,

Kingdoms of Glory and Astronomical Apparent Magnitude

Stephen C

•

How much more glorious is the Celestial Kingdom than the Terrestrial? D&C 76 likens the difference between the Celestial, Terrestrial, and Telestial Kingdoms to the difference between the sun, moon, and stars respectively. We can intuit this by sight, of course, but how much of a difference is this numerically? 

Thankfully, astronomy has a rigorous concept that measures how bright celestial objects are to each other: apparent magnitude (all quotes and numbers are from the Wikipedia article).

“The scale is reverse logarithmic: the brighter an object is, the lower its magnitude number. A difference of 1.0 in magnitude corresponds to the brightness ratio of, or about 2.512. For example, a magnitude 2.0 star is 2.512 times as bright as a magnitude 3.0 star, 6.31 times as bright as a magnitude 4.0 star, and precisely 100 times as bright as a magnitude 7.0 star.”

On this scale, a sun during day from the earth is –26.83. The full moon is -12.60, or about 400,000x less bright than the sun. 

Stars, of course, vary from star to star, as it discusses in D&C 76, implying that different telestial inhabitants vary in glory like stars vary from each other. 

Sirius, the brightest star (and the only one we can see from our porch just outside of DC) is -1.4. So assuming that is the most glorious telestial denizen, that equals (check my math, but I think I’m right): 

(-1.4)-(-12.6)=11.2

10^(.4*11.2)=30,199.52

So by these metrics the Celestial Kingdom if 400,000x more glorious than the terrestrial. While the terrestrial is ~30,000x more glorious than the most glorious telestial inhabitant. So that means that the celestial kingdom is about 12 billion times as glorious as the telestial (depending on rounding). And when we consider that the baseline reference point of the telestial kingdom is described as so glorious that is “surpasses all understanding” the grandeur of the restored gospel’s cosmology becomes apparent. It’s like if a ten year old said “imagine something more [glorious] then anything you can imagine….now times it by 12 billion!”

 Of course, in discussing these numbers I’m not making any claim to precision. It’s likely the sun, moon, and star comparison is largely a beautiful, general point of comparison for the differences. Still, it’s fun to think through the magnitude of these differences and what they entail if we really buckle down on the astronomical metaphor.

Comments

9 responses to “Kingdoms of Glory and Astronomical Apparent Magnitude”

  1. Lily

    Threadjack: In the temple were are told that the Telestial Kingdom is the “kingdom within which we now live.” So I’m not sure how its glory can surpass all understanding. Can anyone explain how its both the world we are in and a final destination at the same time?

  2. Stephen C.

    That’s a good question I don’t know the answer to.

  3. Jack

    Lily,

    I’m guessing that the “lone and dreary” world is a fallen version of the telestial world. The Telestial Kingdom is not fallen–but, rather, a glorified version of the telestial world.

  4. Jack

    I think the difference in luminosity between the sun, moon, and stars bespeaks a stratified cosmos–much like Abraham saw when the Lord showed him the stars. The greater glory seems to align with a greater reckoning of time–and perhaps space. And of course, the implication is that those who inherit a greater glory will be made fit for a greater reckoning. Even so, I’m of the opinion that exalted beings have no trouble navigating the divisions of the sacred cosmos–from the lowest to the highest “all are there’s” as it is said.

  5. Jack

    *Theirs*

    Garsh.

  6. Vic Rattlehead

    I have actually heard this stellar magnitude analogy used before, so it is cool to hear it again. In response to Lily’s question, perhaps we can divide terrestrial and telestial planets in to class T-temporal and E-Eternal. We are living on a class Telestial-T world, and presumably other habitable planets we can observe with life may also be in this class. After the judgement, the Telestial worlds there are far surpassing these ones and are now Telestial-E. Similarly, when this planet is Terrestrialized in the Millenium, it may become a Terrestrial-T, wheras those in the Terrestrial kingdom will have planets far surpassing the Millenium as Terrestrial-E. Another question I have is degrees within the kingdoms, for example, the brightest star in the sky, Sirius, with a stellar apparent mag of -1.46, is over 4000 times brighter than the dimmest star visible to the naked eye in ideal dark sky conditions. So already we could have tremendous variation within the Telestial. Another question is how much greater the floor of the Telestial kingdom is than the ideal conditions here. Is it 1.3 times better? 12? 60?

  7. Last Lemming

    Remember when Alma tells the story of his three days of suffering while unconscious after which he remembered his sins no more? Well, he obviously remembered them or he couldn’t have told the story. But the suffering was entirely over and he was not haunted by it. I read “surpasses all understanding” in a similar manner. I interpret it as being better than anything we have ever experienced or that has historically been experienced. But it is technically understandable–mostly we just don’t understand how to achieve it.

    In my opinion, every description of the celestial kingdom that has ever been given (streets paved with gold and such) is actually telestial. The nature of the terrestrial and celestial kingdoms, however, are truly beyond our understanding.

  8. Kent Larsen

    Why would you think that the metaphorical language of D&C 76 could be reduced to mere mathematics? While I get that the language there is making a comparison of luminosity and glory, I don’t think they are the same thing at all. Instead, luminosity is a symbol for glory.

    As happens way too often, this logic is substituting the “finger pointing at the moon” for the moon itself.

  9. Jack

    Kent Larsen,

    I agree with you–that luminosity is a symbol for glory. But in the OP’s defense I think the math becomes typological if we “read” it is a language. In other words, looking at the differences in magnitude as measured by math can also serve as a rough analog to heavenly things–much like the sun, moon, and stars do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.