Consequently, equation (1) is absurd. It is offered to study the theory of vortex gravitation and cosmology below. On the basis of this theory it is possible to explain genesis of the Black hole without contradictions.

About the Theory of Vortex Gravitation

The theory of vortex gravitation [3] is based on the well-known astronomical fact – all heavenly objects rotate. The most logical explanation of the reason of this movement can be only one – rotation of heavenly objects generated vortex rotation of space substance – ether. Ether forms system of the interconnected whirlwinds in world space. Orbital speeds of ether in each tuft (torsion) decrease in the direction from the center to the periphery under the law of the return square of this removal.  If orbital speeds of a stream of ether decrease then, under aerodynamics laws, pressure in this stream increases. The gradient of pressure generates pushing out force in the direction to zones with the smallest pressure, that is to the center of this torsion. We will consider the equation of vortex gravitation received in the theory [3]. In this section, a model of appearance of the gravitation attraction force is considered from the viewpoint of aerodynamics. Namely, the two-dimensional model is considered on the basis of the following initial postulates. These postulates will be expanded and defined more exactly below.

Forces operating on a body 2 are specified. The Fc-centrifugal force, Fp-force of an attraction of a body 2 from a body 1, v2 – the linear speed of a body 2 on an orbit, R – the radius of an orbit, r1 – the radius of a body 1, r2 – the radius of a body 2, w1 – the angular speed of rotation of air on a surface of a body 1, m2 – body weight 2.

As it was already spoken, movement of a whirlwind is resulted by pressure gradient. Radial distribution of pressure and ether speed in work [3] are defined on the basis of Navier-Stokes's equation for movement of viscous liquid (gas).

In cylindrical coordinates taking into account radial symmetry of vr=vz=0, vj=v (r), P=P (r) the equation will register in the form of system

Where r = 8.85 х 10-12  kg \m3 - density of ether [4], – a vector of speed of ether, P – pressure of ether, h- viscosity.

In cylindrical coordinates for the module of force of gravitation

Then comparing (3) and (4) for incompressible ether (r=const) we find that

After necessary transformations (full calculation is stated in the theory [3]) it is received:

1 . the equations for determination of force of gravitation depending on the speed of rotation of ether

rn,  mn  – radius and mass of a nucleon.

We will transform a formula (6). We will equate r1 = r. We will substitute w1 r1 = v1 and numerical values rn,  mn, r, we receive:

2. The equations for determination of dependence of pressure of P0, from the speed of rotation of ether of V1

Where – pressure of ether on we consider P0 to an orbit, using a boundary condition

In fig. 2 pressure distribution according to a formula (8) is graphically shown.

Vortex Black Hole

Асcording to laws ether-loudspeakers [4] pressure in motionless air is accepted size

Ether density

By means of the equation (8) we will find the orbital speed of ether of V0 = V1 at which pressure of P0 will be equal to zero.

from where  

Orbital speed of ether to belong to the radius of the orbit under the law of the return square

where

R0  – radius of an orbit of a whirlwind on which ether reaches speed

Rkn – radius of an orbit of a whirlwind in which the speed of ether is known (Vkn).

From the equation (9) we find the orbital radius of the radio torsion with zero pressure.

Orbital speed of ether of Vkn is determined by the known force of gravitation in the same orbit, by means of the equation (7).

Radius of the Vortex Black Hole of the Sagittarius*

We will consider the Sun address in a galaxy orbit.

Orbital speed of solar system -V = 2.2 * 105

Radius of an orbit of solar system - Vkn = 2.46*1020 [5].

We determine the centrifugal force operating on the Sun.

Provided that centrifugal forces, in any point of an orbit, are always equal to attraction forces, we find force of the galactic gravitation operating on the Sun.

We substitute value Fп and r in the equation (7) and we find ether speed in a solar orbit.

Radius of an orbit of astronomical object the Sagittarius* with the zero pressure upon surfaces, on the basis of the equation (10)

The strength of the vortex gravitation on the surface of a black hole

Fg = 620 x M

Similarly, we find radiuses of Black holes at other objects:

Sun - R0 = 155500 m

Eartht - R0 = 0.478 m

Conclusion

Obviously, the modern theory of the origin of black holes contradictory. On the example of a celestial object Sagittarius A* can be argued that Black holes are not superdense and supermassive objects. They may not have a huge force of gravity at its surface.  Based on the theory of vortex gravitation and cosmology, black holes is the central region of space, ether, gravitation torsion. Orbital velocity of the ether on the surface of this area reaches the maximum possible value

At this speed, the pressure on the rotationorbitof theesterdecreases to zero. No substanceorradiation is notable tobreak out ofthis zone.Therefore, the centerspace, gravitation torsioninvisible.Insidethe black holerotationetherorstopsorslows down. In this case,there can existinside a black holeof antigravity.

Note. A similar phenomenon is noted in the center of tropical meteorology and sea storms. Where there is complete peace of mind (calm). This phenomenon is called the "eye of the storm." Radius of the black hole Sagittarius A * at the center of our galaxy observations to determine the magnitude

The estimated value of the radius of the black hole Sagittarius A *, obtained in Chapter 4 (1,382×〖10〗^14 m) higher than the observed value of two orders of magnitude. This is not a calculation error, and the inequality of the radii of the Black Hole in the longitudinal (orbital) and transverse (axial) dimension. The fact that black holes have their form likeness forms of galaxies - and the disk are located in outer space, in the same direction as the galaxies themselves. Terrestrial observer is on the periphery of our galaxy and it can measure their visual observations center of the galaxy (Sagittarius A *) only in the transverse axial dimension. At the same time, disk Sagittarius A * its plane directed to us, so we can determine the calculations only the distance in the longitudinal direction radially. Therefore, calculations determined the orbital radius, and observations - transverse axial thickness of the black hole Sagittarius A *. Radius of gyration of any cosmic torsion far exceeds its axial thickness. For the black hole Sagittarius A * this fact recorded in this paper calculations and astronomical observations.

Gravitational torsions can be of different sizes. Each torsion creates its material object. Micro torsion create atoms. Planetary - planet. Star - star. Galactic - galaxies. Universe - the universe. All torsions in their centers hase black holes. In celestial bodies (atoms, planets, stars, etc.) they are under a layer of the material of which they are created. Therefore, they are hidden from us. In large space objects such as galaxies, they are open and subject to study. Modern classic exercise in cosmology and astrophysics have a lot of controversy for one reason. All of them are based on a global error of the classical theory of gravitation, which states that all bodies create gravity. In fact the opposite is true - gravity creates the body.

For more information about Article : https://ijclinmedcasereports.com/

https://ijclinmedcasereports.com/ijcmcr-rw-id-00156/ https://ijclinmedcasereports.com/pdf/IJCMCR-RW-00156.pdf

[teachersource]

Johann Gottfried Galle was born on June 9, 1812. A German astronomer from Radis, Germany, at the Berlin Observatory who, on September 23, 1846, with the assistance of student Heinrich Louis d'Arrest, was the first person to view the planet Neptune and know what he was looking at. The discovery of Neptune is widely regarded as a dramatic validation of celestial mechanics, and is one of the most remarkable moments of 19th-century science.

[birdylion]

Okay, let's do this. We want to figure out the orbital mechanics of a planet with seasons that last several years. I'm taking you with me as I try to figure it out, so don't expect a definite answer.

I see a question about hypothetical celestial mechanics, and it's very hard not to think about it, so I'm thinking it through to get it out of my head. I know almost nothing about GoT / ASoIaF.

TL;DR: I explain how the seasons on Earth function, and try to extrapolate what would need to change. I make many speculations, largely without definite result, but overall I don't think it's possible in a way that makes sense. Either you don't have a good definition of what makes one 'year' and why they would count summers and winters in years, or I guess gravitational forces would tear the planet apart.

Follow my reasoning under the cut, and if you know more about celestial mechanics than I do, please tell me if I’m wrong.

What is a year?

One year is the time it takes for a planet to orbit its star once. There are different ways to measure that point, but we'll get to that later.

How do we get the seasons on Earth?

Imagine a disk. In the middle of the disk there's the Sun. And the Earth orbits the sun on the edge of that disk. You now have a very approximate representation of the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The disk has a top and a bottom side. Conventionally, since most of the science around it was written up by people on the northern hemisphere of the Earth, the side from which you can see the sky you see when you're on the northern hemisphere of Earth is seen as 'up', or 'North'. But that's just convention. Keep in mind that we're in a 3D space.

You know that the Earth rotates around itself in ~24 hours. That's how we get day and night. The axis around which it rotates goes through the geographical north pole and south pole.

Imagine again the disk. The rotation axis of the Earth does NOT go directly upwards. Instead, it leans to one side, currently at around 23°. This is called the axis tilt.

[graphic number 1: ID by wikipedia: Description of relations between Axial tilt (or Obliquity), rotation axis, plane of orbit, celestial equator and ecliptic. Earth is shown as viewed from the Sun; the orbit direction is counter-clockwise (to the left).]

The ecliptic is on the same plane as the disk I described. The celestial equator is our Earth's equator projected onto the sky.

Ever wonder why there's a polar day and polar night? Look at this graphic:

(Source)

[graphic number 2: ID: graphic of the Earth's orbit around the Sun. The Earth is shown in 4 places: the June solstice to the left, December solstice to the right, and the March 'behind' and September equinox 'in front of' the Sun. Earth's rotational axis is always tilted to the right. For the June and December solstice, the side of the Earth that is turned away from the sun is dark. In June, the south pole lies in darkness. In December the north pole.]

The polar circles are at ~67° latitude. Which is 90°-23°, i.e. the line perpendicular to the Earth's orbit around the sun minus the Earth's axis tilt. This is why there's a polar day and night.

In that graphic you can also see: In June, the sunlight arrives on the surface of the northern hemisphere at a steeper angle than it does in December. The graphic is misleading in one way: The Earth is not physically closer. The distance between the Earth and the Sun is so big, and the Earth's orbit so close to a perfect circle, that the physical closeness doesn't have an impact on the length of days or temperature. It's really just the angle in which the sunlight hits the Earth, and how long it hits the Earth, that have the effect we know as seasons (and climate zones).

In short: Axis tilt = seasons. Europe leans away from the Sun in winter, and leans towards the Sun in summer.

What is a year, 2.0

I said before that there are different ways of measuring a year. For our Earth, the two relevant terms are 'Sidereal year' and 'Tropical year'.

Tropical year If we want a calendar that works with our cycle of the year, with our seasons (in mid-latitudes, where the calendar we use was made), then we want to measure 'one circle around the sun' with a reference point that lies within that system. A tropical year measures how long it takes from one June solstice to the next June solstice. Or from the March Equinox to the next March Equinox. In such a definition of the year, the (northern) summer solstice would always be on the 21th of June.

Sidereal year The other stars are very, very far away. So far that they have no influence whatsoever on our solar system's celestial mechanics. That also makes them a good point of reference if we want to place ourselves in space. They can be a coordinate system. If we look at it like this, we can also measure a year as 'how long does it take until the Earth passes past a certain star again.' This is called a sidereal year.

On earth, sidereal year and tropical year are not the same. That means, for every time the Earth passes the point of the (e. g.) March equinox, the Earth stays a bit behind on the outside coordinate system. It takes 20 minutes longer to reach a full year on that outside coordinate system. It's not relevant for us in our day-to-day life, but it means that several thousand years ago, the stars were in a different position in the sky during the March equinox.

Axis Precession That's because the axis tilt of the earth is not fixed. Sure, it's always around 23°, but it moves like a spintop, or however you call that toy. The earth wobbles. We only don't notice it because it takes ~25 800 years for one full circle. That means, every 25 800 years, the Earth's axis points towards the exact same spot in space (for example Polaris, the current northern pole star).

In short: The Earth does 25 800 circles around the sun in the time its axis describes one circle (of 23° inclination compared to a imaginary line perpendicular to its orbit around the sun).

What would we need to get a planet where winter lasts, say, 7 years?

7 or 70 doesn’t really make a difference in this time scale, so it doesn’t matter how long winter takes in the world of GoT. For now, I just assume that it’s a regular cycle.

The tropical definition of a year wouldn't make sense for this as a starting point, because then for example the winter solstice would mark "one year", even though it took 14 rounds of the planet around the star to reach that "one year" mark. A winter would always last 1/2 year. The only thing that changed would be how the stars look like.

Let's say we use the definition of a sidereal year. One year = the planets makes 1 tour around its star compared to a fixed coordinate system. For a winter to last many years, the plant's axis has to wobble really fast. Like, the axis has to make 1+1/14 circle in one year.

Now how can that possibly happen? The precession (rotation of the axis) is caused by the gravitational forces of other celestial bodies, mainly Sun and Moon. (Further reading on wikipedia) Earth is not a perfect sphere, but is flatter on the top. The term here is 'equatorial bulge', by the way, and it exists because of the centrifugal force that happens because of the rotation around the axis. The sun 'grabs' the earth at the equator and pulls. The 'flatter' a planet is, the stronger these forces will be, and the forces try to 'straighten up' the planet.

Remember your toy, the spinning top? When it spins quickly, it stands upright, and as it loses its rotation, it starts to wobble. It happens quickly with the toy because Earth's gravity and the surface friction are strong forces, but a planet doesn't have those, so once set in motion, it's only influenced by other celestial bodies.

Into the Realm of Speculation ... Now we're getting into territory that I'm not equipped to handle since I'm not a physicist or mathematician. We would need to get into the physics of how a gyroscope moves when other bodies exert force on it. As far as I understand it: strong forces = small wobble, but quickly; weak forces = big wobble, but slowly. That means, either we have an almost perfect sphere of a planet with a small axis tilt, but the seasons, such as they are, change quickly, or we have a planet that's flat at the top with a big axis tilt, but the cycles take really long.

We want a planet whose rotation axis wobbles so quickly that it's in sync with less than one year. I can't do the math, but seeing as it takes ~ 26 000 years for the earth, that wobble must be really quick. And one years really long. And I don't know if it's even possible for it to be synced to its orbit around the star.

Different gravitational forces interacting cause tidal forces. For example the gravitation of the Earth (which keeps the Earth together) vs the gravitation of the Sun (which happens because while the sun is far away, it has a lot of mass).

In this whole endeavour, I didn't mention the moon, who also interacts with the Earth. The Moon doesn't exactly orbit the Earth while the Earth stays fixed - instead, they both orbit their shared center of mass, which just happens to lie under the surface of the Earth (but at a different point depending ont he position of the Moon). So, Earth and Moon are a system that wobbles around the sun together.

As I said, I'm in way over my head here, but I assume that if such a thing were possible, it would be only due to very strong forces pulling at the planet, perhaps by big moons, or by giant planets that orbit the star in close proximity to your planet, and I don’t know if they could do it.

Although my guess would be that if there was a planet so massive that it influences the axis tilt of a planet to such a degree, then it would also be massive enough to just tear the planet apart when it passes in proximity, or disturb its orbit around the star. But this is just speculation now, and anyway, if I were able to solve the three-body-problem ... well. I'm not. Anyway, most axial tilts in our solar system that I know about were, afaik and probably, caused by collisions with other celestial bodies, which put a spin on the planet / satellite.

And even if it were possible: such strong gravitational forces would have a big influence on the structural integrity of the planet. Our tectonics are active and strong, but I imagine on such a planet, stable continental plates would be a rare thing.

(In all of this, I assume that there will be no winter for 7 years, and then no summer for 7 years. I don't know if it's described like this in GoT, or if they have a fixed number of years of barely-existent winters, and then the same number years of barely-existent summers.)

Another idea: different shape of orbit

What if it's not the same mechanism as our seasons. What if the axis tilt has nothing to do with it? Every orbit is an ellipse, and the central body is in one of the focus points of the ellipse. What if the ellipse is so eccentric (i.e. stretched, not round like a circle) that for part of the (sidereal) year, the planet is close to the star, and for other part it's far away.

Well. First it would have to need to stay in the habitable zone (which only means that water can exist in a liquid form). Estimates for our Sun's habitable zone go from 0.725 to 3.0 astronomical units (= average distance between Sun and Earth), so, there's a bit of room.

This is how such an orbit looks like.

[Link to graphic number 3: ID: graphic of apsidal precession / chance in orbit over time]

The most notable thing here would be that in such a system, the planet moves with a different speed depending on where in its orbit it is. That because the closer it is to the star, the more the gravitational force of the star pulls at it. I have no idea if you'd notice that, apart from that the stars seem to move faster during summer, and slower during winter. (Which is a fascinating world building aspect.)

Assuming the planet's atmosphere can cope with the changes in distance, there's still the question how you define a year. Assuming the axis is tilted, also, and the axial precession happens over 10 000s of years like on our Earth. Assuming the axis tilt necessary for winter corresponds with the point where the planet is almost at the outer edge of the habitable zone - I'd say that would be more or less believable for a long and hard winter that comes back in regular intervals.

Then the time it takes for the planet to orbit the star is approximately as long as one cycle of summer-winter. Even considering the apsidal precession (yet another way of measuring a year: how long does it take a planet to reach the same apsis again (farthest or nearest point of the planet to the star)), there's no way how you would define a year in a way that makes one winter several years long.

Conclusion

Now, celestial mechanics are a complex topic and I didn’t take into account if there’s a moon, or several, in the world we’re thinking about, or if there are other planets that disturb the orbit. And I didn’t touch on the changes these different orbits would have on the global weather systems on the planet itself.

I think the most interesting thing to come out of it is that it doesn’t make sense to think in years, instead there would be some very interesting calendars. But that’s probably a topic for another day.

(Also, I can’t describe the pictures better than I did - if someone wants to write more, I numbered them for easier identification.)

Someone over on Discord asked, "I'm morbidly curious: How BAD is A Song of Ice and Fire in terms of the authenticity George claims it to be?"

My reply was straightforward:

The long and the short of it is that ASOIAF is basically a vehicle for GRRM to present both his rape fetish and his Hobbesian view on human nature and has less historical accuracy than Frozen or most other Disney movies.

That's actually a good way to think of it, now that I've said it--he's Family Unfriendly, they're Family Friendly, but both have the same relationship with History: just Pure Aesthetic with no consideration for how the worldbuilding would work.

[worstgirlsgames]

FACTIONS / CELESTIAL MECHANICS

Hi there it’s Aevee again and this time we are talking about choices. Do you find yourself routinely making poor decisions despite your otherwise reasonable judgement? Then you will love Heaven Will Be Mine, where all of your choices will result in an ill-conceived love affair or a robot exploding. Sometimes both!

Similar to We Know The Devil, choices in Heaven Will Be Mine aren’t based around selecting dialogue so much as they’re about choosing a side. In this case, that side is one of the three factions fighting over the fate of the international space colonization program. As your faction sends you on various missions to advance their agenda over the course of the game, you can decide if in fact you believe space politics are boring and would rather make out with your enemy instead.

Each of the sides in this conflict has a grim, tragic, or insidious fate in mind for the human race, so don’t feel bad about betraying them. You should make your decisions based on your heart, or who seems cute, or who you’d most prefer to be elegantly stabbed by in space.

I will talk a little more about the system next week when we talk about the other factions, but for now we would like to show you who is trying and failing to be in charge of Saturn, the demo protagonist and least responsible heroine.

CELESTIAL MECHANICS

Celestial Mechanics has been doing a pretty great job pretending it isn’t Celestial Mechanics for almost the conflict’s entire year. Officially, Celestial Mechanics is supposed to be advancing human thought and potential and charting our future, and not inventing something existentially horrifying, but they are in fact doing that, and Memorial Foundation loyalists and Cradle’s Graces rebels are too into each other to pay attention to what’s happening at the lab in orbit around Cronus.

Nothing good, right? That’s what an anonymous test pilot thought, and she very helpfully leaked all the most damaging information she could get ahold of, resulting in and immediate end to the truce. That will teach the director to bench Saturn indefinitely from piloting duties! I mean, whoever did that!

[sapphicbookoftheday]

The Lady's Guide to Celestial Mechanics by Olivia Waite

Today's sapphic book of the day is The Lady's Guide to Celestial Mechanics by Olivia Waite!

Summary: "As Lucy Muchelney watches her ex-lover’s sham of a wedding, she wishes herself anywhere else. It isn’t until she finds a letter from the Countess of Moth, looking for someone to translate a groundbreaking French astronomy text, that she knows where to go. Showing up at the Countess’ London home, she hoped to find a challenge, not a woman who takes her breath away.

Catherine St Day looks forward to a quiet widowhood once her late husband’s scientific legacy is fulfilled. She expected to hand off the translation and wash her hands of the project—instead, she is intrigued by the young woman who turns up at her door, begging to be allowed to do the work, and she agrees to let Lucy stay. But as Catherine finds herself longing for Lucy, everything she believes about herself and her life is tested.

While Lucy spends her days interpreting the complicated French text, she spends her nights falling in love with the alluring Catherine. But sabotage and old wounds threaten to sever the threads that bind them. Can Lucy and Catherine find the strength to stay together or are they doomed to be star-crossed lovers?"

[sbflux-art]

The Next Morning...

[lindahall]

Nathaniel Bowditch – Scientist of the Day

Nathaniel Bowditch, an American mathematician, was born Mar. 26, 1773.

read more...

[onmyliteraturebullshitagain]

To end out 2021, here are some more books that fall into the category "it's gay and it slaps." Once again a range of styles and genres, but if there's a queer main character and it's a 4-5 star book, it's gay and it slaps. 😁

Not pictured but also gay and they slap, so they deserve a mention:

- Boyfriend Material by Alexis Hall

- The Incubus series by A. H. Lee (warning that these are an mmf relationship that's pretty weird/paranormal and very spicy but I enjoyed them)

- Covenant (webtoon) by explodikid

- Six of Crows (the first in the duology with Crooked Kingdom) could be on this list, but no one is really explicitly queer until book two. Still a great book though!

Go forth and enjoy, my friends! And as always, feel free to recommend me more. My giant tbr can always get bigger!

[quranindex]

Discover Quran Verses about #Celestial mechanics @ https://quranindex.info/search/celestial-mechanics [41:37] #Quran #Islam

[smokefalls]

Loving you is entirely different. You make me feel expansive, as thought my heart is big enough and strong enough to contain the whole world. As though I can become anyone I need to, or want to, without fear—I can reach higher and farther and not lose you for the striving. And oh, my love, do you know how great a gift that is?

Olivia Waite, The Lady's Guide to Celestial Mechanics

[aschenblumen]

«Me gusta pero me asusta».

[honestlyvan]

@bitegore asked: 15 and 17 for reconstruction/post-war Cybertron?

17. Day and night

Cybertronians don’t really have circadian rhythms the way we think about them -- their roomba hindbrains developed before Cybertron had settled into orbit around a star, and even then Cybertron’s rotational periods are not constant -- and traditionally more stuff got done during the dark period of the rotation becuse that is, just... more familiar to them developmentally. Fortunately, post-war so many Cybertronians were used to a yay-30 hour working cycle after being on the 24-hour Earth for so long that the yay-60 hour Cybertronian day cycle could easily be split into daylight and night time, and then have those two halves be basically an entire days worth of stuff and activity before resetting.

The funny thing is that it stuck well enough that the largely uneven rotational period of Cybertron eventually stabilised into actually being 70-and-change hours long. Before that, since mecha were active around the clock and work shifts mattered more than the length of the day, Cybertron’s rotational period would vary by about 10 hours every quarter of a year.