View Full Version : The Sun has an owner
applecorped
28th November 2010, 06:18 AM
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpps/news/offbeat/spanish-woman-claims-she-now-owns-sun-dpgonc-20101126-gc_10808147
"After billions of years the Sun finally has an owner -- a woman from Spain's soggy region of Galicia said Friday she had registered the star at a local notary public as being her property. Angeles Duran, 49, told the online edition of daily El Mundo she took the step in September after reading about an American man who had registered himself as the owner of the moon and most planets in our solar system.
There is an international agreement which states that no country may claim ownership of a planet or star, but it says nothing about individuals, she added.
"There was no snag, I backed my claim legally, I am not stupid, I know the law. I did it but anyone else could have done it, it simply occurred to me first."
She plans to charge a fee for anyone using the sun.
Sledge
28th November 2010, 06:21 AM
I look forward to the war between her and China when she tries to collect her fee.
Region Rat
28th November 2010, 06:22 AM
I plan to sue her for global warming.
Lisa Simpson
28th November 2010, 06:40 AM
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa25/idiotdogbrain/Forum/NotRatnerExcellent.jpg
dasmiller
28th November 2010, 06:44 AM
So . . . if anyone gets skin cancer, she may be legally responsible?
Furcifer
28th November 2010, 06:49 AM
Wait until Spain sends her the first property assessment.
dtugg
28th November 2010, 06:54 AM
Lol. She is going to charge everybody who uses the sun? That would be everybody on the planet. What does she plan on charging? How much is use of the sun worth? Let's give a very conservative estimate of a one time fee of $100. If she can successfully make everybody on the planet she pay up, she will become by far the richest person in the world with a fortune fn almost $700 billion. Seems like a foolproof plan. I wish I thought of it first.
Ron_Tomkins
28th November 2010, 07:00 AM
Does this mean the Beatles have to pay her royalties?
U6tV11acSRk
Lisa Simpson
28th November 2010, 07:02 AM
Lol. She is going to charge everybody who uses the sun? That would be everybody on the planet. What does she plan on charging? How much is use of the sun worth? Let's give a very conservative estimate of a one time fee of $100. If she can successfully make everybody on the planet she pay up, she will become by far the richest person in the world with a fortune fn almost $700 billion. Seems like a foolproof plan. I wish I thought of it first.
She's rich until the lawsuits start coming in, as dasmiller suggested.
Furcifer
28th November 2010, 07:19 AM
It's an interesting "what if". What if her claim to ownership was taken seriously?
My guess is that it would be contested by just about everyone and their brother. She'd be broke paying for lawyers before it even went to court.
I guess there's about a million ways this could proceed. What do you think?
Denver
28th November 2010, 07:53 AM
I think can be valid in a couple ways.
First, anyone or any country declaring ownership of any land isn't really that relevant until they have to defend it from invasion. That's when ownership is really tested.
And second, perhaps she can just claim squatters rights to the sun. If she can squat on the sun, she probably deserves to own a piece of it.
TragicMonkey
28th November 2010, 08:28 AM
I insist this woman remove her sun from my galaxy, or I'll have it towed away at her expense.
geni
28th November 2010, 08:30 AM
Operating an unshieled nuclear reactor has to be illegal in some way or another.
bokonon
28th November 2010, 08:31 AM
I'm not paying. Let her cut me off. I'm tired of paying the same as everyone else for second-class service. Those Norwegians get midnight sun. I've lived in Los Angeles for 30 years, and we've never had midnight sun. Not once.
And three times a year, instead of sun, we get rain. Screw that.
Region Rat
28th November 2010, 08:33 AM
Hey, maybe the terrorists will start attacking her for making Saudi Arabia too sunny. She's the reason they have to live in a desert.
Didaktylos
28th November 2010, 09:29 AM
What's she on about? - Murdoch has owned The Sun for decades.
I Ratant
28th November 2010, 09:42 AM
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa25/idiotdogbrain/Forum/NotRatnerExcellent.jpg
.
Yes!
The sun far exceeds any Angelo in toxic emissions!
Rein them in, Senora!
steve s
28th November 2010, 09:51 AM
She's rich until the lawsuits start coming in, as dasmiller suggested.
The telecommunication companies are going to nail her the next time a solar flare disrupts their service.
Steve S
Doubt
28th November 2010, 11:25 AM
I await her attempt to cut off access.
wasapi
28th November 2010, 11:46 AM
So let her start billing us. Can you imagine what it would cost her in stamps?
Julia
dio
28th November 2010, 06:11 PM
Hm. This could turn ugly. Do they have property taxes in Spain? That thing looks expensive.
Furcifer
28th November 2010, 07:17 PM
Hm. This could turn ugly. Do they have property taxes in Spain? That thing looks expensive.
That's what I'm saying. Some guy down at the Spanish IRS needs to assess her and invoice her for the title transfer. Just for fun.
Roll Number1
Property Location and description Center of Galaxy
Municipality Sol
Property Classification Commercial/ Power Generating
Your property value on January 1st, 2011 $100 000 000 000 000 000
For Tax Year 2011 your phased assessment $100 000 000 000 000 000
Property Information Nuclear Self Sustaining Reactor/ Type 1-Fusion
Frontage - 100 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 ft
Depth - 100 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 ft
Building sq. ft- N/A
Year of Construction 7 900 000 000 000 BC
Please remit payment at your earliest convenience.
kuroyume0161
28th November 2010, 07:18 PM
With a surface area of 6.0877×10^12 km^2 and a volume of 1.412×10^18 km^3 (over 1 million times that of the planet Earth) property taxes should be readily payable - in several thousand freight tanker loads of pure gold ingots per day. She may have thought of it first but she didn't really think of the consequences. Can we have class action suits against bad weather, mass ejections, solar eclipses, and anything else related to the sun (which is quite a lot in the solar system)?
Upchurch
28th November 2010, 07:26 PM
Property Location and description Center of Galaxy
um.....
kookbreaker
28th November 2010, 07:42 PM
I say we tax her based on estimated income from her new 'asset', not on her actual collections.
sinclairmcevoy
28th November 2010, 07:54 PM
um.....Heh heh heh
quixotecoyote
28th November 2010, 08:32 PM
um.....
Well, the Earth is the center of the solar system, so it's only fair the sun gets to be the center of something. :)
Slimething
28th November 2010, 09:03 PM
Act now and get free home delivery!!!
Nosi
28th November 2010, 11:48 PM
I think can be valid in a couple ways.
First, anyone or any country declaring ownership of any land isn't really that relevant until they have to defend it from invasion. That's when ownership is really tested.
And second, perhaps she can just claim squatters rights to the sun. If she can squat on the sun, she probably deserves to own a piece of it.
Talk about getting a hotseat! :eye-poppi
Darat
29th November 2010, 12:06 AM
I think someone should explain what the sun is for the Scottish Members reading this thread.
Aepervius
29th November 2010, 12:20 AM
There is an international agreement which states that no country may claim ownership of a planet or star, but it says nothing about individuals,
International space treaty. But as far as I can tell :
1) I might actually be misinterpreting the language, but I am pretty sure a citizen of a country would fall under the treaty too, as part of the country. I.e.ö, to ahve the possession recognized you would have to have it recognized by the country, which would mean the country would have to have the ability to assign the property to you, which from the treaty it clearly isn't able to.
2) you would need to enforce your claim, by at least showing presence on the surface. Difficult for moon/planet scam, but not int he domain of the utterly impossible, but the sun ? ha !
PhantomWolf
29th November 2010, 01:57 AM
2) you would need to enforce your claim, by at least showing presence on the surface. Difficult for moon/planet scam, but not int he domain of the utterly impossible, but the sun ? ha !
I eagerly await her planting a flag in the surface to claim ownership, just so I can get in on the Class action against her for sun damage to properties, the cost of sun screen, and compensation due to pain and suffering caused by sun-burn.
JWideman
29th November 2010, 02:02 AM
Yeah, good luck with that.
bluesjnr
29th November 2010, 03:25 AM
I wonder how much fire insurance will be for her property?
Skeptic
29th November 2010, 04:37 AM
The sun is NOT on fire -- it's too hot for that (literally).
Skeptic
29th November 2010, 04:38 AM
I insist this woman remove her sun from my galaxy, or I'll have it towed away at her expense.
Oh yeah? And who gave you the right to put your galaxy in my universe?
Lukraak_Sisser
29th November 2010, 04:41 AM
I think someone should explain what the sun is for the Scottish Members reading this thread.
Its the shiny hot thing in the sky seen when vacationing in spain or greece.
Its also the cause for the one purple side they have after passing out drunk on the beach during the night ;)
Lukraak_Sisser
29th November 2010, 04:42 AM
Oh yeah? And who gave you the right to put your galaxy in my universe?
I did.
Speaking of which, I'm still waiting for the fee for that little transaction
Skeptic
29th November 2010, 04:42 AM
Now that she owns it, where will she keep it?
Damien Evans
29th November 2010, 04:54 AM
Operating an unshieled nuclear reactor has to be illegal in some way or another.
:dl:
bluesjnr
29th November 2010, 05:22 AM
The sun is NOT on fire -- it's too hot for that (literally).
I never said it was! I pondered the cost of fire insurance on her property.
(Boy am I glad I never asked about escape of water from a fixed domestic installation)
maxpower1227
29th November 2010, 06:47 AM
um.....
I was more concerned with this:
Year of Construction 7 900 000 000 000 BC
:eye-poppi
Beerina
29th November 2010, 07:24 AM
It's an interesting "what if". What if her claim to ownership was taken seriously?
My guess is that it would be contested by just about everyone and their brother. She'd be broke paying for lawyers before it even went to court.
I guess there's about a million ways this could proceed. What do you think?
Nah, it's like claiming you own all the air on Earth. It's a stupid claim.
soylent
29th November 2010, 08:17 AM
Operating an unshieled nuclear reactor has to be illegal in some way or another.
Not if you're the military. E.g. see project pluto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto); it was to be a cruise missile driven by a nuclear powered ramjet, that could fly mach 3 at low altitude, stay aloft for a couple of weeks and carry multiple nuclear warheads. Not only was it unshielded, outside air was blasted across its very hot fuel elements at great speed, slowly erroding them and spewing out fission products and beryllium oxide out the back.
It was a hedge against the possibility that an effective counter-measure to ICBMs could quickly be developed. It was cancelled, but not before building and testing the ramjet/reactor combo in a static fire. It's ~500 000 ceramic fuel elements, composed of oxides of uranium and beryllium, were made by the coors company, the same company that is now more famous for its beer-making division.
Furcifer
29th November 2010, 08:20 AM
Nah, it's like claiming you own all the air on Earth. It's a stupid claim.
That's just not as fun. I say give her the title.
Furcifer
29th November 2010, 08:22 AM
I was more concerned with this:
:eye-poppi
It's the government, the only thing they get right or care about is how much you owe.
soylent
29th November 2010, 08:28 AM
If you actually go there, you will effectively own the area you are actively using because there will be no one capable of effectively contesting your use of the resource for quite some time.
If mining an asteroid or putting in place bits of a dyson sphere around the sun were to become sufficiently popular, then formal property titles would become a meaningful concept. I think such titles would still be based on some sort of homesteading; of going there and meaningfully using the resource as a prerequisite to ownership.
Moon-Spinner
29th November 2010, 09:14 AM
I think can be valid in a couple ways.
First, anyone or any country declaring ownership of any land isn't really that relevant until they have to defend it from invasion. That's when ownership is really tested.
And second, perhaps she can just claim squatters rights to the sun. If she can squat on the sun, she probably deserves to own a piece of it.
If she's going to squat on the sun, she'll need to build a domicile. I imagine she's going to want some type of central air conditioning at the very least!!!!
Emet
29th November 2010, 11:38 AM
Meet Angeles Duran (http://www.ology.com/technology/woman-claims-ownership-sun).
Nosi
1st December 2010, 09:43 AM
Oh yeah? And who gave you the right to put your galaxy in my universe?
And you violated my copyright on the multiverse buster! :p
Vorticity
1st December 2010, 09:46 AM
If mining an asteroid or putting in place bits of a dyson sphere around the sun were to become sufficiently popular, then formal property titles would become a meaningful concept.
Interestingly, for Dyson sphere bits around the Sun, "amount of property" would have to be defined not in terms of area, but in terms of solid angle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid_angle).
Skeptic
1st December 2010, 12:45 PM
And you violated my copyright on the multiverse buster! :p
This thread gives a whole new meaning to the term, "supersize me".
cornsail
1st December 2010, 01:24 PM
Center of Galaxy
Two semesters of astronomy not enough? ;)
Furcifer
1st December 2010, 07:22 PM
Two semesters of astronomy not enough? ;)
Finally some cross-over. ;)
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.