Celestron 127EQ View Thread Reply Hide Edwin Hubble - Sun, 04 Jan 2015 18:14:07 EST 1FsPM3Cw No.54891 File: 1420413247281.jpg -(101670B / 99.29KB, 1200x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. I'm gonna start this thread out by saying, this is one of the most appropriately named boards on the web. With that being said, I have had a life long passion for astronomy for 30 years now and I have finally acquired a really good telescope. The Celestron 127EQ is the scope I have (got it last month for my birthday) and it seems to be a rather good investment for a beginner. I do have some troubles though. I got the telescope put together without trouble, but I have trouble with coordinates and with the adjusting of it. I can of course move it around and swivel it, but sometimes it doesn't want to lock into position. If any of you could give me some tips and advice it would be much appreciated. I just really want to get the hang of this hobby so I can begin photographing, the telescope comes with a mount for a camera. Anyway, pic related, this is it. 1 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Nicolaus Copernicus - Tue, 13 Jan 2015 02:51:48 EST Dnv5U1Ks No.54905 Reply Is that pic related? It looks 8"Invest in a bigger one if you can. You will be glad you did.nb cuz not helpful >> Hannes Alven - Mon, 02 Feb 2015 09:59:16 EST SiTp3J4K No.54983 Reply just put one of these on it and then point the scope at cool stuff in the sky and look at it through the eye pieceyou might want a different mount for it if yours is slipping. it doesn't look like a very good mount...you probably won't be taking many astro photos with it. i have a similar scope on this tripod with steel legs for ultra stability, it's pretty good! - http://www.telescopesandbinoculars.co.uk/acatalog/AZ4-HEAVY-DUTY-ALT-AZIMUTH-MOUNT---TRIPOD-------1606.html >> Hannes Alven - Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:02:07 EST SiTp3J4K No.54984 Reply 1422889327459.jpg -(99363B / 97.03KB, 336x448) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54983i meant to post this. it's a telrad. they're pretty tight and they're not too spenno...probably one of the best astronomy accessories i've purchased.also im beginning to learn that a nice set of binoculars is pretty important for backyard astronomy, probably even more important than a scope tbh
>> Nicolaus Copernicus - Tue, 13 Jan 2015 02:51:48 EST Dnv5U1Ks No.54905 Reply Is that pic related? It looks 8"Invest in a bigger one if you can. You will be glad you did.nb cuz not helpful
>> Hannes Alven - Mon, 02 Feb 2015 09:59:16 EST SiTp3J4K No.54983 Reply just put one of these on it and then point the scope at cool stuff in the sky and look at it through the eye pieceyou might want a different mount for it if yours is slipping. it doesn't look like a very good mount...you probably won't be taking many astro photos with it. i have a similar scope on this tripod with steel legs for ultra stability, it's pretty good! - http://www.telescopesandbinoculars.co.uk/acatalog/AZ4-HEAVY-DUTY-ALT-AZIMUTH-MOUNT---TRIPOD-------1606.html
>> Hannes Alven - Mon, 02 Feb 2015 10:02:07 EST SiTp3J4K No.54984 Reply 1422889327459.jpg -(99363B / 97.03KB, 336x448) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54983i meant to post this. it's a telrad. they're pretty tight and they're not too spenno...probably one of the best astronomy accessories i've purchased.also im beginning to learn that a nice set of binoculars is pretty important for backyard astronomy, probably even more important than a scope tbh
m(11) View Thread Reply Hide Kan Li Zhong - Tue, 06 Jan 2015 14:35:49 EST Qrrkgdjp No.54896 File: 1420572949725.jpg -(42642B / 41.64KB, 569x350) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. cyanide in space (toward galactic core)waxy cyanide in space (toward galactic core)cyanide on Mars (furthest from Sol than Earth)Radioactive Water (Diduetrium Oxide)Watery super planets near the Galactic CoreCold, Rogue Gas Giants (No detected host star) opposite of Glesian superplanetsafter a little research using Twitter I'll find the location of Mars at the point of Curiosity's recent discovery. >> Karl von Weizsacker - Tue, 06 Jan 2015 23:52:25 EST L6PvDKDA No.54900 Reply > Radioactive Water (Diduetrium Oxide)What? Heavy water isn't radioactive, though it's used in some types of reactors. What are you on about anyway? nb
>> Karl von Weizsacker - Tue, 06 Jan 2015 23:52:25 EST L6PvDKDA No.54900 Reply > Radioactive Water (Diduetrium Oxide)What? Heavy water isn't radioactive, though it's used in some types of reactors. What are you on about anyway? nb
cool video View Thread Reply Hide Walter Baade - Tue, 06 Jan 2015 00:15:08 EST 415JX8nG No.54895 File: 1420521308940.jpg -(33070B / 32.29KB, 640x467) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Here's a cool video on quantum mechanics I found, there's no hard math in it, but it really made me see things in a different way.youtube.com/?reload=7&rdm=1cbzr13i6#/watch?v=BFvJOZ51tmcIt revolves around the famous debate between Bohr and Einstein over really their philosophies on the fundamental nature of reality. But it really drove home to me a lot of principals of quantum mechanics.Picture is of the election shell around a hydrogen atomAlso: General far out stuff thread >> Walter Baade - Tue, 06 Jan 2015 15:21:45 EST H3af7FdZ No.54897 Reply https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFvJOZ51tmc
>> Walter Baade - Tue, 06 Jan 2015 15:21:45 EST H3af7FdZ No.54897 Reply https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFvJOZ51tmc
Worlds Largest Optical Telescope Gets Green Light View Thread Reply Hide Urbain Le Verrier - Tue, 09 Dec 2014 19:35:39 EST CSHK8ujB No.54790 File: 1418171739534.jpg -(192677B / 188.16KB, 1280x800) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. The European Extremely Large Telescope (E-ELT), a planned 39 meter telescope to be built high in the atacama desert has received sufficient funding to move into implementation. The observatory aims for first light around 2024.http://www.eso.org/public/images/eso1440a/At 39 meters the telescope will dwarf the current 8-10 meter class telescopes with 4 times the resolution and about 15 times the collecting area. The telescope evolves around several science themes from large to small. It's extreme resolution combines will provide Hubble like views of galaxies 30 times further away but also with the power to resolve every pixel into a spectrum. This will mean a great deal for galaxy formation. On the topic of exoplanets E-ELT will have a high precision spectrograph capable of confidently detecting earth like planets around sun like stars. With later instruments it will also be capable of directly imaging super-earths. With time it could provide evidence of continents and oceans. It's high precision spectrograph of directly measuring the expansion of the universe for the first time. Redshift drift is an effect where the expansion of the universe causes redshifts to slowly increase over time. E-ELT boasts big science and some incredible engineering. 11 posts and 2 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:02:50 EST CSHK8ujB No.54811 Reply >>54809Nice post, tiny nitpic. The deep fields are actually a very small region of the sky. >> John Bahcall - Mon, 05 Jan 2015 04:07:37 EST uAV78rGD No.54893 Reply Does it get red, blue, infrared and ultraviolet light too? >> John Wheeler - Mon, 05 Jan 2015 23:21:24 EST CSHK8ujB No.54894 Reply >>54893Yes. Initially the instumentation will focus on the near infrared because adaptive optics is easier there and so you get the most out of the telescope. Possibly with a mid infrared camera also. After that visible and UV will come in.
>> Kiyotsugu Hirayama - Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:02:50 EST CSHK8ujB No.54811 Reply >>54809Nice post, tiny nitpic. The deep fields are actually a very small region of the sky.
>> John Bahcall - Mon, 05 Jan 2015 04:07:37 EST uAV78rGD No.54893 Reply Does it get red, blue, infrared and ultraviolet light too?
>> John Wheeler - Mon, 05 Jan 2015 23:21:24 EST CSHK8ujB No.54894 Reply >>54893Yes. Initially the instumentation will focus on the near infrared because adaptive optics is easier there and so you get the most out of the telescope. Possibly with a mid infrared camera also. After that visible and UV will come in.
Panspermia View Thread Reply Hide Walter Adams - Mon, 29 Dec 2014 16:10:02 EST h1NupmlQ No.54865 File: 1419887402811.gif -(1021711B / 997.76KB, 400x225) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Oh shit. I just realized that panspermia is plausible. For those here who dont know, Panspermia basically explains that the building blocks for life, or even micro-organisms came originally from some extra-terrestrials source [read: Not "aliens" per se]. The way I came to this self realization is by reading about the Voyager & Pioneer crafts, and this page from What If: https://what-if.xkcd.com/117/So according to this author, whom I would say is slightly reliable if not on the optimistic side, there are a number of microorganisms that remain viable upon spacecraft after launch. Even though most craft are decontaminated, there are still some number of organisms left. Now, a number of craft have failed in their missions and impacted planets. Another number of craft have willingly set down upon planets. Do you think it is possible that there could be cross contamination from earth based organisms on any local celestial bodies, and more, do you believe that if microorganisms contaminated Mars, or Titan, etc. that they could remain viable, or even multiply? 1 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> James Elliott - Thu, 01 Jan 2015 23:18:56 EST XwQwdExC No.54885 Reply 1420172336080.jpg -(168259B / 164.32KB, 1068x614) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. The 11th episode of the new Cosmos TV series shows a very plausible explanation for the origin of life being Panspermia; I suggest you watch that episode if you are interested in the subject. I made a thread on /sagan/ about this exact same topic early last year, see this post here: >>53790I just find it incredibly interesting how we are finding amino acids and other biological building blocks just floating around in space... >> Robert Wilson - Fri, 02 Jan 2015 03:09:47 EST H3af7FdZ No.54886 Reply 1420186187995.jpg -(43279B / 42.26KB, 400x302) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. name for this hypothesis contains a word of sexual nature and its meaning can have vulgar, or even sexist overtones to sensitive people >> Annie Cannon - Sat, 03 Jan 2015 00:21:26 EST 415JX8nG No.54889 Reply I think a reasonable to suggest that if panspermia is correct, most habitable places in this solar system should be inhabited.I think Martian caves, Europas oceans or slush, and I was thinking maybe even volcanoes on titan, there may be liquid water with interesting chemistry going on.Also, Curiosity detected organic carbon when it burned some soil containing water ice in a sample retrieved a few inches underground. Nothing definitive, but an interesting signal none the less.Of course not finding life wouldn't necessarily be proof that panspermia didn't happen, but it would imply that life needs more particular conditions to survive.We are always finding life that pushes the boundaries of what we thought was possible, if life can in fact exist elsewhere in our solar system, it will.
>> James Elliott - Thu, 01 Jan 2015 23:18:56 EST XwQwdExC No.54885 Reply 1420172336080.jpg -(168259B / 164.32KB, 1068x614) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. The 11th episode of the new Cosmos TV series shows a very plausible explanation for the origin of life being Panspermia; I suggest you watch that episode if you are interested in the subject. I made a thread on /sagan/ about this exact same topic early last year, see this post here: >>53790I just find it incredibly interesting how we are finding amino acids and other biological building blocks just floating around in space...
>> Robert Wilson - Fri, 02 Jan 2015 03:09:47 EST H3af7FdZ No.54886 Reply 1420186187995.jpg -(43279B / 42.26KB, 400x302) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. name for this hypothesis contains a word of sexual nature and its meaning can have vulgar, or even sexist overtones to sensitive people
>> Annie Cannon - Sat, 03 Jan 2015 00:21:26 EST 415JX8nG No.54889 Reply I think a reasonable to suggest that if panspermia is correct, most habitable places in this solar system should be inhabited.I think Martian caves, Europas oceans or slush, and I was thinking maybe even volcanoes on titan, there may be liquid water with interesting chemistry going on.Also, Curiosity detected organic carbon when it burned some soil containing water ice in a sample retrieved a few inches underground. Nothing definitive, but an interesting signal none the less.Of course not finding life wouldn't necessarily be proof that panspermia didn't happen, but it would imply that life needs more particular conditions to survive.We are always finding life that pushes the boundaries of what we thought was possible, if life can in fact exist elsewhere in our solar system, it will.
Study finds possible alternative explanation for dark energy View Thread Reply Hide Joseph von Fraunhofer - Tue, 30 Dec 2014 19:38:01 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54870 File: 1419986281805.jpg -(19458B / 19.00KB, 305x244) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. http://phys.org/news/2014-12-alternative-explanation-dark-energy.html>The predicted effects of time being faster in the past would have the effect of making the plot of supernovas become linear at all distances, which would imply that there is no acceleration in the expansion of the universe. In this scenario there would be no necessity to invoke the existence of dark energy.So pretty much if this is true, Dark Energy doesn't exist and it's observed effects are really caused by time dilation. Hubble expansion is really just an illusion caused by time slowing as the universe ages. We see acceleration at increased distances because when you look farther away it means you look back in time, and time is actually slowing down.Also, this would imply that as the state of the acceleration is essentially linear, there will be no Big Rip or Big Crunch because the acceleration is not positive or negative. The universe will likely end in a slow Heat Death. 9 posts and 1 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> James Elliott - Thu, 01 Jan 2015 20:38:37 EST XwQwdExC No.54883 Reply 1420162717080.gif -(703718B / 687.22KB, 256x256) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54880very interesting, thanks for your reply. I find time dilation really fascinating.About "gravitational time dilation":What if gravitation was merely a secondary effect of increased time dilation (rather than the other way around, i.e. time dilation being "caused" by increased gravity), with objects having a natural tendency to gravitate towards regions of spacetime with slower time? Do you think this is at all possible?Even a spaceship traveling at a significant fraction of the speed of light would have greatly increased mass (according to E=mc^2), and therefore would also have a greatly increased gravitational field. In this case, the increased gravity would act like natural "drag" to slow the velocity of the spacecraft down to a more neutral speed (with respect to other moving bodies in the universe). Is it at all plausible to consider that gravity may be a "fictitious force" like we consider the centripetal force to be?sorry if these are dumb questions >> Giovanni Cassini - Fri, 02 Jan 2015 08:47:54 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54887 Reply >>54883If anything, things would seem to move away faster as they move into space that experiences a faster time rate. Oh wait, they already do and this is why we think there's dark energy.All this still doesn't explain dark matter. >> Henry Russell - Sun, 04 Jan 2015 14:25:15 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54890 Reply >>54887Thought experiment, feel free to dismiss this as nonsense.What if dark matter is somehow linked to the apparent mass increase objects experience as they approach light speed?In localized areas where the time is not moving faster, objects to not seem to have any increased mass. But more distant objects, which are relatively moving faster and faster away from us approaching light speed more and more, objects are actually apparently gaining mass due to general relativity.This could be tested by measuring the mass of extremely distant objects over time but I'm afraid it would take too much time, in human years, to observe a change.
>> James Elliott - Thu, 01 Jan 2015 20:38:37 EST XwQwdExC No.54883 Reply 1420162717080.gif -(703718B / 687.22KB, 256x256) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54880very interesting, thanks for your reply. I find time dilation really fascinating.About "gravitational time dilation":What if gravitation was merely a secondary effect of increased time dilation (rather than the other way around, i.e. time dilation being "caused" by increased gravity), with objects having a natural tendency to gravitate towards regions of spacetime with slower time? Do you think this is at all possible?Even a spaceship traveling at a significant fraction of the speed of light would have greatly increased mass (according to E=mc^2), and therefore would also have a greatly increased gravitational field. In this case, the increased gravity would act like natural "drag" to slow the velocity of the spacecraft down to a more neutral speed (with respect to other moving bodies in the universe). Is it at all plausible to consider that gravity may be a "fictitious force" like we consider the centripetal force to be?sorry if these are dumb questions
>> Giovanni Cassini - Fri, 02 Jan 2015 08:47:54 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54887 Reply >>54883If anything, things would seem to move away faster as they move into space that experiences a faster time rate. Oh wait, they already do and this is why we think there's dark energy.All this still doesn't explain dark matter.
>> Henry Russell - Sun, 04 Jan 2015 14:25:15 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54890 Reply >>54887Thought experiment, feel free to dismiss this as nonsense.What if dark matter is somehow linked to the apparent mass increase objects experience as they approach light speed?In localized areas where the time is not moving faster, objects to not seem to have any increased mass. But more distant objects, which are relatively moving faster and faster away from us approaching light speed more and more, objects are actually apparently gaining mass due to general relativity.This could be tested by measuring the mass of extremely distant objects over time but I'm afraid it would take too much time, in human years, to observe a change.
Gravity Question View Thread Reply Hide Edwin Salpeter - Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:28:17 EST 415JX8nG No.54821 File: 1418660897305.jpg -(18309B / 17.88KB, 450x450) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Would two colliding gravitational waves exert a tiny force against each other?If they did at distances where the universe becomes homogenized, could the cumulative force of colliding gravitational waves of the rest of the universe overcome the weak attraction of gravity?This isn't against dark energy, I was just wondering if it could be a contributing factor. 4 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Caroline Herschel - Tue, 16 Dec 2014 04:56:03 EST Ncnb3OJc No.54829 Reply 1418723763789.gif -(41331B / 40.36KB, 150x150) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Gravitational waves don't have a longitudinal component, so they don't cause expansion or contraction of space along the direction of propagation. They cause expansion or contraction perpendicular to the direction of propagation. Pic related, it's what you'd see if a very strong gravitational wave traveled along the line from your screen to your face. It simultaneously expands and contracts in such a way that any area is only deformed, not increased or decreased. There is no unbalanced force, thus, it can't contribute to the metric expansion of spacetime.Two gravitational waves would not collide, they would constructively or destructively interfere. That means that in some places, the effect in the gif would be amplified, while cancelled out in other places. Interference still wouldn't create unbalanced forces.Another argument against it being related to the expansion of spacetime is that the strength of gravitation waves are inversely proportional to the distance from the source. The expansion of spacetime, on the other hand, is most significant in areas of low gravity. Galaxies are receding, but not falling apart. Binary stars (which are likely generators of gravity waves) don't repulse other objects or binary stars.Finally, keep in mind that gravitational waves are generated only by accelerating objects, they only propagate changes in a gravitational field, they're not the carriers of gravity or the dual of gravitons.Disclaimer: I'm not a physicist nor do I understand the math. This is just what I picked up reading about the topic. >> Bruon Rossi - Sun, 28 Dec 2014 22:33:12 EST 2uBuMclp No.54861 Reply >>54821weak or strong gravitational waves exert a force against each other. thats why while you are being pulled to the earth the earth is also being pulled toward you. >> Arno Penzias - Mon, 29 Dec 2014 03:51:04 EST w9Ju60EU No.54862 Reply >>54861No, read the post above yours.
>> Caroline Herschel - Tue, 16 Dec 2014 04:56:03 EST Ncnb3OJc No.54829 Reply 1418723763789.gif -(41331B / 40.36KB, 150x150) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Gravitational waves don't have a longitudinal component, so they don't cause expansion or contraction of space along the direction of propagation. They cause expansion or contraction perpendicular to the direction of propagation. Pic related, it's what you'd see if a very strong gravitational wave traveled along the line from your screen to your face. It simultaneously expands and contracts in such a way that any area is only deformed, not increased or decreased. There is no unbalanced force, thus, it can't contribute to the metric expansion of spacetime.Two gravitational waves would not collide, they would constructively or destructively interfere. That means that in some places, the effect in the gif would be amplified, while cancelled out in other places. Interference still wouldn't create unbalanced forces.Another argument against it being related to the expansion of spacetime is that the strength of gravitation waves are inversely proportional to the distance from the source. The expansion of spacetime, on the other hand, is most significant in areas of low gravity. Galaxies are receding, but not falling apart. Binary stars (which are likely generators of gravity waves) don't repulse other objects or binary stars.Finally, keep in mind that gravitational waves are generated only by accelerating objects, they only propagate changes in a gravitational field, they're not the carriers of gravity or the dual of gravitons.Disclaimer: I'm not a physicist nor do I understand the math. This is just what I picked up reading about the topic.
>> Bruon Rossi - Sun, 28 Dec 2014 22:33:12 EST 2uBuMclp No.54861 Reply >>54821weak or strong gravitational waves exert a force against each other. thats why while you are being pulled to the earth the earth is also being pulled toward you.
>> Arno Penzias - Mon, 29 Dec 2014 03:51:04 EST w9Ju60EU No.54862 Reply >>54861No, read the post above yours.
Do dwarfs live on Pluto? View Thread Reply Hide :3 - Wed, 24 Dec 2014 07:31:28 EST PNtK+lw6 No.54857 File: 1419424288937.gif -(1593205B / 1.52MB, 768x432) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Hello.Today on https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1520367906/max-navy-1488-space-program there is a project that might tell us why Pluto really isent classed as a planet anymore.Do anyone know if aliens live on Pluto?Is NASA refusing to tell us why they really changed what we now say Pluto is?Is Earth in some sort of conflict with the dwarfs?I pledged some money and if you just like me want to find out the truh please try to get it 100% funded. >> Joseph-Louis Lagrange - Wed, 24 Dec 2014 13:30:17 EST vud/nmWg No.54858 Reply dwarf people are not people.
>> Joseph-Louis Lagrange - Wed, 24 Dec 2014 13:30:17 EST vud/nmWg No.54858 Reply dwarf people are not people.
Interstellar Question View Thread Reply Hide Edmond Halley - Wed, 17 Dec 2014 15:42:59 EST 9uY/b809 No.54832 File: 1418848979655.jpg -(18183B / 17.76KB, 204x200) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. Not here to talk about whether or not it was good movie or not. Just had a question that has me a little baffled.So they go down on the planet near the black hole with the intense gravity, and they leave the black guy behind. Due to relativity time passes for the black guy much faster than on the distorted planet. So, would the black guy see if he looked down at the planet with a high power telescope? Would they be moving extremely slow or what? 1 posts omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Henry Russell - Tue, 23 Dec 2014 05:01:31 EST 3dhJAQX4 No.54854 Reply no >> Bart Bok - Tue, 23 Dec 2014 16:01:11 EST KCC23SOp No.54855 Reply >>54832Doesn't matter because they would have never gone to waterworld; the signal would have been "stretched" by gravity as well; they wouldn't be able to receive an affirmative message and if they did it (but they wouldn't) would just be junk. Even the binary pings they were using would be rendered unusable. speculation, but I do have a background in radio communication; feel free to debunk if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I am not. But yes, he would see their journey unfold at a snails pace, they would look like they were hardly moving. >> Bart Bok - Tue, 23 Dec 2014 20:28:18 EST KCC23SOp No.54856 Reply >>54855Addendum to what I said earlier: He may not be able to see them well or even at all; if he can see them at all they will appear to be moving _very_ slowly. A fixed number of photons travel from the planet to the distant observer in orbit, because of the distorting effect in play photons leaving the planet nano seconds after other photons will reach the observer quite a bit after the photons they had been chasing. The guy in space is receiving an hours worth of photons over a 20 year period. That should have an effect on how the entire planet is seen; like it should leave a ghost trail in its orbit or something.
>> Bart Bok - Tue, 23 Dec 2014 16:01:11 EST KCC23SOp No.54855 Reply >>54832Doesn't matter because they would have never gone to waterworld; the signal would have been "stretched" by gravity as well; they wouldn't be able to receive an affirmative message and if they did it (but they wouldn't) would just be junk. Even the binary pings they were using would be rendered unusable. speculation, but I do have a background in radio communication; feel free to debunk if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure I am not. But yes, he would see their journey unfold at a snails pace, they would look like they were hardly moving.
>> Bart Bok - Tue, 23 Dec 2014 20:28:18 EST KCC23SOp No.54856 Reply >>54855Addendum to what I said earlier: He may not be able to see them well or even at all; if he can see them at all they will appear to be moving _very_ slowly. A fixed number of photons travel from the planet to the distant observer in orbit, because of the distorting effect in play photons leaving the planet nano seconds after other photons will reach the observer quite a bit after the photons they had been chasing. The guy in space is receiving an hours worth of photons over a 20 year period. That should have an effect on how the entire planet is seen; like it should leave a ghost trail in its orbit or something.
Black Holes and trash compactors View Thread Reply Hide Edmond Halley - Wed, 17 Dec 2014 22:14:24 EST n8sUDEe1 No.54835 File: 1418872464784.jpg -(2835458B / 2.70MB, 4096x3072) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. If black holes are at the center of each galaxy, and their gravitational vortex creates the whirlpool spiraling of galaxy arms, then is it possible black holes and gamma ray bursts such as Cygnus X-1 act as garbage disposals or trash compactors and they can get full. Does the pull of a black hole suck in at varying speeds? Do some black holes start slowing down? Is there too much matter in them?On an unrelated note, my garbage disposal is currently jammed. 3 posts and 1 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Henry Russell - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:29:32 EST YHjXylC8 No.54842 Reply 1418930972040.jpg -(509495B / 497.55KB, 3000x2400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54838If there's too much mass being accreted, a portion of the matter being accreted will be ejected, but the size/shape of a body is irrelevant to its gravitational effect on another body, only center of mass and distance. >> Wilhelm Beer - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:09:50 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54843 Reply >>54840Finally found something similar but it's not what I rememberhttp://www.nbcnews.com/id/6940627/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/scientists-learn-how-black-hole-stops-itself/#.VJNnNAYDAMore or less if 2 supermassive black holes are merging, the accretion discs can merge into a quazar that will blow all matter away from the holes so nothing will fall into the black holes, effectively neutralizing their pull for a short amount of time.But this isn't exactly the article I remember. I think I might be suffering from false-memory syndrome which is weird because my memory is usually flawless and I assure you that I'm not just pulling this out of my ass (aka lying).I really can't find it but I know I fucking saw it. This is frustrating.Just from my speculation, since Hawking radiation works by 2 entangled particles approaching a black hole and only one falling in, with the other by chance flying off, the black hole loses mass, or that's as much as I understand. If we have a black hole of 10 stellar masses and throw dozens of stellar masses of entangled particles at it, the black hole would eventually evaporate completely because it's natural rate of decay by hawking radiation would have been artificially increased. I wouldn't doubt a type 3 civilization would be capable of destroying a black hole in this manner. But this isn't what I read either. >> Johann Bode - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:36:59 EST Ncnb3OJc No.54844 Reply >>54843Reading about the quasar phase was interesting, thanks.> effectively neutralizing their pullThough the quasar's wind blows gas away and inhibits the growth of the black hole, I don't see it as the black hole losing strength. There are other things (stars orbiting beyond the significant effects of the cosmic wind, dark matter) that continue being dominated by the black hole's gravity. I guess I'm arguing semantics.> Hawking radiation works by 2 entangled particles approaching a black hole and only one falling inEntanglement isn't important to Hawking radiation. Virtual particle pairs that occur very close to the event horizon can be split apart by the gravity, with one particle accreted and the other escaping. The infalling particle represents negative energy since they're virtual (add up to 0) and the escaping particle is positive (it carries mass away from the black hole). Virtual particle pairs is just one way of explaining Hawking radiation. Another is quantum tunneling, which allows particles to cross the event horizon without moving faster than the speed of light.> throw dozens of stellar masses of entangled particles at it, the black hole would eventually evaporateThat wouldn't work. We'd be throwing mass at the black hole and it would grow. Even if we could split virtual particles pairs with an artificial event horizon, any energy we could throw would be positive, meaning the negative half of the virtual pairs would reduce our own mass.
>> Henry Russell - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:29:32 EST YHjXylC8 No.54842 Reply 1418930972040.jpg -(509495B / 497.55KB, 3000x2400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54838If there's too much mass being accreted, a portion of the matter being accreted will be ejected, but the size/shape of a body is irrelevant to its gravitational effect on another body, only center of mass and distance.
>> Wilhelm Beer - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 19:09:50 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54843 Reply >>54840Finally found something similar but it's not what I rememberhttp://www.nbcnews.com/id/6940627/ns/technology_and_science-space/t/scientists-learn-how-black-hole-stops-itself/#.VJNnNAYDAMore or less if 2 supermassive black holes are merging, the accretion discs can merge into a quazar that will blow all matter away from the holes so nothing will fall into the black holes, effectively neutralizing their pull for a short amount of time.But this isn't exactly the article I remember. I think I might be suffering from false-memory syndrome which is weird because my memory is usually flawless and I assure you that I'm not just pulling this out of my ass (aka lying).I really can't find it but I know I fucking saw it. This is frustrating.Just from my speculation, since Hawking radiation works by 2 entangled particles approaching a black hole and only one falling in, with the other by chance flying off, the black hole loses mass, or that's as much as I understand. If we have a black hole of 10 stellar masses and throw dozens of stellar masses of entangled particles at it, the black hole would eventually evaporate completely because it's natural rate of decay by hawking radiation would have been artificially increased. I wouldn't doubt a type 3 civilization would be capable of destroying a black hole in this manner. But this isn't what I read either.
>> Johann Bode - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 20:36:59 EST Ncnb3OJc No.54844 Reply >>54843Reading about the quasar phase was interesting, thanks.> effectively neutralizing their pullThough the quasar's wind blows gas away and inhibits the growth of the black hole, I don't see it as the black hole losing strength. There are other things (stars orbiting beyond the significant effects of the cosmic wind, dark matter) that continue being dominated by the black hole's gravity. I guess I'm arguing semantics.> Hawking radiation works by 2 entangled particles approaching a black hole and only one falling inEntanglement isn't important to Hawking radiation. Virtual particle pairs that occur very close to the event horizon can be split apart by the gravity, with one particle accreted and the other escaping. The infalling particle represents negative energy since they're virtual (add up to 0) and the escaping particle is positive (it carries mass away from the black hole). Virtual particle pairs is just one way of explaining Hawking radiation. Another is quantum tunneling, which allows particles to cross the event horizon without moving faster than the speed of light.> throw dozens of stellar masses of entangled particles at it, the black hole would eventually evaporateThat wouldn't work. We'd be throwing mass at the black hole and it would grow. Even if we could split virtual particles pairs with an artificial event horizon, any energy we could throw would be positive, meaning the negative half of the virtual pairs would reduce our own mass.
Subject Zero View Thread Reply Hide Illuminati - Wed, 17 Dec 2014 20:29:13 EST PNtK+lw6 No.54833 File: 1418866153109.jpg -(75298B / 73.53KB, 1024x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. What does this image show really?I do belive that its space related. >> Joseph Taylor Jr. - Wed, 17 Dec 2014 22:01:23 EST 4HbkLal6 No.54834 Reply >>54833http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Knight_satellite >> Vera Rubiin - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 07:02:36 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54839 Reply >>54834>a thermal blanket lost during an EVABullshit, who brings a blanket on an EVA?And if it is a blanket, who let the fucking clown into EVA? >> Henry Russell - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 12:39:10 EST YHjXylC8 No.54841 Reply 1418924350040.png -(975679B / 952.81KB, 1006x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54839Several segments of the station are covered in thermal blankets, some of these need to be removed when connecting segments together.In at least one case, several parts drifted away due to complications.
>> Joseph Taylor Jr. - Wed, 17 Dec 2014 22:01:23 EST 4HbkLal6 No.54834 Reply >>54833http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Knight_satellite
>> Vera Rubiin - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 07:02:36 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54839 Reply >>54834>a thermal blanket lost during an EVABullshit, who brings a blanket on an EVA?And if it is a blanket, who let the fucking clown into EVA?
>> Henry Russell - Thu, 18 Dec 2014 12:39:10 EST YHjXylC8 No.54841 Reply 1418924350040.png -(975679B / 952.81KB, 1006x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54839Several segments of the station are covered in thermal blankets, some of these need to be removed when connecting segments together.In at least one case, several parts drifted away due to complications.
iron you say? View Thread Reply Hide Henry Draper - Wed, 03 Dec 2014 15:37:23 EST PA4ykyUu No.54750 File: 1417639043009.jpg -(16804B / 16.41KB, 300x296) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. I've read before that asteroids contain iron, years further back than I can exactly remember... I want to share with you a rant I've engaged on instagram as it pertains to the cyanide found closer to the galactic core.what if life on Earth came from microbes, and that the conditions on Mars and Venus were too dramatic to allow the evolution of microbes. The first wave of planets to be created by the sun were bombarded by asteroids containing microbial life, and the gravity of the planets became so strong after condensing so much that the small asteroids with little gravity began to rotate around the planets to become moons, but their gravitational field was too weak to contain microbial life, and thus the sun blew those microbes into space. Would microbes survive an impact with rocky terrain, and would the survivors of an impact be the eventual homo-sapien? or would the conditions need be a soft collision with buoyant elements such as plasmic hydrogen gas, or water? or perhaps a large icy meteor containing dna needed melting in the atmosphere of Earth and needed to be so large that the DNA itself would not be destroyed. Well, scientists have discovered that DNA can survive the heat of atmospheric conditions in indirect penetration. It seems that the DNA could not stay attached to the parts designed for wind resistance, but did survive in crevices where wind resistance has little to no factorable value.Well, then we would have to suppose in the case that a requirement is a soft collision that the liquid hydrogen core had since been subjected to temperatures so high that fusion could occur enough times for the core to become Iron, and we physically are not yet capable of testing at that magnitude. But we can use contextual evidence, such like the biogenesis theories that life did sprinkle upon the Earth as mana from the gaseous atmosphere... but what kind of atmosphere would exist strong enough to resist the explosive fusion reactions of Hydrogen to Iron? Well, it seems that iron is a product of lesser resistance to fusion by-product, if you compare the Earth's core to the surface of the sun, where fusion only occurs in the core of the sun and only photons make way to the surface, producing sun spots, the elder definition of dark matter.a plasmic Hydrogen-2 foam core (such like the primordial Helium-4 of plasmic meta-material) could possibly have existed to host microbial life before a fission occurance seperated the hydrogens, to allow a binding with radical oxygens existing in a surrounding foam, preparing to fuse with the hydrogen thus to become H2O water. The fission-fusion process could thus have become the asteroids to bring microbial life to lesser or greater evolved planets which produced iron cores and also carbon, thus exposing DNA to high gravity environments and very few elements, and possibly also carbon, whereupon the DNA binded.it is possible that a group of C4H7, photonic bombardment (electrons with no protons or nuetrons), were met with a single nuetrino for each molecule and thus, a Carbon becomes Nitogen. This must have happened to the first carbon [ to be propyl cyanide (attached to the first carbon)] in half the group, and to the second Carbon, to be isopropyl cyanide (attached to the second carbon), which makes theorizing possible that matter can coexist after certain divine intervention occurs... now the wonder of if the hydrocarbons were seperated and regrouped, and by what, if not by the gravity of the solar system itselfcarbon would need supreme intervention to be able resist the bombarding lower mass elements, to interact with Hydrogen naturally. Hence, the proximity of Hydrocarbonic Cyanide in our galaxy, discovered toward the Gamma-Radioactive Galactic Core. The recent discovery of Cyanide in two different forms (propyl cyanide and isopropyl cyanide) , suggests that indeed Carbon must have existed resistant to ionization in order to retain it's nucleus, either by shape, or pure mass, To exist as C-C=CN-C-H-H-H-H-H-H-H and also CN=C-C-C-H-H-H-H-H-H-H. The composition leaves a very obvious footprint although an equally dark mystery to the workings of the universe. It is possible that hydrocarbons would collect hydrogens until the mass was able to resist oncoming forces of electrons, which reconfigured the propyl structure into half propyl and half isopropyl by the addition and removal of one carbon in one group, with the help of Nitrogen, that came from out of fucking nowher… Comment too long. Click here to view the full text. 7 posts and 1 images omitted. Click View Thread to read. >> Jan Hendrik Oort - Tue, 09 Dec 2014 09:53:12 EST uyuUt0io No.54786 Reply 1418136792052.jpg -(41171B / 40.21KB, 600x428) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54778>as I am attempting to undefine the hyperreality of the big bang and relocate the starting point of reality at this known location in the galaxy, where human consciousness could have began subatomically before or during a delineation of self and a host reality.you're babbling again. simplify your points and theory to the point where they make sense to people who aren't on NBOMe, please, so we can have a discussion >> Hannes Alven - Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:56:44 EST h1NupmlQ No.54830 Reply 1418741804241.jpg -(53460B / 52.21KB, 600x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54778>The universe being an illusion would prove my theory and my above stated points.No, it wouldn't. Please, Just stop. You're not re-writing physics and cosmology, you're just spouting meta-physical bullshit and labeling it a theory. >> Charles Messier - Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:38:01 EST LjaCs03k No.54831 Reply 1418747881984.jpg -(142248B / 138.91KB, 333x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54759"Mana from heaven," as in fluff from the sky in the bible, as in his allegory to organic chemical rain in the early earths atmosphere as seen on Titan.
>> Jan Hendrik Oort - Tue, 09 Dec 2014 09:53:12 EST uyuUt0io No.54786 Reply 1418136792052.jpg -(41171B / 40.21KB, 600x428) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54778>as I am attempting to undefine the hyperreality of the big bang and relocate the starting point of reality at this known location in the galaxy, where human consciousness could have began subatomically before or during a delineation of self and a host reality.you're babbling again. simplify your points and theory to the point where they make sense to people who aren't on NBOMe, please, so we can have a discussion
>> Hannes Alven - Tue, 16 Dec 2014 09:56:44 EST h1NupmlQ No.54830 Reply 1418741804241.jpg -(53460B / 52.21KB, 600x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54778>The universe being an illusion would prove my theory and my above stated points.No, it wouldn't. Please, Just stop. You're not re-writing physics and cosmology, you're just spouting meta-physical bullshit and labeling it a theory.
>> Charles Messier - Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:38:01 EST LjaCs03k No.54831 Reply 1418747881984.jpg -(142248B / 138.91KB, 333x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. >>54759"Mana from heaven," as in fluff from the sky in the bible, as in his allegory to organic chemical rain in the early earths atmosphere as seen on Titan.
So.. flying saucers are a thing. View Thread Reply Hide Fritz Zwicky - Sat, 13 Dec 2014 17:35:25 EST eMAv2J9C No.54813 File: 1418510125360.png -(157180B / 153.50KB, 902x770) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAdj6vpYppAand they're powered by laser beams."with 2 to 6 better fuel efficiency to the space shuttle"Just..watch the whole thing, holy shit. >> Johann Encke - Sat, 13 Dec 2014 18:58:03 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54814 Reply >>54813This video is ancient.Also, I've known this for a long time, they run on the same concept as a solar sail.The object in OP's pic is about the size of a dinner plate. >> William Huggins - Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:32:16 EST 5O93DDXg No.54818 Reply >>54814scale testing or not I want to see the results on the full sized model. Launching a bit of mass isn't hard. But launching the larger mass of a fully space ready rocket is another issue. >> Joseph Taylor Jr. - Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:43:36 EST eMAv2J9C No.54819 Reply 1 year later (scaled up model)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_9ac-w4DW8Apparently this is considered a "Lightcraft" and it's distinct from solar sails because it's dependent on the expansion of reaction mass to accelerate rather than being accelerated by light pressure alone. not a lot of news on this, probably not a feasible project to "launch satellites into orbit within 10 years"
>> Johann Encke - Sat, 13 Dec 2014 18:58:03 EST ksAXy5yQ No.54814 Reply >>54813This video is ancient.Also, I've known this for a long time, they run on the same concept as a solar sail.The object in OP's pic is about the size of a dinner plate.
>> William Huggins - Sun, 14 Dec 2014 13:32:16 EST 5O93DDXg No.54818 Reply >>54814scale testing or not I want to see the results on the full sized model. Launching a bit of mass isn't hard. But launching the larger mass of a fully space ready rocket is another issue.
>> Joseph Taylor Jr. - Sun, 14 Dec 2014 14:43:36 EST eMAv2J9C No.54819 Reply 1 year later (scaled up model)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_9ac-w4DW8Apparently this is considered a "Lightcraft" and it's distinct from solar sails because it's dependent on the expansion of reaction mass to accelerate rather than being accelerated by light pressure alone. not a lot of news on this, probably not a feasible project to "launch satellites into orbit within 10 years"
Space is interesting View Thread Reply Hide Tycho Brahe - Wed, 10 Dec 2014 17:11:27 EST R7ksFdp2 No.54798 File: 1418249487586.jpg -(855748B / 835.69KB, 2560x1600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. I really want to learn more about space, /sagan/ but the sheer vastness of the amount of information on the subject is just overwhelming to me. I could spend a lifetime just literally reading about space, different theories, the math involved with space and space travel, how stars work, if interdimensional travel is possible, astral planes... Just all of it. And to be honest it's very humbling but yet it puts things into perspective. We are less than a fraction than a blink of an eye in age to the universe, and we are beyond microscopic because the universe is so vast but yet, it would take millions of years to reach the farthest depths. Maybe I'm over-thinking this but space is just mystifying to me and there's so much to learn and I don't know where to start. >> Caroline Herschel - Wed, 10 Dec 2014 20:38:40 EST 4HbkLal6 No.54799 Reply >>54798>>where"to start"does it actually matter? I mean, truly? On a cosmic scale, geographically or in size? Duration?Space is pretty fucking interesting man. >> Riccardo Giacconi - Wed, 10 Dec 2014 20:50:24 EST 9uY/b809 No.54801 Reply Watch Cosmos, new and old. Read books by Sagan, Hawking, Tyson. >> John Bahcall - Thu, 11 Dec 2014 05:04:55 EST R7ksFdp2 No.54802 Reply >>54801I'm going to start with those, and any other documentaries on like the history channel or discovery cause those are interesting too when they actually play them and not reality tv because everyone on cable is a sellout.
>> Caroline Herschel - Wed, 10 Dec 2014 20:38:40 EST 4HbkLal6 No.54799 Reply >>54798>>where"to start"does it actually matter? I mean, truly? On a cosmic scale, geographically or in size? Duration?Space is pretty fucking interesting man.
>> Riccardo Giacconi - Wed, 10 Dec 2014 20:50:24 EST 9uY/b809 No.54801 Reply Watch Cosmos, new and old. Read books by Sagan, Hawking, Tyson.
>> John Bahcall - Thu, 11 Dec 2014 05:04:55 EST R7ksFdp2 No.54802 Reply >>54801I'm going to start with those, and any other documentaries on like the history channel or discovery cause those are interesting too when they actually play them and not reality tv because everyone on cable is a sellout.
