
Categories
- Art (178)
- Other (1,667)
- Philosophy (1,353)
- Psychology (1,883)
- Society (495)
Recent Questions
- Is the number of convolutions in the brain related to the presence of the mind?
- How to understand female logic if you are a woman?
- What is the difference between feeling awkward and feeling ashamed?
- Why is it that before going to bed at night, a bunch of "brilliant" ideas come to mind, and in the morning everything is either forgotten, or it doesn't seem so brilliant anymore?
- How not to lose yourself in yourself? In the company of people, I lose all my thoughts, attitudes and desires, becoming confused and empty
I think that any word or phrase that constantly looms before your eyes can acquire a touch of banality, lose its attractiveness, lose its “salt”. It's like in W. Schefner's poem about Words:
Yes, I haven't seen such a question yet.
And here's what: “Take care of nature, otherwise you will ruin yourself!”, and for example, in 10 (or maybe 20) of the most common languages (as well as Esperanto).
Of course, to realize this, you need to be a God. You need to move the stars so that they line up in the inscription. And if there are not enough bright stars, then zoom in on the dimmer ones (as they are visible from Earth, and not really dim). Supergiants should not be particularly close: they tend to explode (this is called a supernova). A close supernova explosion – it won't seem too small. The most common stars are red dwarfs. To make them even visible as second-magnitude stars, you will have to zoom in so much that they will affect the orbits of planets and other bodies in the Solar System, so they should also not be touched. What remains are more massive main-sequence stars, as well as giants (but not supergiants).
Yes, and the stars will no longer be called “such and such a star of such and such a constellation”, but “such and such a star of such and such a letter, syllabus, hieroglyph of such and such a word”.
Or maybe better glowing geostationary satellites?