The Instigator
Swetha
Pro (for)
Losing
8 Points
The Contender
CarmenAnu
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Will there be an end to our solar system?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
CarmenAnu
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/3/2010 Category: Science
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,588 times Debate No: 13551
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (5)

 

Swetha

Pro

I think that there will be an end to the soar system. Before we go into the topc let's see what does the topic mean! There was a beginning for the solar system and of course all the things will have an end! The point is will our solar system have an end? I strongly believe that solar system will have an end and will explain it after I know the view of my opponent.
CarmenAnu

Con

I wish to thank my opponent for this opportunity in debating.

I agree with the affirmative's statement of "There was a beginning for the solar system and of course all the things will have an end!". That is correct. All things created must indeed have and end. However, when talking about the solar system, we cannot accurately describe the solar system as a "thing". A "thing" is defined follows: 1. a material object without life or consciousness; an inanimate object. 2. some entity, object, or creature that is not or cannot be specifically designated or precisely described. In both definitions, a thing is an object. Object is defined as follows: anything that is visible or tangible and is relatively stable in form. The solar system is not a tangible, meaning you cannot touch it, object and therefore is not a "thing" which in turn, means that the affirmative's statement that "There was a beginning for the solar system and of course all the things will have an end!" is not relevant to this topic.
Debate Round No. 1
Swetha

Pro

I thank my opponent for accepting the debate. I agree that solar system is not a 'thing'. But the constituents of solar system such as planets, comets, stars, satellites are of course, a thing or an object. The planets circle like clockwork, the sun burns steadily, and even delicate life has survived on at least one world. It cannot last. Something unpleasant is bound to shatter this comfortable calm. Our sun will die, of course, about six billion years from now. Our sun has been holding all the planets together in their orbit and providing them with sun light which is very important for our day to day activities.
We can compromise ourselves that our scientists will figure out a way to replace sun light with something else. But we cannot replace an object which can exert gravity on other planets to hold them in their orbit. If the sun looses it's power the planets will not move in their orbit and will start moving in a galumph way. Sometimes, there are chances for the planets to collide when they do not move in a definite orbit. When the planets start colliding our solar system will come to an end.
It has been stated that our galaxy is going to collide with the nearest galaxy (Andromeda) as Andromeda is approaching us with a great speed and will collide within a million of years. Our solar system is a part of Milky way galaxy and that can be an end to our galaxy and our solar system too.
Our solar system is a part of the universe and the most accepted theory of formation universe is Big bang theory. There has been a possible end of the universe due to Big shrink theory. According to the big bang theory, time is going forward and space is expanding...entropy rules ! But there is gonna be a time , a crucial point (big shrink) that space will start shrinking and time will go backwards...we are going to live backwards! ...in a way. What if that process happened infinite times, we lived and we are going to live for ever, it is a universe of frequencies why its nature cannot be a frequency itself that keeps repeating... This may sound crazy but there is going to be a collapse which will lead to the time before the universe was formed and the time when our solar system never existed. So, I strongly believe that there will be a time when our solar system comes to an end. But the question is will my opponent be there to see it and accept that her idea is wrong!
CarmenAnu

Con

I negate my opponents last comment "But the question is will my opponent be there to see it and accept that her idea is wrong!" This statement is irrelevant because"our galaxy is going to collide with the nearest galaxy as Andromeda is approaching us with a great speed and will collide within a million of years" It is highly unlikely I will be around in a million years to witness the said destruction of the solar system.

"We can compromise ourselves that our scientists will figure out a way to replace sun light with something else. But we cannot replace an object which can exert gravity on other planets to hold them in their orbit."

It is indeed very likely that before our million years are up that scientists will figure out a way to replace the sun. But as of right now, that is a feat far out of our reach. So what is to say that scientists could not come up with some device to "exert gravity on other planets to hold them in their orbit"? Both statements are strictly speculation.

*I wish to take just a moment to ask my opponent to paste their references for the information they have. It would be very helpful :) I ask for a specific piece of evidence regarding the statement "It has been stated that our galaxy is going to collide with the nearest galaxy" Thanks

"Our solar system is a part of the universe and the most accepted theory of formation universe is Big bang theory."

This is true. This is the most widely accepted theory but the keyword here is THEORY. We, meaning the scientists who research these things, cannot be sure of this because it is only a theory. They have no proof of the Big Bang theory. *If the Negative DOES have proof then I ask he also adds that to the evidence asked for above ;)

"There has been a possible end of the universe due to Big shrink theory"

I personally have never heard of the Big Shrink theory and upon researching it using Google.com, I could find nothing of merit regarding this theory. *I ask once more for the Negatives evidence regarding this "Big Shrink Theory"

I await the Negatives response.
Debate Round No. 2
Swetha

Pro

My opponent's statement, 'It is indeed very likely that before our million years are up that scientists will figure out a way to replace the sun. But as of right now, that is a feat far out of our reach. So what is to say that scientists could not come up with some device to "exert gravity on other planets to hold them in their orbit"? Both statements are strictly speculation.' seems, my friend says that there is a possibility for our scientists to find out a way to hold the planets in their orbit. But when we think logically sun is nearly 100 times compared to that of earth. Scientists cannot invent something 100 times more than earth by living in earth. That option is highly impossible.
My opponent has just opposed my views and asked for the proofs. I am just explaining about my views. She has not expressed or supported her view. Then, how does she expect me to go against her?
Proof for Big bang theory:
Scientists have put forward many theories of how universe was formed. But all were not expected and there was a fault in it and something was not clear. But the Big bang theory has been accepted by most of the scientists and researchers and seems to be the apt explanation. 'The theory is the most comprehensive and accurate explanation supported by scientific evidence and observations. (http://en.wikipedia.org...). It was proposed by Georges Lema�tre.
Proof for Big shrink theory:
http://www.universaltheory.org.... This site provided me extra information along with the Universe book issued by Discovery channel.
Proof for collision of our galaxy and Andromeda galaxy:
. And we have even studied in our text books all about it.

I have provided the necessary proofs. And as it is the last round and I will not be able to post more I like to conclude. I thank my opponent once again for accepting to debate on this topic but a little disappointed as she did not put forward her idea and just asked about the proofs.
I am still confident that solar system will have an end but the only question is the time it will end!
CarmenAnu

Con

I do apologize for my lack of persuasive arguments. This is my first online debate so it's much different than a regular old debate for a school team. Plus, this is a rather difficult topic to oppose. Moving on...

My opponent said "the sun is nearly 100 times compared to that of earth. Scientists cannot invent something 100 times more than earth by living in earth. That option is highly impossible." I disagree. The world is just arriving into an advanced space age. Could we not simply build a device out in space?

Our solar system will not end because if scientist can figure out a way to replace the sun and emit gravity, they almost certainly can build something to keep the solar system from exploding.

My conclusion: there will not be an end to our solar system because our scientists will inevitably find a way out of it.

Thank my opponent for this debating opportunity and again I apologize for the lack of persuasive arguments. :) I still had fun and learned a lot.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Chrysippus 6 years ago
Chrysippus
@Lightkeeper: Didn't even see that you had responded! Sorry.

Eh, sure; the planets, the sun, they are all things. The "solar system" is a name that we give to a large collection of things; it is a concept and a category, a tag, that allows us to readily identify several thousand things (asteroids, planets, moons, the Sun, all lumped together).

Con did not express it well, which is why I berated her for it, but you cannot touch a concept; and concepts do not necessarily have an end, like things do.

But, that is all irrelevant to the voting on the debate. She didn't say that, so don't bother with that. What is important is what those two said. I just was leaving them with something to keep in mind to help them next time.
Posted by TheAtheistAllegiance 6 years ago
TheAtheistAllegiance
Two things:

First of all, all theories must have demonstrable evidence to support their conclusions, otherwise they would not be regarded as theories, but instead as hypotheses.

Secondly, the Big Bang Theory has myriad amounts of proof to organize and arbitrate its ideas.
Posted by Lightkeeper 6 years ago
Lightkeeper
Right....I screwed that up..."The mere fact that you can't touch it (because your arms are not long enough) doesn't affect its tangibility" is what I should have said.

I have to quit posting in the middle of the night :)
Posted by Lightkeeper 6 years ago
Lightkeeper
What are you two talking about? Of course the solar system is a thing. It's material and tangible. The mere fact that you can't touch it (because your arms are not long enough).

What's more, even if it weren't an object, it certainly is an entity; a thing.
Posted by mageist24 6 years ago
mageist24
the solar system is dependent on the sun. The sun will expire. Therefore, the solar system will expire.
Posted by Chrysippus 6 years ago
Chrysippus
The Big Shrink: It's either a hypothesis, a wild assumption, a far fetched speculation, or an overweight psychiatrist. It's not a theory. Theories have to have some sort of verification.
Posted by Chrysippus 6 years ago
Chrysippus
Con, you deserved a better opponent, and may be new to internet debating; but there were so many things to nail Pro on here that you just let slide. This debate hurt to read.

RFD:

Agree before: Pro. The solar system will end someday, along with all other material things.
Agree after: Same. The ineptness of Pro's arguments have had no effect on my personal beliefs.

To the actual voting points now.

Conduct: Tied. Respectfully played, no forfeits.

Spelling/Grammar: Con. I don't often award this point, but I wish it were more points this time, for reasons:

1. Both debaters' format was regrettable, but Pro's was horrible. Space out the thoughts, organize your thinking, PLEASE don't jumble things like that!

2. Pro had many, many spelling errors. There are spellcheckers readily available on any decent word processing program, and even on the "submit argument" screen. Use them. Better yet, learn to write.

Arguments: Tied. Neither side gained any real advantage, or really did much arguing to the point. If Con had stuck to the "The Solar system is a concept" line, he could have won; if he had blasted Pro fro thinking the Sun's mass would go away when it's reactions died out, Pro wouldn't have had a leg to stand on. As it was, they both ended the debate quibbling over The Big Shrink.

Sources: Tied. Con had none, and Pro tried to cite her high school astronomy text book. That's worth losing several points of credibility over.
Posted by CarmenAnu 6 years ago
CarmenAnu
I forgot to add this to my arument but my sources are:

www.dictionary.com
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Public_Agenda 6 years ago
Public_Agenda
SwethaCarmenAnuTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:25 
Vote Placed by mageist24 6 years ago
mageist24
SwethaCarmenAnuTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Chrysippus 6 years ago
Chrysippus
SwethaCarmenAnuTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Vote Placed by CarmenAnu 6 years ago
CarmenAnu
SwethaCarmenAnuTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
SwethaCarmenAnuTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60