• sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    2 months ago

    Imagine a terrestrial planet that is Earthlike in all respects, but it simply has more persistent cloud cover, such that seeing an open cloudless sky is miraculously unlikely, as unlikely as humans directly witnessing an asteroid impact.

    No ground based astronomy.

    No technological discoveries or culture that derives from ground based astronomy.

    No celestial navigation on the ground.

    Very different / stunted / more difficult cartography.

    Technological civilization is capable of emerging, but it would not be able to well understand anything beyond the terra firma, not untill it generated aircraft capable of breaching the cloud cover layer, and thrmen developed airborne observatories.

    • mkwt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      “Nightfall”, by Arthur C. Clarke is a short story based on this premise.

      Except in the story it’s a complex multiple-star solar system that makes it very rare for all suns to set at once.

      Edit: It’s actually Isaac Asimov.

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Augh!

        You’re telling me there’s an Arthur C Clarke short that I missed?

        Damnit I am losing so many nerd points today.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I have written a post about exactly this phenomenon, arguing that that’s how most animals/insects see the world (assuming their sense of vision isn’t good enough or they just don’t care to look up). Apparently i was wrong, even insects can see the stars and navigate due to their light (milky way navigation).

      • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Is there a particular instance you’re referring to here? Because contrary to popular belief, the church has historically been big on investing in what we now call science.

        For instance, although the trial of Galileo is often characterised as “big bad church holds us back because religion is opposed to heliocentrism”, there was actually a lot of legitimate scientific beef against Galileo. Although he ended up being right about heliocentrism, he didn’t really have good evidence to support his claims; He didn’t understand Kepler’s laws of planetary motion, and his telescope produced so many aberrant artifacts that astronomers who use it were reasonable to be dubious of his claims.

        If you’d like to learn more, here’s an excellent video by Dr Fatima, an astrophysicist turned science communicator. The philosopher of science, Paul Feyerabend also uses Galileo as a case study in his book Against Method

        • liuther9@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Because religion contradicts scientific approach to thinking. I personally like the way in which Carl Sagan gets rid of all the “noise” information when investigating how the world works. Religion is a noise

          • pressanykeynow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Because religion contradicts scientific approach to thinking

            Any scientific base for that claim? Because there seems to be way to much religious scientist for it to be true.

    • 🍉 DrRedOctopus 🐙🍉@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I wrote and tried publishing a short story about a species like that.

      where only occasionally people on top of mountains see stars, and they chuck it as a consequence of low pressure. eventually they invented flight, and assume pilots going high enough to see stars are having cognitive issues due to lack of air.

      They asked pilots to draw the stars they see, and they get different drawings (they sent pilots at different times of the year because they couldn’t ever expect stars to shift) and assume its proof that thise stars are a cognitive artifact.

      Eventually a pilot swears they are real and can actually use then to navigate, skepticism, he proves it. brand new research field emerges.

      Although the story focuses more on deep DEEP time an omniengineering. (A term I just made up because mega engineering is a concept way too small compared to the one in the story).

      If you want I don’t mind putting that story in the conversation.

    • nilaus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Well, as soon as they invent radio and experience interferens radio astronomi will evolve… I guess?

        • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Good news: it’s all public domain (edit: it isn’t). Whole series is there, at least the public domain ones. There was a newer one that wasn’t public domain when I last checked, though that was a long time ago and it might be now.

          Don’t read it for nerd points. Read it to find out why it’s associated with nerd points.

          Edit: disregard above, no idea where I got that idea from, maybe from how easy it is to find the full novel online just by doing a search for it, I must have figured and then somehow along the way it turned into a fact in my mind.

        • Drekaridill@lemmy.wtf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Don’t want to spoil anything because you really should, but this is very reminiscent of a plot point in one of the books.