PDA

View Full Version : Facts about the Universe


Amnorix
03-21-2008, 09:43 AM
I'm currently reading a primer about the Universe. It's chock full of interesting nuggets and, of course, I've decided to share. I intend to update this thread from time to time as I go through the book.

1. The sun has about 99.8% of all of the mass of our solar system.

2. A day is longer than a year on Venus. It takes Venus 225 Earth days to revolve around the sun, but 243 Earth days to rotate once on its axis. (this is the only planet that takes longer to rotate than revolve).

3. Neptune was discovered in 1846. Since it's discovery, it still hasn't even revolved around the sun once, since one Neptune year is equal to about 165 Earth years.

Stewie
03-21-2008, 10:26 AM
What book is this? I love reading about this kind of stuff.

DenverChief
03-21-2008, 10:26 AM
more more MORE!!

Hog Farmer
03-21-2008, 11:03 AM
Neptune=Carls plan to get us to the Superbowl

BigChiefFan
03-21-2008, 11:05 AM
The universe is all made of the same properties.

BigChiefFan
03-21-2008, 11:06 AM
http://www.didyouknow.cd/fastfacts/earth.htm

tiptap
03-21-2008, 11:22 AM
Venus' has a retrograde rotation of its day. In other words the sun rises in the west and sets in the east. Most of the atmosphere is CO 2. Large amounts of Sulfuric Acid exists high, high in the atmoshphere. That H2SO4 acts as a true mirror as opposed to the Greenhouse Effect which absorbs and re emits electromagnetic waves. As such there is a net cooling effect from that Sulfuric Acid. That doesn't change that it is extremely hot and would be like the bottom of the ocean in terms of air pressure at the surface of Venus.

Bowser
03-21-2008, 11:23 AM
Venus' has a retrograde rotation of its day. In other words the sun rises in the west and sets in the east. Most of the atmosphere is CO 2. Large amounts of Sulfuric Acid exists high, high in the atmoshphere. That H2SO4 acts as a true mirror as opposed to the Greenhouse Effect which absorbs and re emits electromagnetic waves. As such there is a net cooling effect from that Sulfuric Acid. That doesn't change that it is extremely hot and would be like the bottom of the ocean in terms of air pressure at the surface of Venus.

Sounds like someone forgot to flush.

tiptap
03-21-2008, 11:27 AM
I am really excited that the recent European probe for Venus got a chance to take readings of Earth looking back at us. The results are promising that we will be able to detect lots of the constituents of the highly unusual reduced state (highly reactive molecular Oxygen and Nitrogen) atmosphere unlike the oxidized state found on Venus or Mars. These findings for other extra solar planets would be suggestive of life.

Bowser
03-21-2008, 11:28 AM
Anybody watch the series "The Universe"? It has had some interesting tidbits, especially concerning possible life on other planets.

beach tribe
03-21-2008, 11:31 AM
Anybody watch the series "The Universe"? It has had some interesting tidbits, especially concerning possible life on other planets.

HD every time it's on. Love it.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 11:39 AM
Venus' has a retrograde rotation of its day. In other words the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.

Right. Speculation abounds as to why this is. The best theory (and nobody is too excited about it) is that Venus may have had a large impact long ago which got it spinning the other way.

:spock: Seems like a weak one to me.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 11:42 AM
Uranus is the only planet that spins on a horizontal axis (like a giant ferris wheel). The other planets have a vertical axis (although with some tilt, and often with some wobble).

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 11:43 AM
One of Jupiter's moons, Ganymede, is larger than Mercury. There are several moons that are larger than Pluto, but since Pluto no longer counts as a planet....

Hog Farmer
03-21-2008, 11:44 AM
Uranus is the only planet that spins on a horizontal axis (like a giant ferris wheel). The other planets have a vertical axis (although with some tilt, and often with some wobble).







ROFL

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 11:47 AM
Jupiter:

1. The great red spot is a whirling mass of gas resembling a hurricane, with winds of about 225 mph at its edges. This is no ordinary storm, however -- at it's widest, the diameter of the great red spot is three times the diameter of the entire planet Earth.

2. Though far more massive than Earth, it spins relatively quickly, completing a rotation every 9-1/2 Earth hours.

3. Jupiter gives off nearly double the energy that it receives from the sun. This is because it's terrific gravity is causing it to shrink under its own pressure

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 11:49 AM
What book is this? I love reading about this kind of stuff.


http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Know-Much-About-Universe/dp/0060932562

I like Davis' "Don't know much" series -- he has a bunch. They're good overviews or introductory readings, and contain lots of weird factoids. This particular one was poorly edited, and the typos are irritating me. Still...

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 11:51 AM
Last one for now -- the highest winds ever recorded in the United States was 231 mph (Mount Washington, NH). Top wind speed of the most violent hurricanes are about 155 miles per hour.

In 1989, Voyager 2 saw a great dark spot on Neptune, which seemed similar to the red spot on Jupiter -- a massive storm. Estimated wind speed was 1,500 miles per hour.

In 1994, the Hubble Telescope confirmed that the dark spot had vanished.

Chief Chief
03-21-2008, 12:16 PM
Uranus is the only planet that spins on a horizontal axis (like a giant ferris wheel). The other planets have a vertical axis (although with some tilt, and often with some wobble).

Please: No more information about Uranus!

morphius
03-21-2008, 12:16 PM
I'm currently reading a primer about the Universe. It's chock full of interesting nuggets and, of course, I've decided to share. I intend to update this thread from time to time as I go through the book.

1. The sun has about 99.8% of all of the mass of our solar system.



All the planets in our solar system could be placed inside the planet Jupiter.

chagrin
03-21-2008, 12:52 PM
Neptune=Carls plan to get us to the Superbowl

This is my favorite fun fact so far, lol!

Uncle_Ted
03-21-2008, 01:02 PM
What does it say about the age of the Earth? Is it 6,000 or 10,000 years old? Can never get a straight answer out of some people ...

:evil:

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 01:12 PM
What does it say about the age of the Earth? Is it 6,000 or 10,000 years old? Can never get a straight answer out of some people ...

:evil:


:D

It gives 4.6 billion years as being the approximate age of the bodies in the solar system. It does list the age according to a number of religions as well, however, merely as reference.

mlyonsd
03-21-2008, 01:24 PM
http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Know-Much-About-Universe/dp/0060932562

I like Davis' "Don't know much" series -- he has a bunch. They're good overviews or introductory readings, and contain lots of weird factoids. This particular one was poorly edited, and the typos are irritating me. Still...

Awesome. My 12 year old is a science nut so I'm going to buy this book for his upcoming birthday.

acesn8s
03-21-2008, 01:54 PM
[quote=Amnorix;4642482]

2. A day is longer than a year on Venus. It takes Venus 225 Earth days to revolve around the sun, but 243 Earth days to rotate once on its axis. (this is the only planet that takes longer to rotate than revolve).

quote]
Explains the "women are from Venus" thing since it takes them all day to go out for the night.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:03 PM
Awesome. My 12 year old is a science nut so I'm going to buy this book for his upcoming birthday.


Yep, should be very good for someone in that age group.

I also read Hawkings Brief History of Time. errr...wait a few years on that one. It's a brain cramper. :D

Donger
03-21-2008, 02:05 PM
They just found (maybe) salt on Mars, too.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:06 PM
Aristotle's thoughts regarding the universe held sway for over 1,500 years. Among other things, he thought the universe was fixed and unchanging, and therefore thought things such as comets and meteors were in the upper atomosphere of the earth -- exhalations of the earth via volcanic eruptions.

Not understanding gravity, he also thought that the universe was held in a fifth element (to earth, air, fire and water). The only storng, transparent substance known at that point was crystal, so he believed the entire universe was encased in crystal...

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:08 PM
They just found (maybe) salt on Mars, too.


That reminds me. The concept of "canals" on Mars is an error in translation. An Italian astronomer observed "canali", which was translated as canals, but actually means "channels".

And ultimately, he was proven to have seen an optical illusion.

That doesn't change the possibilities regarding water on Mars, etc., however, but the whole "Martian canals" is just plain wrong.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:08 PM
A comet's tail always point away from the sun, as the particles are pushed away from the sun by the solar wind. Some comet tails are over a million miles long.

Donger
03-21-2008, 02:15 PM
Only 55% of all Americans know that the sun is a star.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:20 PM
Only 55% of all Americans know that the sun is a star.


:spock::doh!::doh!::shake:

Donger
03-21-2008, 02:23 PM
:spock::doh!::doh!::shake:

Oh, and they all vote Democrat.

Baby Lee
03-21-2008, 02:26 PM
3. Jupiter gives off nearly double the energy that it receives from the sun. This is because it's terrific gravity is causing it to shrink under its own pressure
And gravity, for all it's high profile, is a very weak force, one of the weakest in physics.

Baby Lee
03-21-2008, 02:28 PM
Aristotle's thoughts regarding the universe held sway for over 1,500 years. Among other things, he thought the universe was fixed and unchanging, and therefore thought things such as comets and meteors were in the upper atomosphere of the earth -- exhalations of the earth via volcanic eruptions.

Not understanding gravity, he also thought that the universe was held in a fifth element (to earth, air, fire and water). The only storng, transparent substance known at that point was crystal, so he believed the entire universe was encased in crystal...

I thought he proposed 'the ether,' never heard the part about it being a crystal.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:35 PM
Oh, and they all vote Democrat.

Cool, I'll take a majority. How are they dispersed among the key electoral college states however...?


:D

Rain Man
03-21-2008, 02:37 PM
Only 55% of all Americans know that the sun is a star.

And 40% know that the moon is a star.

morphius
03-21-2008, 02:38 PM
And 40% know that the moon is a star.
And too many believe that the Moon is the Sun at night. Don't ask them what an eclipse is.

Donger
03-21-2008, 02:38 PM
Cool, I'll take a majority. How are they dispersed among the key electoral college states however...?


:D

Oh, and they all think that the northeast is the center of the universe.

Donger
03-21-2008, 02:39 PM
And 40% know that the moon is a star.

I remember reading long ago that something like 50% of people believe that the light from Moon is actually generated there.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:41 PM
I thought he proposed 'the ether,' never heard the part about it being a crystal.


I've found support both ways, and more support for the "aither" than crystal, but here's a confusing reference (below). I'm left uncertain.


For example in astronomy, Aristotle proposed a finite, spherical universe, with the earth at its center. This central region was comprised of four elements: earth, air, fire, and water which were all strictly part of the imperfect earthly sphere. Earthly motion is always linear and always comes to a halt, in other words, temporal.
Notice how this fit nicely with the religious view that the earthly things are somehow second-rate. By contrast, the heavens move naturally and endlessly in a complex circular (read: perfect) motion. The heavens, therefore, must be made of a fifth, and different element, which he called aither.
As recently as the 17th century, poor Rene Descartes was still hamstrung by this bit of piffle. Who knows how much more useful his output might have been without it. It is well known that Copernicus and Galileo were both skating on thin ice when they challenged the Aristotelian notion that the nightly motion of stars across the sky was the result of stars being fixed on rotating crystalline spheres.

http://www.scienceandyou.org/articles/ess_10.shtml

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:41 PM
Oh, and they all think that the northeast is the center of the universe.


er.........wait.........................it's not?

Rain Man
03-21-2008, 02:41 PM
There was some dude back in the 80s who would predict earthquakes based on the alignment of the planets. He got some notoreity because he correctly predicted the Bay Area quake.

Rain Man
03-21-2008, 02:42 PM
er.........wait.........................it's not?

It's the center of the media universe, though interestingly Los Angeles produces more energy than it absorbs.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:44 PM
It's the center of the media universe, though interestingly Los Angeles produces more energy than it absorbs.


That's cuz they're all hyped up on drugs.

Baby Lee
03-21-2008, 02:45 PM
I've found support both ways, and more support for the "aither" than crystal, but here's a confusing reference (below). I'm left uncertain.



http://www.scienceandyou.org/articles/ess_10.shtml

You want to feel old? They're teaching quantum theory in basic chemistry these days, ie, the wave/particle duality of matter as well as light, assigning spin to electrons, and explaining orbitals as probabalistic clouds.

jAZ
03-21-2008, 02:50 PM
Neptune=Carls plan to get us to the Superbowl

Five Neptune Year Plan!!!

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 02:51 PM
You want to feel old? They're teaching quantum theory in basic chemistry these days, ie, the wave/particle duality of matter as well as light, assigning spin to electrons, and explaining orbitals as probabalistic clouds.


I barely got it as a senior in high school. My kids are going to bring 6th grade science issues to me and I'm going to point to the computer/internet and say "good luck with that kid".

I'm hanging their ongoing respect for my not being a total imbecile by my knowledge of history, but since I consider memorization of precise dates to be largely irrelevant -- and since that's what pre-college history focuses on -- I'm likely not to impress in that area there either.

Ah well, they'll still hvae to come begging to me for money I guess... :D

Fire Me Boy!
03-21-2008, 03:01 PM
Venus' has a retrograde rotation of its day. In other words the sun rises in the west and sets in the east.

So... if you apply the Kal-El Principle, eventually, by witnessing Venus, we'll be able to tell exactly how the solar system came to be.




I really hope that's not too obscure.

Ari Chi3fs
03-21-2008, 03:08 PM
You guys will LOVE this.

http://www.worldwidetelescope.org

Science educator Roy Gould (http://www.ted.com/speakers/view/id/199) and Microsoft's Curtis Wong give an astonishing sneak preview of Microsoft's new WorldWide Telescope (http://www.ted.com/talks/view/id/224)-- a technology that combines feeds from satellites and telescopes all over the world and the heavens, and builds a comprehensive view of our universe.

mlyonsd
03-21-2008, 03:08 PM
This isn't really universe related but I find it interesting.

Here's a website that tracks when the international space station and space shuttle are visible at any given location.

There are times when the shuttle is docking/undocking from the ISS where both can be seen at the same time.

Kinda cool if you're sitting outside drinking a beer some summer night when they're flying by.

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/

StcChief
03-21-2008, 03:12 PM
This isn't really universe related but I find it interesting.

Here's a website that tracks when the international space station and space shuttle are visible at any given location.

There are times when the shuttle is docking/undocking from the ISS where both can be seen at the same time.

Kinda cool if you're sitting outside drinking a beer some summer night when they're flying by.

http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/realdata/sightings/assuming you can get away from the light pollution.

mlyonsd
03-21-2008, 03:18 PM
assuming you can get away from the light pollution.

Yea, although the ISS is supposedly the brightest thing in the night sky.

I'm out in the country and my nearest neighbor is a mile away so I'm lucky in that regard.

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 03:18 PM
I remember reading long ago that something like 50% of people believe that the light from Moon is actually generated there.Well, duh!

It's radioactive limburger.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 03:28 PM
Last one for today -- MUST do some work. *sigh*

Three cheers for Edmund Halley. The comet that bears his name might not be his most impressive contribution to mankind and astronomy.

At the ripe old age of about 20, he went to St. Helena (later of Napoleon exile fame) in the Southern Hemisphere to perform the first high quality charting of stars viewed from that hemisphere. That contribution was critical to naval navigation and of great assistance to the British naval dominance that characterized the next two centuries.

But his most important achievement (in many ways) was not his own. A relatively intelligent fellow named Isaac Newton had had a couple of bright ideas. They'd be kicking around in his head for 20 years, but he hadn't really bothered to do much with them. Halley convinced Newton to write a book about this stuff. At first, the Royal Society (to which Halley belonged) was to unwrite the project. Regrettably, the Royal Society had taken a financial bloodbath the year before with it's not-so-hot seller "History of Fishes", so they backed out.

So Halley himself underwrote the project and marketed it. Not a big hit at first, because nobody understood it, Newton's "the Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy", more commonly known as Principia, is perhaps the most important scientific writing in the history of mankind.

So three cheers to Edmund Halley...

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 03:28 PM
assuming you can get away from the light pollution.


I go camping annually (or nearly so) in the White Mountains of New Hampshire. It ALWAYS strikes me how many more stars I can see from there. Amazing.

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 03:32 PM
My sister lives in Kona. Talk about a clear sky...

It was pretty nice here in OP last night. I was taking a late walk (about 9:45) and all the constellations were visible, despite traffic and streetlights.

But there's no seeing the milky way...

Donger
03-21-2008, 03:33 PM
Last one for today -- MUST do some work. *sigh*

Three cheers for Edmund Halley. The comet that bears his name might not be his most impressive contribution to mankind and astronomy.

At the ripe old age of about 20, he went to St. Helena (later of Napoleon exile fame) in the Southern Hemisphere to perform the first high quality charting of stars viewed from that hemisphere. That contribution was critical to naval navigation and of great assistance to the British naval dominance that characterized the next two centuries.

But his most important achievement (in many ways) was not his own. A relatively intelligent fellow named Isaac Newton had had a couple of bright ideas. They'd be kicking around in his head for 20 years, but he hadn't really bothered to do much with them. Halley convinced Newton to write a book about this stuff. At first, the Royal Society (to which Halley belonged) was to unwrite the project. Regrettably, the Royal Society had taken a financial bloodbath the year before with it's not-so-hot seller "History of Fishes", so they backed out.

So Halley himself underwrote the project and marketed it. Not a big hit at first, because nobody understood it, Newton's "the Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy", more commonly known as Principia, is perhaps the most important scientific writing in the history of mankind.

So three cheers to Edmund Halley...

And almost everyone mispronounces his last name.

CrazyPhuD
03-21-2008, 03:34 PM
2. A day is longer than a year on Venus. It takes Venus 225 Earth days to revolve around the sun, but 243 Earth days to rotate once on its axis. (this is the only planet that takes longer to rotate than revolve).


So do people only sit on the pot for 2 days on venus then?

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 03:35 PM
And almost everyone mispronounces his last name.


Right. Rhymes with Valley.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 03:35 PM
And oh yes, new one on me -- Newton was gay.

NTTAWWT

Rain Man
03-21-2008, 03:37 PM
I go camping annually (or nearly so) in the White Mountains of New Hampshire. It ALWAYS strikes me how many more stars I can see from there. Amazing.

I've been to some pretty obscure places, but the best star view I've ever had was on the highway to Taos, New Mexico. Maybe it was the combination of having no light pollution combined with a high altitude and desert air, but my wife and I actually pulled off the side of the road to get out and look at the sky. Absolutely amazing.

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 03:38 PM
I've been to some pretty obscure places, but the best star view I've ever had was on the highway to Taos, New Mexico. Maybe it was the combination of having no light pollution combined with a high altitude and desert air, but my wife and I actually pulled off the side of the road to get out and look at the sky. Absolutely amazing.Did you experience the Taos hum?

CrazyPhuD
03-21-2008, 03:44 PM
And oh yes, new one on me -- Newton was gay.

NTTAWWT

So I guess back then dropping the apple would mean the same as dropping the soap today? :spock:

Rain Man
03-21-2008, 03:45 PM
Did you experience the Taos hum?

Is that a sex thing? If so, then....yes.

jiveturkey
03-21-2008, 03:46 PM
I go camping annually (or nearly so) in the White Mountains of New Hampshire. It ALWAYS strikes me how many more stars I can see from there. Amazing.Image looking up from the deck of an Aircraft Carrier in the middle of the Pacific.

It's unfreakin' real.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 03:50 PM
Image looking up from the deck of an Aircraft Carrier in the middle of the Pacific.

It's unfreakin' real.

Yes -- and subtract the pollution of 200 or so years of industrial revolution
from the earth's atmosphere, and you can see the fascination our ancestors had with the stars...

Lzen
03-21-2008, 03:57 PM
Anybody watch the series "The Universe"? It has had some interesting tidbits, especially concerning possible life on other planets.

Yep, got the dvr set. Love that kind of stuff.

Lzen
03-21-2008, 04:02 PM
Only 55% of all Americans know that the sun is a star.

Holy crap. Is that a real statistic? That is truly sad. :shake:

bowener
03-21-2008, 04:10 PM
I've found support both ways, and more support for the "aither" than crystal, but here's a confusing reference (below). I'm left uncertain.

For example in astronomy, Aristotle proposed a finite, spherical universe, with the earth at its center. This central region was comprised of four elements: earth, air, fire, and water which were all strictly part of the imperfect earthly sphere. Earthly motion is always linear and always comes to a halt, in other words, temporal.
Notice how this fit nicely with the religious view that the earthly things are somehow second-rate. By contrast, the heavens move naturally and endlessly in a complex circular (read: perfect) motion. The heavens, therefore, must be made of a fifth, and different element, which he called aither.
As recently as the 17th century, poor Rene Descartes was still hamstrung by this bit of piffle. Who knows how much more useful his output might have been without it. It is well known that Copernicus and Galileo were both skating on thin ice when they challenged the Aristotelian notion that the nightly motion of stars across the sky was the result of stars being fixed on rotating crystalline spheres.

http://www.scienceandyou.org/articles/ess_10.shtml


I just wrote a [3100 page word paper-- this is incorrect / this is correct] on Descartes last night actually. What does it say hamstrung him? Copernicus and Galileo were definately ****ed over by the Church. Pope JP issued a papal apology for the way Galileo was treated. Coincidentally, it should probably not be known as the 'Copernican Revolution', but more accurately the 'Keplerian', or 'Keplarian-Galilean-Newtonian Revolution'.

bowener
03-21-2008, 04:11 PM
You want to feel old? They're teaching quantum theory in basic chemistry these days, ie, the wave/particle duality of matter as well as light, assigning spin to electrons, and explaining orbitals as probabalistic clouds.

I learned of probabalistic clouds my junior year, which would have been 01-02. What did they teach before that? That electrons had fixed orbits? :shake:

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 04:21 PM
I just wrote a 3100 page paper on Descartes last night actually. What does it say hamstrung him? Copernicus and Galileo were definately ****ed over by the Church. Pope JP issued a papal apology for the way Galileo was treated. Coincidentally, it should probably not be known as the 'Copernican Revolution', but more accurately the 'Keplerian', or 'Keplarian-Galilean-Newtonian Revolution'.


Yes, the Church REALLY hamstrung development of scientific thought for a long time. People were afraid to publish ideas until their deathbed (Kepler I believe). Others delayed for a long time. Who knows how many people died without having spoken up with their ideas, etc.

I'll post a horrific story about this when I have time.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 04:26 PM
I learned of probabalistic clouds my junior year, which would have been 01-02. What did they teach before that? That electrons had fixed orbits? :shake:

The whole concept of quantum mechanics and probability fields was certainly not high school level stuff 20 years ago.

I'm not sure anyone recognized its importance in so many fields of science that long ago. I think back then it was only considered important for advanced astronomical analysis etc. My memory of seniro high school physics (public school) is mainly limited to analysis of light -- waves or particles, etc. Whatever else we studied that year is lost to me, but I was never of a scientific bent when I was younger. The written word was clearly my path to earning income. I also suck at higher math.

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 04:36 PM
Is that a sex thing? If so, then....yes.Although it did occur to me that it could be taken into a perverse direction, no, I'm afraid it's not a sex thing.

Still pretty interesting, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taos_Hum

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 04:39 PM
Last ones for today.

The sun also rotates. It rotates once every Earth month more or less.

It of course also revolves around the Milky way. It takes about 200 million years to revolve once (at a speed of about 150 miles per second) around the center of the galaxy.

The surface temperature of the sun is about 10,000 degrees fahrenheit. The center is much hotter, about 27 MILLION degrees fahrenheit.

the sun is a bit bigger, brighter and hotter than the average star. Mroe than a million earths could fit inside the sun.

Every second, the sun converts 5 million tons of matter into energy by nuclear reactions going on at the heart of the sun. It's the equivalent of 92 billion one megaton nuclear bombs going off every second.

These explosions turn hydrogen into helium at the core, converting a minute amount of matter each time into energy. The energy is in the form of gamma rays at first, which slowly (millions of years) work their way from the center of the sun to its surface, and are changed into visible light. So the ray of light that took 8 minutes to go from the sun to your eyeball on earth left the core of the sun a million or three years ago.

In one second, the sun gives off more energy than all human beings have produced combined during their entire hsitory on earth. The Earth receives two-billionths of this energy, the rest streaming out into outer space.

The Sun is estimated to be at it's midlife crisis mode -- about 4.5 billion years old, with about 6 billion left to go before it goes through its agonizing death throes.

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 04:40 PM
Although it did occur to me that it could be taken into a perverse direction, no, I'm afraid it's not a sex thing.

Still pretty interesting, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taos_Hum

Rain Man thought you said Taos Hummer. His bad.

Fire Me Boy!
03-21-2008, 04:42 PM
I can't believe there's no love for the Kal-El Principle. :shake:

Frazod
03-21-2008, 04:46 PM
There was some dude back in the 80s who would predict earthquakes based on the alignment of the planets. He got some notoreity because he correctly predicted the Bay Area quake.

IIRC, that same guy predicted the New Madrid fault would go off and wipe out the Midwest in December of '92 or '93. Moron.

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 04:47 PM
Rain Man thought you said Taos Hummer. His bad.Oh, 'hum' works too. Ladies can develop an appreciation for a good, deep, resonant hum. Or so I've heard.

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 04:48 PM
IIRC, that same guy predicted the New Madrid fault would go off and wipe out the Midwest in December of '92 or '93. Moron.Jim Berklund (who might be who you guys are talking about) makes regular predictions on coast-to-coast AM based in large part on that kind of stuff, and he's surprisingly accurate. He also uses animal behavior.

bowener
03-21-2008, 04:52 PM
Yes, the Church REALLY hamstrung development of scientific thought for a long time. People were afraid to publish ideas until their deathbed (Kepler I believe). Others delayed for a long time. Who knows how many people died without having spoken up with their ideas, etc.

I'll post a horrific story about this when I have time.

Oh, I misread what you were saying for Descartes. I thought you meant he had trouble reconciling science with Christian Religion, that is what I was going to argue was incorrect. But yeah, I see what you meant now. My bad! Kepler probably did publish from his death bed, I think he wrote a ton of texts.. he is credited with the first Science fiction story (about a man on a moon), but I think historians could argue that the Gilgamesh story came first. Galileo may have been published just before or right after he died as well, I cannot remember.

Frazod
03-21-2008, 04:53 PM
Jim Berklund (who might be who you guys are talking about) makes regular predictions on coast-to-coast AM based in large part on that kind of stuff, and he's surprisingly accurate. He also uses animal behavior.

Well, I've probably driven from here to Missouri 40-50 times since then, and since at no point has my car plunged off a ruined bridge into the swirling waters of the Mississippi, I'd say he pretty much screwed the pooch on that one. :D

bowener
03-21-2008, 04:55 PM
Last ones for today.

The sun also rotates. It rotates once every Earth month more or less.

It of course also revolves around the Milky way. It takes about 200 million years to revolve once (at a speed of about 150 miles per second) around the center of the galaxy.

The surface temperature of the sun is about 10,000 degrees fahrenheit. The center is much hotter, about 27 MILLION degrees fahrenheit.

the sun is a bit bigger, brighter and hotter than the average star. Mroe than a million earths could fit inside the sun.

Every second, the sun converts 5 million tons of matter into energy by nuclear reactions going on at the heart of the sun. It's the equivalent of 92 billion one megaton nuclear bombs going off every second.

These explosions turn hydrogen into helium at the core, converting a minute amount of matter each time into energy. The energy is in the form of gamma rays at first, which slowly (millions of years) work their way from the center of the sun to its surface, and are changed into visible light. So the ray of light that took 8 minutes to go from the sun to your eyeball on earth left the core of the sun a million or three years ago.

In one second, the sun gives off more energy than all human beings have produced combined during their entire hsitory on earth. The Earth receives two-billionths of this energy, the rest streaming out into outer space.

The Sun is estimated to be at it's midlife crisis mode -- about 4.5 billion years old, with about 6 billion left to go before it goes through its agonizing death throes.

About halfway through the remaining years of our suns life the milkyway will begin to collide with our nearest galaxy; andromeda. It should be quite beautiful as it approaches us, eventaully it will be an ominous disc on our horizon though, that would seem odd to see everynight.

bowener
03-21-2008, 04:56 PM
Well, I've probably driven from here to Missouri 40-50 times since then, and since at no point has my car plunged off a ruined bridge into the swirling waters of the Mississippi, I'd say he pretty much screwed the pooch on that one. :D

Isnt that fault supposedly hundreds of years overdue for a good shakeup?

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 04:57 PM
Here's the answer on the NM prediction, it wasn't Berklund, although he apparently uses some of the same theory:The Browning Panic (http://geology.about.com/cs/eq_prediction/a/aa030903a.htm)

Iben Browning was not a geologist at all but a retired biologist. Nevertheless, he issued a startling prediction: within two days of December 3, 1990, he said, there was a 50-50 chance that a magnitude-6.5 quake would strike the New Madrid region of Missouri. A remarkably energetic huckster, Browning raised such a public panic that businesses closed and schools in four states shut down during early December. Children and parents were needlessly alarmed, and much ink was spilled and scientists' time spent combating nonsense. Browning's theory of tidal forces—the same one used by quake predicter James Berkland—has never had significant support from the data.

Frazod
03-21-2008, 05:00 PM
Isnt that fault supposedly hundreds of years overdue for a good shakeup?

I actually watched a show on History Channel about that earlier in the week. According to those "experts," New Madrid goes once every 300 to 500 years, and the last major series of quakes was 200 years ago. So if they're right, it won't be a problem for anyone who's alive now.

Of course, it could go tomorrow, too. Who knows?

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 05:01 PM
If you want to be really scared, start thinking about the fact that Yellowstone's a supervolcano.

Frazod
03-21-2008, 05:03 PM
Here's the answer on the NM prediction, it wasn't Berklund, although he apparently uses some of the same theory:

That's the one. I remembered it was in December, but was off by a couple of years. I do recall being concerned, especially living on the other side of the river from everybody. I was alot more gullable about shit back then.

Frazod
03-21-2008, 05:04 PM
If you want to be really scared, start thinking about the fact that Yellowstone's a supervolcano.

Yep. That's due to go as well. That would ruin most of the northern hemisphere, especially the United States.

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 05:08 PM
Yep. That's due to go as well. That would ruin most of the northern hemisphere, especially the United States.And don't forget Mount Rainier, just waiting to blow its top.

Let's face it, we're f*cked, no matter what.

Bowser
03-21-2008, 05:08 PM
You guys are a real ray of sunshine.

Rain Man
03-21-2008, 05:09 PM
I just wrote a 3100 page paper on Descartes last night actually. What does it say hamstrung him? Copernicus and Galileo were definately ****ed over by the Church. Pope JP issued a papal apology for the way Galileo was treated. Coincidentally, it should probably not be known as the 'Copernican Revolution', but more accurately the 'Keplerian', or 'Keplarian-Galilean-Newtonian Revolution'.


Is that single-space or double-space?

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 05:11 PM
You guys are a real ray of sunshine.Speaking of sunshine, what about that upcoming sunspot cycle.

We're so screwed.

Frazod
03-21-2008, 05:18 PM
You guys are a real ray of sunshine.

The best you can hope for is to die of something else before any of that other shit happens. :)

keg in kc
03-21-2008, 05:22 PM
The best you can hope for is to die of something else before any of that other shit happens.I always wondered why you got married.

Frazod
03-21-2008, 05:41 PM
I always wondered why you got married.

Yeah, me too. :banghead:

bowener
03-21-2008, 06:58 PM
Is that single-space or double-space?

Double, but that doesnt change the word count.

Delano
03-21-2008, 07:37 PM
If you want to be really scared, start thinking about the fact that Yellowstone's a supervolcano.

That thought is particularly disturbing when you are standing near the rim of the caldera looking in.

tiptap
03-21-2008, 08:35 PM
I learned of probabalistic clouds my junior year, which would have been 01-02. What did they teach before that? That electrons had fixed orbits? :shake:

Ok, I graduated from high school in 1970. I took General Chemistry as a junior. We discussed Quantum Mechanics. It WAS the explanation for the Rayleigh series and others that was energy emitted as electrons "absorbed" energy and then "fail down" to certain alloweable orbits. That would be Bohr's model. We then discussed the wave charateristic of moving electrons. Any discussion of dual slits experiments required this. So we were then introduced to the shapes of a probability model. Now the shape of f sub orbitals was not demonstrated and no one in high school actually worked out the spherical coordinate system for generating the 4 spdf orbital numbers that fall out from considering the Schrodinger Wave theory. I did in my sophomore year in College worked out all of that but from Dirac's postulate system and not the more robust Heisenberg Matrix method. Though one uses Matrices. So while I am willing to accept that most high school student did not discuss Quantum Mechanics in High School back then, it was here and there. Oh I graduated from Raytown High School.

tiptap
03-21-2008, 08:39 PM
The best "view" of stars for me was the collection of stars and the Comet Kohotec (sp) over the Grand Canyon. That was a great trip with the kids. We got to see the first intentional Flooding of The Canyon artificially of course by releasing the water from the dam up stream.

tiptap
03-21-2008, 08:49 PM
If you want to be on the cutting edge in high school you talk about up down strange colors and other boson characteristics. Talk about strong force duality in sustaining the atoms nucleus, (explanating why there is no natural Technetium stable isotopes, a question that bothered me all through college). And I know I didn't get this all exactly right. But my kids do. Better than me.

It is a poor parent who cannot see his child do better.

bowener
03-21-2008, 09:43 PM
Who here runs this site? Theyre from missouri....
http://www.missouriskies.org/eclipse_2008/eclipse_2008.html

Halfcan
03-21-2008, 10:55 PM
The universe is actually very small compared to King Carl's ego.

Rausch
03-21-2008, 11:05 PM
You'll find that the true thinkers in science all related back to a "fluid" comprehension of physics/the universe.

Things ebb and flow. Gravity, magnetism, energy, all act in ways similar to water or fluids. They are all described to the average n00b in ways that relate to water/fluids.

You can break down "M theory" to the water/oil gadget on some lawyer's desk from the sharper image. The greater concepts all make sense it's just proving them that's the bastard of the matter...

Herzig
03-21-2008, 11:35 PM
Yes, the Church REALLY hamstrung development of scientific thought for a long time. People were afraid to publish ideas until their deathbed (Kepler I believe). Others delayed for a long time. Who knows how many people died without having spoken up with their ideas, etc.

I'll post a horrific story about this when I have time.

Very true...but that time is long past. In fact, today the Catholic church is one of the more progressive Christian denominations when it comes to science. Their views are very progressive as far as evolution, the age of the earth, and even the big bang theory. I think the Church has learned and evolved from many mistakes they made hundreds of years ago.

Rausch
03-21-2008, 11:43 PM
I think the Church has learned and evolved from many mistakes they made hundreds of years ago.

It's those mistakes they made 10 or 20 years ago that are the nasty bugaboo.

And I don't buy the whole mess over Sister Lucia. I mean, she's got the most important message ever in the most troubled of all times and the CC says "Bidge, STFU..."

Amnorix
03-21-2008, 11:54 PM
Very true...but that time is long past. In fact, today the Catholic church is one of the more progressive Christian denominations when it comes to science. Their views are very progressive as far as evolution, the age of the earth, and even the big bang theory. I think the Church has learned and evolved from many mistakes they made hundreds of years ago.

I don't doubt it, but let's not debate it here. I don't want to see this thread yanked into DC because of some sideline debate. Hopefully the facts I'm posting here are of general interest to all science geeks. :D

Delano
03-21-2008, 11:56 PM
I don't doubt it, but let's not debate it here. I don't want to see this thread yanked into DC because of some sideline debate. Hopefully the facts I'm posting here are of general interest to all science geeks. :D

Yes, please carry on at your earliest convenience.

Halfcan
03-22-2008, 12:55 AM
Stephen Hawking would get a woody over this thread.

Rausch
03-22-2008, 12:57 AM
Stephen Hawking would get a woody over this thread.


I'm guessing....No. Probably not.

:shake:

bowener
03-22-2008, 01:05 AM
I'm guessing....No. Probably not.

:shake:

ROFL :doh!:

Rausch
03-22-2008, 01:36 AM
This is likely the wrong thread but when one looks at singularities and considers that information can't be lost or destoryed Hawrking still loses information at about a 1/3 rate.

Even including "hawking radiation."

It doesn't add up. If energy can neither be created or destroyed there shoulnd't be a loss. This loss is part of the reason behind M theory and dark matter but it still doesn't fill the whole.

I'm starting to wonder if the problem isn't resonance. Sound, in short. Once again it operates much like a fluid/water but as energy. If there isn't a measure of vibration between the "branes" that allows for both creation as well as distribution...

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-22-2008, 01:47 AM
My personal favorite that really proves our insignificance:

There are more stars than all the grains of sand on all the beaches on the entire planet. Your average handfull of sand has about 10,000 grains.

greg63
03-22-2008, 02:13 AM
I wanna live on Neptune.

bowener
03-22-2008, 03:01 AM
This is likely the wrong thread but when one looks at singularities and considers that information can't be lost or destoryed Hawrking still loses information at about a 1/3 rate.

Even including "hawking radiation."

It doesn't add up. If energy can neither be created or destroyed there shoulnd't be a loss. This loss is part of the reason behind M theory and dark matter but it still doesn't fill the whole.

I'm starting to wonder if the problem isn't resonance. Sound, in short. Once again it operates much like a fluid/water but as energy. If there isn't a measure of vibration between the "branes" that allows for both creation as well as distribution...

You may have a hard time arguing resonance since you would need a medium in which it can pass. I have not read a lot of information on blackholes in quite a while, but my understanding is still that all we know about them is almost entirely theoretical. Also, if wormholes do exist, could that help explain for some of your energy loss? I only say this because I am a firm believer in conservation of mass/energy, and we do not seem to have a lot of 'white spikes' floating around in our universe... but then that assumes any material excreted out of the other end of a worm hole would come out in the form of light. Perhaps this will interest you? I came across it a few days ago: http://www.universetoday.com/2008/02/13/synthetic-black-hole-event-horizon-created-in-uk-laboratory/

stumppy
03-22-2008, 07:53 AM
Wow.....how bout' them Chiefs ? Anyone think they're going to do better this year ?









NOTE: I would like to thank all of the posters in the thread who have reminded me of the often forgot yet painfully obvious fact that I'm dumb. I was trying really hard to come up with something to contribute but the sad fact is yesterday I learned that the drop rate of a sewer line was about 1/4" drop for every 1 ft. of travel and that information was more than enough to make me feel as if I had once again put distance between myself and the botom feeders of our society.

Ya know, on second thought maybe I should use this thread as motivation. Motivation for self improvment and education. Theres no time like the present ! I've got a computer, internet access, a library card. There's no reason why I can't move up another rung on the intelligence ladder. Something i've always been keenly interested in but always felt was a little out of my reach (intelectualy) is worm farming. How cool can that be ? Think about it. Worms...............farming. How the hell do they do it ? However the slimy little things are able to farm I think you'll all agree, this stuff has got to be cutting edge. But, I'm going togo ahead and jump into this self improvement quest full speed, a 110%, no looking back, ready to think outside the box. It won't be very long and any question any of you have about worm farming you just come to me. I'll be more than happy to help. And after worm farming who knows ? The sky's the limit on education.

Baby Lee
03-22-2008, 08:04 AM
One of the theoretical constructs that tickles my brain every time I think of it.

If one were to fall over the event horizon into a 'black hole' and were able to register cognition despite the forces being exerted on you. You would witness the typical free-fall such as jumping from a plane on earth, but from a frame of reference such as ours here, your fall would take the remainder of human history [not that we could even theoretically see it from our frame of reference].

stumppy
03-22-2008, 08:19 AM
One of the theoretical constructs that tickles my brain every time I think of it.

If one were to fall over the event horizon into a 'black hole' and were able to register cognition despite the forces being exerted on you. You would witness the typical free-fall such as jumping from a plane on earth, but from a frame of reference such as ours here, your fall would take the remainder of human history [not that we could even theoretically see it from our frame of reference].


Are you sure ? I've allways thought he might twist an ankle or something when he hit bottom. Oh yea, and he would probably couldn't see very well.. The whole "Black" hole thing.

Baby Lee
03-22-2008, 08:38 AM
Are you sure ? I've allways thought he might twist an ankle or something when he hit bottom. Oh yea, and he would probably couldn't see very well.. The whole "Black" hole thing.

Oh, you won't actually be able to witness your descent, the difference in gravitational forces for your feet and head will rip you apart.

The construct just puts a recognizable face on the intertwined ideas that the fundamentals of physics are the same for all frames of reference, and what one's relative motion changes is the relative appearance of time and space.

Much like a super collider, which to us appears to be 20 some miles long, is actually, in the frame of reference of a particle speeding through it, about 2 meters long.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:12 AM
I'm guessing....No. Probably not.

:shake:


I read his Brief History of Time. He dumbed it down as far as it would go, and there were still some paragraphs and topics that weren't suffiiceintly dumb for me.

:doh!::shake:

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:21 AM
We're now reaching the portion of our discussion where we're made to feel truly and utterly insignificant in compared to the vastness of space. First, however, a brief review of measurements in space just in case anyone doesn't quite know.

It's worthless to say "miles" or "kilometers" in space because of the vast numbers involved, so instead scientists use Light Years ("LY") and even parsecs. A Light Year is a measurement of BOTH time and distance. If someone says two celestial bodies are one light year apart, then you're saying that the distance between them is the distance that it takes a ray of light to travel in one year.

Specifically, since a ray of light goes about 186,000 miles per second, that would be 5.88 TRILLION miles. So we got that? One light year is nearly 6 trillion miles. The circumference of the earth is about 25,000 miles, so that would be 240 million trips around the earth in a single year theoretically.

It is also, of course, a measure of time -- i.e. the time it would take a ray of light -- the fastest known thing in the universe, to go from here to there.

Now we can move on to the factoids.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:29 AM
Our little solar system is estimated to be about 25,000 light years away from the center of the Milky Way, which is the galaxy in which we reside.

The Milky Way, if you could look at it from outside of it, is believed to look like a spinning disc with a bulge in the center. It's somewhat tough to figure out exactly, since we're actually IN it, but we believe the Milky Way to be between 100,000 and 130,000 light years across. The center of it (the bulge) is believed to be abotu 10,000 light years thick, tapering to about 2,000 light years thick at the edges.

In our little corner of the Milky Way, the stars average a distance of 5 light years. Towards the center, where the older stars are, they're about 100 times closer together.

The entire Milky Way orbits the center of it, taking about 200-250 million years to complete one rotation. Nobody is certain, but we suspect that the center of the Milky Way -- the thing around which the entire thign revolves, is a massive blackhole.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:31 AM
The edges of the Milky Way contain nebulae -- large formations of dust and gas, where new stars are formed.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:33 AM
Galaxies come in several shapes. One is spiral, like the Milky Way. Others are elliptical -- anywhere from near perfect spheres to football shapes to flattened basketballs.

We can't be precisely certain of the shape of any galaxy because we can only see it from one angle.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:34 AM
The Milky Way -- ONE galaxy in a universe full of galaxies, is believed to contain 200 BILLION stars.

The next nearest spiral galaxy -- Andromeda, is believed to be double that with 400 billion stars.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:35 AM
Teh closest galaxy to our own is called the Sagittarius Dwarf, at a mere 80,000 light years away. Most astronomers believe we will collide with it, and our much larger galaxy will consume it. But don't hold your breath -- it's at least 100 million years away from happening.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:36 AM
Hubble in 2001 observed two galaxies that are tethered together by a stream of gas and dust that was apparently streaming from one galaxy to the other. Likely these two will merge together -- probably within the next 20 million years.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:40 AM
Galaxies tend to move together in clusters, or groups. The above galaxies are called the "Local Group" of galaxies, and measure about 3 million light years across. The whole group is puny compared to the Virgo Cluster -- about 50-60 million light yaears away, it is a supercluster, comprised of TWO THOUSAND galaxies. EACH OF WHICH, in turn, contains billions of stars.

The Virgo Cluster is so massive it is quickly reeling in the Local Cluster, and we, Andromeda, and the rest of our little galaxies will be absorbed into it. In fact, we're believed to be "falling into" the Virgo Cluster at a speed of nearly a million miles per hour.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 09:41 AM
Andromeda, the next nearest spiral galaxy and a larger galaxy than our own, is about 3 million light years away. Thsi means that a ray of light from a star in that galaxy left that star 3 million years ago -- or before humans existed on Earth.

milkman
03-22-2008, 10:47 AM
Only 55% of all Americans know that the sun is a star.

55%.

Seems kinda low.

Hell, most of the people I come into contact with wouldn't even know how to spell "sun", much less know that it's a star.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-22-2008, 10:53 AM
If I live to be a billion, I'm going to grow increasigly concerned with the impending collision between the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies.

Herzig
03-22-2008, 11:12 AM
The Milky Way -- ONE galaxy in a universe full of galaxies, is believed to contain 200 BILLION stars.

The next nearest spiral galaxy -- Andromeda, is believed to be double that with 400 billion stars.

I teach most of this stuff as a 6th grade science teacher.

Another interesting fact about galaxies...some elliptical galaxies contain as many as 1 trillion stars or about 4 times the 250 billion our Milky Way is estimated to have.

milkman
03-22-2008, 11:19 AM
If I live to be a billion, I'm going to grow increasigly concerned with the impending collision between the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies.

If you live to be a billion, you'll probably embrace the sweet release of death, and I'm fairly certain the only real concern you'll have is who's going to clean you after you shit yourself.

Herzig
03-22-2008, 11:32 AM
Most people don't really understand what a scientific theory is.....they view them as merely speculation or something someone just made up. I have to really emphasize this concept in my classes.

A Scientific Theory is a well-tested explanation for a wide range of observations or experimental results. Scientists accept a theory only when there is a large body of evidence that supports it. However, future testing can still prove an accepted theory to be incorrect. If that happens, scientists may modify the theory, or discard it altogether.

In the case of the Big Bang Theory, basically astronomers have observed that all of the galaxies are moving outward and away from each other(or in some cases toward each other but outward from a common point). They have extrapolated by the current direction and speed of the galaxies that they all came from a common point in the universe about 13.7 billion years ago. Other evidence, such as redshifts in galaxies and the abundance of light elements also support the Big Bang theory.

milkman
03-22-2008, 11:37 AM
Most people don't really understand what a scientific theory is.....they view them as merely speculation or something someone just made up. I have to really emphasize this concept in my classes.

A Scientific Theory is a well-tested explanation for a wide range of observations or experimental results. Scientists accept a theory only when there is a large body of evidence that supports it. However, future testing can still prove an accepted theory to be incorrect. If that happens, scientists may modify the theory, or discard it altogether.

In the case of the Big Bang Theory, basically astronomers have observed that all of the galaxies are moving outward and away from each other(or in some cases toward each other but outward from a common point). They have extrapolated by the current direction and speed of the galaxies that they all came from a common point in the universe about 13.7 billion years ago. Other evidence, such as redshifts in galaxies and the abundance of light elements also support the Big Bang theory.

So what you're saying is that scientific theory is educated speculation?

Herzig
03-22-2008, 11:39 AM
So what you're saying is that scientific theory is educated speculation?

Pretty much but based on tons of evidence. The only real way you could prove the Big Bang Theory would be to go back in a time machine and film it happening to be 100% correct.

Amnorix
03-22-2008, 11:41 AM
So what you're saying is that scientific theory is educated speculation?

Far more than that.

Baby Lee
03-22-2008, 11:44 AM
So what you're saying is that scientific theory is educated speculation?

More like, the explanation that most closely conforms to all collected evidence to date.

milkman
03-22-2008, 11:44 AM
Far more than that.

I was just busting his chops.

patteeu
03-22-2008, 11:49 AM
Double, but that doesnt change the word count.

How many words can you fit on 3100 pages?

P.S. Great thread, Amnorix

Herzig
03-22-2008, 11:49 AM
I was just busting his chops.

Whatever red eyes!

mrpopo
03-22-2008, 11:52 AM
How many words can you fit on 3100 pages?

P.S. Great thread, Amnorix

LMAO :thumb:

Rain Man
03-22-2008, 08:06 PM
The Virgo Cluster is so massive it is quickly reeling in the Local Cluster, and we, Andromeda, and the rest of our little galaxies will be absorbed into it. In fact, we're believed to be "falling into" the Virgo Cluster at a speed of nearly a million miles per hour.


Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v711/AlanCrane/monks_roller_coaster.jpg

Rain Man
03-22-2008, 08:07 PM
How many words can you fit on 3100 pages?

P.S. Great thread, Amnorix

Bowener's papers are so massive that you could fit in 500 Rain Man papers into a single one of them.

tiptap
03-22-2008, 09:45 PM
So what you're saying is that scientific theory is educated speculation?

No, it is not educated speculation. The theory is actually more important and central to understanding than the facts. That is the theory gives the grounding for extending understanding in novel ways quite unexpected by just the facts presently known. Of course once the theory provides incite into new understanding and it is than observed and validated then for that moment the theory is exhausted in the scope of its present inspiration. /

bowener
03-22-2008, 09:50 PM
One of the theoretical constructs that tickles my brain every time I think of it.

If one were to fall over the event horizon into a 'black hole' and were able to register cognition despite the forces being exerted on you. You would witness the typical free-fall such as jumping from a plane on earth, but from a frame of reference such as ours here, your fall would take the remainder of human history [not that we could even theoretically see it from our frame of reference].

The cool thing is to an observer from outside would see your body frozen as it was when it reached the event horizon because the gravity would hold the light back, and finally you would just disappear as the image got to the observer.

Amnorix
03-24-2008, 11:44 AM
A neutron star is the smallest of star types. It has collapsed after going supernova, and can be as small as 12 miles across. They are superdense, however, due to the forces of gravity, and a fragment the size of a sugar cube would weigh as much as all the people on Earth put together.

A supernova is an exploding supergiant (a dying star with a diameter of up to 1,000 times that of the sun). Antares and Betelgeuse, which are ridiculously massive, are supergiants.

When it goes supernova, it explodes, and obtains the temporary brightness of 100 million suns or more...

Rain Man
03-24-2008, 12:13 PM
A supernova is an exploding supergiant (a dying star with a diameter of up to 1,000 times that of the sun). Antares and Betelgeuse, which are ridiculously massive, are supergiants.

When it goes supernova, it explodes, and obtains the temporary brightness of 100 million suns or more...

Do not look directly at a nearby supernova. Wear sunglasses or other protective eyewear.

Donger
03-24-2008, 12:24 PM
Do not look directly at a nearby supernova. Wear sunglasses or other protective eyewear.

WASHINGTON - The explosion of a star halfway across the universe was so huge it set a record for the most distant object that could be seen on Earth by the naked eye.

The aging star, in a previously unknown galaxy, exploded in a gamma ray burst 7.5 billion light years away, its light finally reaching Earth early Wednesday.

The gamma rays were detected by NASA's Swift satellite at 2:12 a.m. "We'd never seen one before so bright and at such a distance," NASA's Neil Gehrels said. It was bright enough to be seen with the naked eye.

However, NASA has no reports that any skywatchers spotted the burst, which lasted less than an hour. Telescopic measurements show that the burst — which occurred when the universe was about half its current age — was bright enough to be seen without a telescope.

"Someone would have had to run out and look at it with a naked eye, but didn't," said Gehrels, chief of NASA's astroparticles physics lab at Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.

The starburst would have appeared as bright as some of the stars in the handle of the Little Dipper constellation, said Penn State University astronomer David Burrows. How it looked wasn't remarkable, but the distance traveled was.

The 7.5 billion light years away far eclipses the previous naked eye record of 2.5 million light years. One light year is 5.9 trillion miles.

"This is roughly halfway to the edge of the universe," Burrows said.

Before it exploded, the star was about 40 times bigger than our sun. The explosion vaporized any planet nearby, Gehrels said.

Amnorix
03-24-2008, 12:59 PM
I'm amazed at how they can measure distances. How do they know it was 7.5 billion light years away, and not 7.3 or 7.6? :spock:

StcChief
03-24-2008, 01:08 PM
I'm amazed at how they can measure distances. How do they know it was 7.5 billion light years away, and not 7.3 or 7.6? :spock:
how are you gonna refute it? Got a big tape measure?

Donger
03-24-2008, 01:15 PM
I'm amazed at how they can measure distances. How do they know it was 7.5 billion light years away, and not 7.3 or 7.6? :spock:

Because light years weigh less than heavy years. Duh.

Dartgod
03-24-2008, 01:52 PM
Do not look directly at a nearby supernova. Wear sunglasses or other protective eyewear.
Avert your eyes!

http://www.raybarton.com/customers/brian_lutz.jpg

bowener
03-24-2008, 02:14 PM
Originally Posted by Amnorix
I'm amazed at how they can measure distances. How do they know it was 7.5 billion light years away, and not 7.3 or 7.6?

This is a simple site that gives you straight forward ways of measuring.

http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/MilkyWay/distance.html

Delano
03-24-2008, 02:16 PM
"Someone would have had to run out and look at it with a naked eye, but didn't," said Gehrels, chief of NASA's astroparticles physics lab at Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.

Lazy bastards.

bowener
03-24-2008, 02:23 PM
How many words can you fit on 3100 pages?

P.S. Great thread, Amnorix

:doh!::doh!::doh!::doh!::doh!:

Yeah, I am dumb and never noticed my word exchange. That should read 'word' not 'page'. Anything that required I wrote a 3 novel length piece I would definately quit and shit on. Sorry I am too dumb to catch the joke within a 1 or 2 day time span. I needed 3 days for this one :shake:


LMAO :thumb:

Bowener's papers are so massive that you could fit in 500 Rain Man papers into a single one of them.


I just caught all of that. I didnt get to read your quotes until today... so I wanted to thank you all for sufficiently pointing out how stupid I am. I fully appreciate the good laugh you gave me. Nothing beats laughing at yourself!

God, I am ****ing dumb. :doh!: :(

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 11:44 AM
Our best guess is that the universe is 12.5 or so billion years old, within a margin of error of about 2 billion years. So between 10-15 billion is about the best we can do. But hey, what's a billion or five years?

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 11:51 AM
Among Einstein's many theories that revolutionized astronomy were two related ones -- that the universe is homogenous (i.e. teh same everywhere), and istropic (i.e. the same in all directions. Among other things, the necessary result of this logic is that it is either constantly expanding or constantly contracting.

Einstein didn't particularly care for this result, so he proposed something he called the cosmological constant -- something that would allow the universe to remain static. He later called this theory the "biggest blunder of my life".

But not so fast Albert! analysis of Hubble pictures of an exploding star strongly suggests that all of space is filled with an energy that creates a mutual repulsion between matter normally attracted to each other by gravity.

This highly theoretical "dark matter" is currently referred to as quiessence. If proven, it may well entitle Einstein to another Nobel Prize -- more than 50 years after his death.

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 11:55 AM
Einstein was an interesting character. In addition to his well known mediocre school records and career as a patent office clerk -- he and a woman had a child out of wedlock. He subsequently married the woman, but all records have been lost regarding the baby, who may have died of scarlet fever. She may have been put up for adoption. No one knows.

He went on to hvae 2 more children by his first wife, including a son who eventually died in a psychiatric son. After leaving Europe in 1933, Einstein had no further contact with the boy "for reasons he later said he could not analyze."

He divorced the mother of his 2 children in 1919 and a few months later, married hsi cousin, Elsa Lowenthal, with whom he'd had a 7 year affair. It was later discovered that Einstein had initially asked one of Elsa's daughters, Ilse, to marry him but upon being turned down married the mother instead.

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 12:01 PM
Building on the work of Einstein, Hubble and others, someone proposed that going back in time, the universe must have started from a single super-dense point. Referring to it as the "primeval atom" or "cosmic egg", space at this point was infinitely curved and all matter and all engergy had then expanded outward. This theory is now commonly known as the "Big Bang".

The person who came up with this concept: Georges Lemaitre of Belgium.

His full-time profession: Jesuit priest.

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 12:06 PM
key elements to have in a solar system so that a planet within it may have life, as propounded by various scientists:

1. a sun of the right distance and mass, so that temperatures are moderated and planets can have stable orbits.

2. right mass, so the planet can retain atmosphere and oceans.

3. a large gaseous planetary body nearby (such as Jupiter) to clear out comets, asteroids and other intergalactic "junk" to reduce the chances and/or frequency of cosmic collisions with the planet on which life is to develop.

4. a large moon at the right distance, to give the stabilize the planetary axis tilt.

5. a correct axis tilt, to moderate seasons.

6. proper amount of carbon, so runaway greenhouse gases don't overwhelm life (such as exists on Venus).

7. correct distance of solar system from the center of the galaxy, to avoid excessive radiation from the more compact stars towards the center.

8. plate techtonics and sizeable oceans, to build landmass and enhance biodiversity.

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 12:11 PM
Hubble -- in this generation it's that big floating telescope. But who was he?

He was the fellow that proved that the universe is expanding. He was also the first to demonstrate the universe has galaxies other than the Milky Way (this was debated prior to Hubble, but he proved it out).

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 12:13 PM
For purposes of the ridiculously monumental task of cataloguing stars, astronomers have divided the universe into 88 regions, called constellations. Building off the original 12, the list is divided into northern (54 of them) and southern constellations.

Currently, astronomers estimate that there are a hundred thousand million galaxies, EACH of which contains a hundred thousand million stars. Imagine trying to identify and list them all!

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 12:17 PM
Remember, the mass of the sun is 99.8% of the mass of everything in our solar system. The combined mass of all 8 planets and everything on them (including you and me of course), the rings of saturn, every moon in the system and every bit of space junk floating around in it would be 0.2%, and the Ssun would be the rest.

Hubble, within a few months of its launch, found evidence of a black hole in Galaxy M87 in the Virgo Supercluster with a mass estimted at 300 million times that of the Sun.

Amnorix
03-25-2008, 12:19 PM
Harry S. Truman reportedly said, upon looking at a Mercury capsule, "How do these guys take a leak?"

Answer (according to NASA): MAGs. Maximum Absorbency Garments. Or, more colloquially -- mandiapers.