celestial orb

This beautiful lady is called Clara Liadon, a fearsome half elf/ half celestial being. 

“Clara’s mother and father were taken by demons under the influence of her father’s commanding officers. She’s a chaotic neutral wizard who has a tendency to be a bit short tempered.”

Dnd character commissioned by: Oni. 

(The staff and parts of the outfit are inspired by an existing character illustration. I’ll ask where the picture originates from…)

Epitaph

There’s an ocean within us all,
with rivers of veins,
mountains of calcium,
and life roaming in forms of cells.

Our heart is a warm celestial orb,
spreading light throughout the soft earth of our body,
providing the source from which life grows.

The universe is our mind,
containing every concept and object,
allowing life to exist.

We are life.

Our epithet is life.

Our epitaph: we lived

anonymous asked:

Hey, I'm really interested in astrology but I'm sO new to it and there's sO much more to astrology than just the zodiac signs. I have no idea where to start with all the "Suns" and "Moons" and "Capricorn Rising" fancy stuff. It would be really great if you could sort of explain some of the basics or post a link to a website that could explain it. I've tried google but I done even know what to type in the search engine! Thx 💜 xoxo

Hello, love!! So I promised someone I’d make a big masterpost on astrological basics tonight! So I think this will be my masterpost haha! Let me know if you have any questions! 

SIGNS: 

So everyone is born with a natal chart, which defines where the sun, moon, and all the planets are located at the time of your birth. Each zodiac sign takes up 30-degrees of the total celestial orb thing (like the whole sky), and your natal chart says which sign each planet is within!

So if, at your birth, the sun is in the divide designated to Taurus, then your sun sign is Taurus (your sun sign is the sign most people already know since it’s based on your birthday), and if Jupiter is in the divide designated to Cancer, then your Jupiter sign is Cancer! (other signs are harder to track since they vary from year to year, if that makes sense)

Each planet is associated with a different part of your personality. Like Mercury is associated with logic and communication, and Saturn is associated with your restrictions and your responses to authority. And each zodiac sign has a set of traits. So if your Mercury sign is Libra, then you have Libra traits when it comes to logic and communication.

You can’t figure all your signs out by yourself unless you have a special book called an ephemerides which tracks the positions of all the planets at all times using tables. But you can find all your signs online at http://astro.cafeastrology.com/cgi-bin/astro/natal. Put in your birth information, and it will give you a table with all of your signs (in the first column of that table)! 

Here are the traits associated with each sign: 

  • Aries: impulsivness, aggressiveness, an active nature
  • Taurus: romantic, patient, hard-working, stubborn
  • Gemini: analytical, talkative, adaptable 
  • Cancer: caring, defensive, motherly 
  • Leo: loyal, passionate, powerful 
  • Virgo: humble, critical, perfectionist
  • Libra: romantic, social, peaceful
  • Scorpio: passionate, jealous, intense
  • Sagittarius: honest, optimistic, idealistic
  • Capricorn: determined, hardworking, cold
  • Aquarius: unemotional, social, humanitarian
  • Pisces: dreamy, artistic, emotional

Here are what the planets represent: 

  • Sun: your basic personality 
  • Moon: your emotions and inner personality
  • Mercury: your communication and logic 
  • Mars: your anger and reaction to sex 
  • Venus: your relationships and reaction to beauty
  • Jupiter: things that expand you, good luck
  • Saturn: things that limit you, your reaction to authority 
  • Uranus: your reaction to progress and innovation
  • Neptune: your dreams, illusions 
  • Pluto: your secrets

CLASSIFICATION OF SIGNS: 

Signs are classified by an element, duality, and mode/quality! Each sign is a different combination of element and mode. 

Here are the elements: 

  • FIRE (Aries, Leo, Sagittarius): active, creative, outgoing
  • EARTH (Taurus, Virgo, Cap): practical, determined, emotional restricted
  • AIR (Gemini, Libra, Aquarius): social, witty, intelligent
  • WATER (Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces): emotional, nurturing, receptive

Here are the dualities: 

  • PASSIVE/FEMININE (all earth and water signs): introverted
  • ACTIVE/MASCULINE (all fire and air signs): extroverted

Here are the qualities: 

  • CARDINAL (Aries, Capricorn, Libra, Cancer): dynamic, brave
  • FIXED (Taurus, Scorpio, Leo, Aquarius): stubborn, stable 
  • MUTABLE (Pisces, Virgo, Gemini, Sagittarius): flexible and adaptable

HOUSES:

So there are 12 houses, and astronomically, they are based on the rotation of the earth about its axis. Rather than your birthday, your birth time and location determine the positions of the houses at your birth. So two people born on the same day at widely different locations or at different times don’t have the same house positions!

Your houses positions are indicated by the sign they start in at your birth! Like, below is my own personal chart!

There is an outer ring with all the zodiac signs, right? And you see below that ring is a second ring with lines that don’t really line up with the lines on the outer ring? Those are the divisions of my houses! On the far left, there is a thick black line, right? The chunk under that thick line and above the next line counterclockwise is my first house. Even though most of the 1st house is in Libra, my 1st house is technically in Virgo because that is where it starts. Your first house is also known as your rising sign, so Virgo is my rising sign! There is one planet in my first house, Venus (the dark green sign in that chunk). The next chunk is my 2nd house, and it continues around the wheel counterclockwise! So my 7th house is in Pisces, for example! Because the 7th chunk from the far left counterclockwise starts in Pisces!

Now each house dictates a different part of your life! Here is what each one dictates!

  • House 1: your self (AKA your rising sign, which shows how you come across to other people)
  • House 2: your possessions
  • House 3: communication
  • House 4: the home
  • House 5: creativity and sex
  • House 6: service and health
  • House 7: partnership and marriage
  • House 8: death and regeneration
  • House 9: philosophy and travel
  • House 10 (midheaven): career and reputation
  • House 11: hopes and friends
  • House 12: self-undoing and secrets

The planets you have in each house determines how that one part of your life is played out in your real life. For example, my Venus is in the 1st House (the House of self). This makes me charming, artistic, and romantic! And my moon is in the 9th house (the House of Philosophy) which makes me often impractical!

I think those are the basics! Admittedly, a lot of this is copy-and-pasted from my other posts, but I hope it helps! Remember you can always ask me if you have any questions about this technical stuff! GOOD LUCK, LOVE!!! <3

The Galileo Controversy

It is commonly believed that the Catholic Church persecuted Galileo for abandoning the geocentric (earth-at-the-center) view of the solar system for the heliocentric (sun-at-the-center) view.

The Galileo case, for many anti-Catholics, is thought to prove that the Church abhors science, refuses to abandon outdated teachings, and is not infallible. For Catholics, the episode is often an embarrassment. It shouldn’t be.

This tract provides a brief explanation of what really happened to Galileo.

Anti-scientific?


The Church is not anti-scientific. It has supported scientific endeavors for centuries. During Galileo’s time, the Jesuits had a highly respected group of astronomers and scientists in Rome. In addition, many notable scientists received encouragement and funding from the Church and from individual Church officials. Many of the scientific advances during this period were made either by clerics or as a result of Church funding.

Nicolaus Copernicus dedicated his most famous work, On the Revolution of the Celestial Orbs, in which he gave an excellent account of heliocentricity, to Pope Paul III. Copernicus entrusted this work to Andreas Osiander, a Lutheran clergyman who knew that Protestant reaction to it would be negative, since Martin Luther seemed to have condemned the new theory, and, as a result, the book would be condemned. Osiander wrote a preface to the book, in which heliocentrism was presented only as a theory that would account for the movements of the planets more simply than geocentrism did—something Copernicus did not intend.

Ten years prior to Galileo, Johannes Kepler
published a heliocentric work that expanded on Copernicus’ work. As a result, Kepler also found opposition among his fellow Protestants for his heliocentric views and found a welcome reception among some Jesuits who were known for their scientific achievements.

Clinging to Tradition?

Anti-Catholics often cite the Galileo case as an example of the Church refusing to abandon outdated or incorrect teaching, and clinging to a “tradition.” They fail to realize that the judges who presided over Galileo’s case were not the only people who held to a geocentric view of the universe. It was the received view among scientists at the time.

Centuries earlier, Aristotle had refuted heliocentricity, and by Galileo’s time, nearly every major thinker subscribed to a geocentric view. Copernicus refrained from publishing his heliocentric theory for some time, not out of fear of censure from the Church, but out of fear of ridicule from his colleagues.

Many people wrongly believe Galileo proved heliocentricity. He could not answer the strongest argument against it, which had been made nearly two thousand years earlier by Aristotle: If heliocentrism were true, then there would be observable parallax shifts in the stars’ positions as the earth moved in its orbit around the sun. However, given the technology of Galileo’s time, no such shifts in their positions could be observed. It would require more sensitive measuring equipment than was available in Galileo’s day to document the existence of these shifts, given the stars’ great distance. Until then, the available evidence suggested that the stars were fixed in their positions relative to the earth, and, thus, that the earth and the stars were not moving in space—only the sun, moon, and planets were.

Thus Galileo did not prove the theory by the Aristotelian standards of science in his day. In his Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina and other documents, Galileo claimed that the Copernican theory had the “sensible demonstrations” needed according to Aristotelian science, but most knew that such demonstrations were not yet forthcoming. Most astronomers in that day were not convinced of the great distance of the stars that the Copernican theory required to account for the absence of observable parallax shifts. This is one of the main reasons why the respected astronomer Tycho Brahe refused to adopt Copernicus fully.

Galileo could have safely proposed heliocentricity as a theory or a method to more simply account for the planets’ motions. His problem arose when he stopped proposing it as a scientific theory and began proclaiming it as truth, though there was no conclusive proof of it at the time. Even so, Galileo would not have been in so much trouble if he had chosen to stay within the realm of science and out of the realm of theology. But, despite his friends’ warnings, he insisted on moving the debate onto theological grounds.

In 1614, Galileo felt compelled to answer the charge that this “new science” was contrary to certain Scripture passages. His opponents pointed to Bible passages with statements like, “And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed …” (Josh. 10:13). This is not an isolated occurrence. Psalms 93 and 104 and Ecclesiastes 1:5 also speak of celestial motion and terrestrial stability. A literalistic reading of these passages would have to be abandoned if the heliocentric theory were adopted. Yet this should not have posed a problem. As Augustine put it, “One does not read in the Gospel that the Lord said: ‘I will send you the Paraclete who will teach you about the course of the sun and moon.’ For he willed to make them Christians, not mathematicians.” Following Augustine’s example, Galileo urged caution in not interpreting these biblical statements too literally.

Unfortunately, throughout Church history there have been those who insist on reading the Bible in a more literal sense than it was intended. They fail to appreciate, for example, instances in which Scripture uses what is called “phenomenological” language—that is, the language of appearances. Just as we today speak of the sun rising and setting to cause day and night, rather than the earth turning, so did the ancients. From an earthbound perspective, the sun does appear to rise and appear to set, and the earth appears to be immobile. When we describe these things according to their appearances, we are using phenomenological language.

The phenomenological language concerning the motion of the heavens and the non-motion of the earth is obvious to us today, but was less so in previous centuries. Scripture scholars of the past were willing to consider whether particular statements were to be taken literally or phenomenologically, but they did not like being told by a non-Scripture scholar, such as Galileo, that the words of the sacred page must be taken in a particular sense.

During this period, personal interpretation of Scripture was a sensitive subject. In the early 1600s, the Church had just been through the Reformation experience, and one of the chief quarrels with Protestants was over individual interpretation of the Bible.

Theologians were not prepared to entertain the heliocentric theory based on a layman’s interpretation. Yet Galileo insisted on moving the debate into a theological realm. There is little question that if Galileo had kept the discussion within the accepted boundaries of astronomy (i.e., predicting planetary motions) and had not claimed physical truth for the heliocentric theory, the issue would not have escalated to the point it did. After all, he had not proved the new theory beyond reasonable doubt.

Galileo “Confronts” Rome

Galileo came to Rome to see Pope Paul V (1605-1621). The pope, weary of controversy, turned the matter over to the Holy Office, which issued a condemnation of Galileo’s theory in 1616. Things returned to relative quiet for a time, until Galileo forced another showdown.

At Galileo’s request, Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, a Jesuit—one of the most important Catholic theologians of the day—issued a certificate that, although it forbade Galileo to hold or defend the heliocentric theory, did not prevent him from conjecturing it. When Galileo met with the new pope, Urban VIII, in 1623, he received permission from his longtime friend to write a work on heliocentrism, but the new pontiff cautioned him not to advocate the new position, only to present arguments for and against it. When Galileo wrote the Dialogue on the Two World Systems, he used an argument the pope had offered, and placed it in the mouth of his character Simplicio. Galileo, perhaps inadvertently, made fun of the pope, a result that could only have disastrous consequences. Urban felt mocked and could not believe how his friend could disgrace him publicly. Galileo had mocked the very person he needed as a benefactor. He also alienated his long-time supporters, the Jesuits, with attacks on one of their astronomers. The result was the infamous trial, which is still heralded as the final separation of science and religion.

Tortured for His Beliefs?

In the end, Galileo recanted his heliocentric teachings, but it was not—as is commonly supposed—under torture nor after a harsh imprison- ment. Galileo was, in fact, treated surprisingly well.

As historian Giorgio de Santillana, who is not overly fond of the Catholic Church, noted, “We must, if anything, admire the cautiousness and legal scruples of the Roman authorities.” Galileo was offered every convenience possible to make his imprisonment in his home bearable.

Galileo’s friend Nicolini, Tuscan ambassador to the Vatican, sent regular reports to the court regarding affairs in Rome. Many of his letters dealt with the ongoing controversy surrounding Galileo.

Nicolini revealed the circumstances surrounding Galileo’s “imprisonment” when he reported to the Tuscan king: “The pope told me that he had shown Galileo a favor never accorded to another” (letter dated Feb. 13, 1633); “ … he has a servant and every convenience” (letter, April 16); and “[i]n regard to the person of Galileo, he ought to be imprisoned for some time because he disobeyed the orders of 1616, but the pope says that after the publication of the sentence he will consider with me as to what can be done to afflict him as little as possible” (letter, June 18).

Had Galileo been tortured, Nicolini would have reported it to his king. While instruments of torture may have been present during Galileo’s recantation (this was the custom of the legal system in Europe at that time), they definitely were not used.

The records demonstrate that Galileo could not be tortured because of regulations laid down in The Directory for Inquisitors (Nicholas Eymeric, 1595). This was the official guide of the Holy Office, the Church office charged with dealing with such matters, and was followed to the letter.

As noted scientist and philosopher Alfred North Whitehead remarked, in an age that saw a large number of “witches” subjected to torture and execution by Protestants in New England, “the worst that happened to the men of science was that Galileo suffered an honorable detention and a mild reproof.” Even so, the Catholic Church today acknowledges that Galileo’s condemnation was wrong. The Vatican has even issued two stamps of Galileo as an expression of regret for his mistreatment.

Infallibility

Although three of the ten cardinals who judged Galileo refused to sign the verdict, his works were eventually condemned. Anti-Catholics often assert that his conviction and later rehabilitation somehow disproves the doctrine of papal infallibility, but this is not the case, for the pope never tried to make an infallible ruling concerning Galileo’s views.

The Church has never claimed ordinary tribunals, such as the one that judged Galileo, to be infallible. Church tribunals have disciplinary and juridical authority only; neither they nor their decisions are infallible.

No ecumenical council met concerning Galileo, and the pope was not at the center of the discussions, which were handled by the Holy Office. When the Holy Office finished its work, Urban VIII ratified its verdict, but did not attempt to engage infallibility.

Three conditions must be met for a pope to exercise the charism of infallibility: (1) he must speak in his official capacity as the successor of Peter; (2) he must speak on a matter of faith or morals; and (3) he must solemnly define the doctrine as one that must be held by all the faithful.

In Galileo’s case, the second and third conditions were not present, and possibly not even the first. Catholic theology has never claimed that a mere papal ratification of a tribunal decree is an exercise of infallibility. It is a straw man argument to represent the Catholic Church as having infallibly defined a scientific theory that turned out to be false. The strongest claim that can be made is that the Church of Galileo’s day issued a non-infallible disciplinary ruling concerning a scientist who was advocating a new and still-unproved theory and demanding that the Church change its understanding of Scripture to fit his.

It is a good thing that the Church did not rush to embrace Galileo’s views, because it turned out that his ideas were not entirely correct, either. Galileo believed that the sun was not just the fixed center of the solar system but the fixed center of the universe. We now know that the sun is not the center of the universe and that it does move—it simply orbits the center of the galaxy rather than the earth.

As more recent science has shown, both Galileo and his opponents were partly right and partly wrong. Galileo was right in asserting the mobility of the earth and wrong in asserting the immobility of the sun. His opponents were right in asserting the mobility of the sun and wrong in asserting the immobility of the earth.

Had the Catholic Church rushed to endorse Galileo’s views—and there were many in the Church who were quite favorable to them—the Church would have embraced what modern science has disproved.

Stardust and Galaxies

Tagging Sam girls… @jodyri @charliesbackbitches @hiddenwritingsintheworld @teamfreewill-imagine @mrswhozeewhatsis @salvachester @sampositive @sam-winchester-admiration-league @jaredsnuggles @jaredxpadaleckey

They say if you stare at the sun too long you’ll go blind. They say that Haley’s comment passes overhead every 700 years. They also say that the eyes are the window to one’s soul.

You found yourself staring into the galaxies of his milky way eyes for far too long. The Aurora Borealis dare not compare itself to Sam’s eyes.

The colors in the celestial orbs changed with his mood like a kaleidoscopic mirror.

Brooding blues, greedy greens, hell fire hazels, amber waves of grain, sunflowers of the late summer nights.

A rainbow would be jealous of these eyes. Yet, when he cries, one appears in a mesmerizing arc as you wipe away the salty liquid.

Astounding azure, bitter brown, gregarious green, terrified tanzanite, mere agate stands alone when he stared into your common, generic, y/e/c. His eyes were the treasure at the end of a rainbow, the ocean at sunset, the night sky as dawn broke.

They say the eyes are the windows to one’s soul then Sam’s soul was concocted of stardust, galaxies, the rings of Saturn, and ever changing leaves of the autumn.

anonymous asked:

the boys reacting to you kissing them out of nowhere.

Ian: you lean back looking into his eyes only to see him showing all his teeth and breathing heavily. “edubs did noat geev consent” he says as he crawls into your broom closet

Joji: Joji immediately condenses into his celestial orb form. His powers are too strong right now - if he were to reciprocate any emotion, you would likely be vaporized and launched into another dimension due to the sheer, pure form his angelic emotions were in. He often shows only a sliver of his true form, and even then he comes off as overly emotional. He exists on a different plane and therefore his true range and potency of emotions is incomprehensible. Despite this, he harvests the love birthed from your kiss and distributes it to every human on the planet. All they needed was a little compassion. Every act of hate is not reversed, but another one does not occur. Instead, they look back on their old ways and learn instead of sulk. They forgive themselves. No animal roams the street hungry. No family cannot afford to cloth their child. Every school has the budget they need. The earth is at peace. Joji closes his eyes. A white mist forms around him and he condenses back into his human form, the form you have come to know and love. He gives you a squinty smile and kisses your forehead, “everything is okay.” He whispers. A single tear rolls down his face. The clouds part to reveal a rainbow and yet it is still lightly raining on the two of you.

Max: OI THE FOOK MATE ARE YEH FOOKIN GAY??? CRIKEY DINGO LOOKIN ARSEHOLE IN A WALLABY’S NEST OF SHITE WHAT THE FOOK ARE YEH DOIN YEH UGLY ARSE GAY ARSE BLOKE??? CRIKEY MATE OI THIS VIDEO IS FOOKED AAAAAAAA

Pluto

Originally posted by moon-leviosa

Our souls are conceivable in the chaos of Pluto. Admist in the shadowy drifts lies a power too profound for words. Liz Greene likens understanding Pluto to being akin to shaking hands with an octopus. Pluto has copped a lot of assault since its discovery in 1930. It’s been on the receiving end of astrology propaganda that paints Pluto as a Dementor who sucks out your soul and leaves your life in pieces. And the astronomers can’t seem to decide what it is - a planet, a planetoid, an icy dwarf? The whole world seems confused about Pluto. The Greek Lord of the Underworld was originally Hades, and thus the designation of Pluto therefore infers ‘riches’. This gives an insight to the sort of themes expressed by a planet so hidden and so mysterious. The music of Pluto leaks from the soul, it can be a real orchestra if the power is wielded appropriately. It traces back into centuries.

While the moon’s waxing and waning symbolises the swelling of the belly in childbirth, Pluto associates with the pain of labor. Pluto is the energy in which we must submit to inexplicable agony so we can be shown a new light and life. This refers to the self transforming, and being split open psychologically, or one becoming two when the body of a woman splits open in the birth of a child. On a soul level, Pluto is the ruler of Pisces. It emanates through the Pisces Mother harnessing the soul down from higher dimensions, and birthing new life into the world as the newborn Aries. 

Pluto can almost only be experienced during conscious ‘black out’ and unconscious thoughtlessness. Not air headiness, or vapidness. But in a place of eternal silence, sliding between the spaces of thoughts, a place of solidarity where Pluto’s headphones provide a direct channel to the soul. It exists in a place that can only be clearly perceived in those with polished minds, free from corruption and self deception, free from identifying with erratic emotions and primitive sexual urges. And when Pluto is forced through rage or lacking self awareness, spiritual neglect or fear, he leaks through like rotten toxins. Shreds of decaying matter scream to be cut from the individual and freed so he can be reborn into transcendence. The message of Pluto is letting go of the old (death) so the fresh breathe of new life (rebirth) can shower the soul in gold (transformation). Pluto is the horrific pain of losing layers of yourself. But the depths of agony do not compare to the reverent and majestic offerings of Pluto. He holds all light of the Sun out there on his own, coupled with the emotion of Venus, the wisdom of Saturn, the knowledge of Mercury, the energetic surges of Mars, the mental expansion of Jupiter, the God dust of Neptune and the intuition of Uranus. Pluto is like a 3rd eye of the soul, a peeking vision into the manuscript of God’s purpose for the individual and the loss of the lower self as it merges once again with the infinite. He carries a celestial orb of power for those brave enough to own their own stories, admit their vulnerabilities, swallow their demons and acknowledging their shadow instead of fiercely rejecting.

And those who feel victimised from Pluto are those who hold onto their pains and identify themselves with their own turmoil. Because it feels safe, or it feels comfortable to be wrapped around a pillow in fetal position, or they feel they will disappear completely without the sentiment of agony to feel themselves or describe themselves as or know themselves by. As shrouded in the black as Pluto is, he’s waiting with the formula that turns pain into power. This is a space of lonesomeness. The accolades and recognition of people disappear under the deafening calling of your destiny. Pluto defines our greatness by the way we rise from the ashes.
-C.

2

Around dawn on April 14, 1561, residents of Nuremberg saw what they described as an aerial battle, followed by the appearance of a large black triangular object and then a large crash outside of the city. According to witnesses, there were hundreds of spheres, cylinders and other odd-shaped objects that moved erratically overhead.

A broadsheet news article was printed later that month, describing the event. The broadsheet, illustrated with a woodcut engraving and text by Hans Glaser, measures 26.2 centimetres (10.3 in) by 38.0 centimetres (15.0 in). The document is archived in the prints and drawings collection at the Zentralbibliothek Zürich in Zurich, Switzerland.

The broadsheet describes objects of various shapes including crosses, globes, two lunar crescents, a black spear and tubular objects from which several smaller, round objects emerged and darted around the sky at dawn.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1561_celestial_phenomenon_over_Nuremberg

Space gothic

The Cosmic Microwave Background singing to you while you are trying sleep. No, more like loudly buzzing to you. Billions of tiny buzzing photons constantly reminding you that everything is still exists. 

Neutrinos everywhere. Oh god where did they come from. Too many goddamn neutrinos to count. They’re in the sink, they’re in the carpet, they’re in the fridge, they’re even in you. Oh god. They’re even in you. 

A tightrope walker balances gracefully 50 feet above the ground. A slight breeze is blowing. The Milky Way galaxy is hurtling through space at 828,000 kilometers per hour. The tightrope walker continues to balance. 

The atoms (except for hydrogen and some helium) in everything you see around you were created in stars. Your empty stomach is made of star stuff. Your novelty sunglasses from when you went to the beach when you were 11 are made of star stuff. Your ex-boyfriend’s t-shirt in the back of your closet is made of star stuff. 100% organic, free range, cruelty free star stuff. 

You have always dreamed of going to space. You are on Earth. Earth is in space. Therefore you are in space. You have always been in space. You dream of going to Earth someday. 

You wake up. Something about today seems off. The Universe is expanding. Dark Energy is ripping apart galaxy clusters. Your cereal is disintegrating into soggy mush of milk and baryonic matter. You can’t remember fixing the cereal. The Universe is bigger now than it was when you woke up. 

You spend every night screaming into the interstellar void. One night, you think you can hear it screaming back at you. You have literally no idea of what it is saying. Trust me, you don’t want to know. 

The Sun. That glorious celestial orb of divine fire. That unfathomably massive, incredibly ancient nuclear reactor. Brightest in all the heavens, bringer of life to Earth. We bask in its glory and sing praise as we get sunburnt.