On the contrary, trash.
Your post above (#95) contains name-calling and insults.
In addition, suggesting you will encourage other members to post negative reputation against another poster, simply because they have a different opinion to yours, is blatant trolling.
Now knock it off, or infractions will follow.
The same goes for you tytower.
Both of you, get over it... and move on.
I am warmed a little by the below post which admits that scientists have and do get it wrong with their age estimates and assumptions from data. The below post deals with the age of a particular star.
I am intrigued by the statement therein " The more mass a star (has) , the shorter its lifespan "
Thats an interesting statement when dealing with black masses that have Millions ,even Billions , of times the mass of our sun.
So does their time get shorter because of it?
I don't think so and don't see that the statement could be right because it is clearly accepted now that all off a galaxy's stars are falling toward a central black mass which therefore must outlast the stars generally.
Last edited by tytower; 17-01-17 at 08:07 AM.
My Health , my Family and my Property are not Government business. Governments should do what they were designed to do . Govern the issues that are best done by a central body in the country to protect it from foreign invasion.State Governments and Local Councils should be abolished to stop the duplication and waste of funds.
To defeat corruption in the public service , give them three times the penalty. Have them agree on hiring.
It's all still a guess based upon hypothesis which are never able to be tested given the time periods involved.
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...
Yes you are quite right Semme . Time is the big limiter . Its amazing though what can be discovered by good analysis based on what little data we can see.
My Health , my Family and my Property are not Government business. Governments should do what they were designed to do . Govern the issues that are best done by a central body in the country to protect it from foreign invasion.State Governments and Local Councils should be abolished to stop the duplication and waste of funds.
To defeat corruption in the public service , give them three times the penalty. Have them agree on hiring.
It's not so much that their previous estimates were wrong, but rather that this star is an exception. Once they became aware of the cause (transfer of material from a population 1 star to a population 2) then a correction can be made but the same date method is still correct. Population 1 stars are high metal stars. Population 2 are low metal stars. Population 3 are no metal stars. This rule still stands firm.
The exceptions, and they are exceptions, are caused by events which are not in the main sequence. Blue stragglers and parasitic stars like 49 Lib.
This statement is still correct. The higher the mass of a star, the quicker it burns through it's fuel and thus the shorter it's lifespan.I am intrigued by the statement therein " The more mass a star (has) , the shorter its lifespan "
Giant stars typically live less than 100 million years before ending their lives as supernovas.
Mid range mass yellow dwarf stars live for billions of years before ending their lives as supergiants and then white dwarfs.
Low mass red dwarf stars have life spans in the order of 10 of billions to hundreds of billions of years.
No because these objects are no longer stars. While we call neutron stars, magnetars, pulsars, quark stars, quasars and black holes "stars" because they emit radiation, they are not really stars in the true sense. They are no longer on the main sequence.Thats an interesting statement when dealing with black masses that have Millions ,even Billions , of times the mass of our sun.
So does their time get shorter because of it?
We might also put white dwarf and brown dwarf stars in this category.
The definition of the mass to life span ratio only applies to stars that burn (fuse) hydrogen.
This isn't correct either. The first reason is to realise that while stars are orbiting the galactic center of gravity, they are not falling toward it anymore than the moon is falling towards the Earth or Neptune is falling toward the sun.I don't think so and don't see that the statement could be right because it is clearly accepted now that all off a galaxy's stars are falling toward a central black mass which therefore must outlast the stars generally.
Second is to realise that this statement is based on the above incorrect statement. You cannot discover a new truth with incorrect evidence based on a previous error.
Sag A* does not have a shorter life span than the Baryonic stars and matter orbiting it because of it's large mass. It's life span is hundreds of billions to trillions of years not withstanding the impending collisions with Andromeda* and other members of the Virgo cluster and the Laniakea supercluster. The result will be mergers with other supermassive black holes and other galaxies resulting in a very large elliptical galaxy with a very large black hole.
Small black holes have shorter lives than large black holes.
Small black holes evaporate in hundreds of billions of years and supermassive black holes in hundreds of trillions of years.
How quickly they evaporate is a function of their temperature vs that of the surrounding universe.
Last edited by trash; 18-01-17 at 06:54 PM.
Yes I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
What is the qualifier here? The asterisk points to something.impending collisions with Andromeda*
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...
Andromeda* is the shorthand name of the central supermassive black hole as opposed to Andromeda M31 Galaxy.
Yes I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
lsemmens (19-01-17)
This is the nearest other black mass that we know about. The closest galaxy to the milky way galaxy . 11 Million years away at the speed of light . So the light we see here is at least 11 million years old and radio and electrical radiation all travel at that speed.
The theory is that these galaxies are all speeding away from some original central point . Remember billions of other galaxies! And they are accellerating!
It makes me think that really ,putting things in the context of such large distances , can they really be sure of knowing anything ? or is it all just wild speculation. Suddenly everything in the universe is instantly created from nothing ? what bunkum.
My Health , my Family and my Property are not Government business. Governments should do what they were designed to do . Govern the issues that are best done by a central body in the country to protect it from foreign invasion.State Governments and Local Councils should be abolished to stop the duplication and waste of funds.
To defeat corruption in the public service , give them three times the penalty. Have them agree on hiring.
This page is interesting in that it shows the correctness, or not,of some of the guesswork that is going on in the name of science
In particular "The new study is a follow-on to previous Hubble observations that placed the age of the bubbles at 2 million years old."
The new one guesses at "the black hole ate its last big meal about 6 million years ago, "
Now thats 3 times the first estimate ! So who is paying for this garbage "scientific study" ?
My Health , my Family and my Property are not Government business. Governments should do what they were designed to do . Govern the issues that are best done by a central body in the country to protect it from foreign invasion.State Governments and Local Councils should be abolished to stop the duplication and waste of funds.
To defeat corruption in the public service , give them three times the penalty. Have them agree on hiring.
What "Black Mass"? This is a Galaxy. Centaurus A.
No.The closest galaxy to the milky way galaxy . 11 Million years away at the speed of light .
M31 (Andromeda) is the closest Galaxy to the Milky Way and it's only 2 million light years away.
That is of course if you don't count dwarf galaxies, which would be the Large Magellanic Cloud and the Small Magellanic Cloud which are about 150,000 and 200,000 light years away. Or the Sagittarius dwarf galaxy which is 65,000 light years away.
No. They are all heading away from each other. Not a central point.The theory is that these galaxies are all speeding away from some original central point .
~100 trillions, and yes they are accelerating.Remember billions of other galaxies! And they are accellerating!
That is what the evidence suggests. You are always welcome to come up with a better theory, but you're going to require some evidence to support it.It makes me think that really ,putting things in the context of such large distances , can they really be sure of knowing anything ? or is it all just wild speculation. Suddenly everything in the universe is instantly created from nothing ? what bunkum.
If you think that Centaurus A is the nearest galaxy to our own galaxy, then you might like to review your evidence.
What's a "Black Mass?"
Yes I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
Double Post
Last edited by tytower; 14-03-17 at 04:47 PM.
The Orion Nebula's distance of some 1,500 light-years would make it the closest known black hole to planet Earth.
Now thats interesting ! If it indeed is a black mass.
And this one is a lot further away but what is interesting here is they speculate on the binary stars future as later being safe in an orbit . Don't think so. Even though its orbit speed would have to be very quick all orbits decay over time and it can only go one way -down.
Last edited by tytower; 14-03-17 at 08:52 PM.
My Health , my Family and my Property are not Government business. Governments should do what they were designed to do . Govern the issues that are best done by a central body in the country to protect it from foreign invasion.State Governments and Local Councils should be abolished to stop the duplication and waste of funds.
To defeat corruption in the public service , give them three times the penalty. Have them agree on hiring.
As you have observed we can only theorise upon the origins of the universe. The only "theory" that, at least, has credible and repeatable tests is that of "creation". We have yet to observe anything "just happen" but we do create new things every day.That is what the evidence suggests. You are always welcome to come up with a better theory, but you're going to require some evidence to support it.
I ma not looking for an argument, or discussion on religious beliefs, I am, however presenting an "alternative" theory.
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...
You must be joking . Which,what or where "credible and repeatable tests" do you mean? There is not one I am familiar with. If you can point me to one creation truth please do so.credible and repeatable tests
My conjecture here has always been that there is no one start time . No big bang , no creation by anything or of anything .Clearly only nothing can come from nothing . To see it otherwise is a a source of much bewilderment to me. .
What is seen as a big bang is in my view most probably one galaxy around one black mass. The black mass gets so big and heavy and spins so fast that it eventually totally explodes throwing material out in all directions but probably mostly in the polar directions (traces of which are the big bang) . Then that matter gradually does all the things we find in galaxies with one central point becoming denser than any other and everything falling back in to that center again culminating in another big bang event when the central black hole , black mass more correctly, explodes again . An endless , closed cycle.
The fact seems to be that material outside this system and extraneous to it can collide and intermingle and we see this in the skys also. So there is always interaction with anything in the black mass's gravitational field. When that black mass choses to explode based on its rotational speed and its size some stars and matter will still be falling into it . So their remains would likely remain on a course toward where the black mass were albeit more slowly so the central position relative to the complete galaxy would likely remain pretty stable.
Last edited by tytower; 14-03-17 at 09:22 PM.
My Health , my Family and my Property are not Government business. Governments should do what they were designed to do . Govern the issues that are best done by a central body in the country to protect it from foreign invasion.State Governments and Local Councils should be abolished to stop the duplication and waste of funds.
To defeat corruption in the public service , give them three times the penalty. Have them agree on hiring.
No, it's not an argument. It's correctly stating an observation.
That is that the universe appears to have a start.
"we can only theorise".
No, we can measure and test any theory. That's how we discovered that the universe had a start. And just to add insult to injury the derogatory term given to this ludicrous theory was "The Big Bang". Which then haunted the steady state theorists for the rest of their days.
It's one of the few occasions I think Science actually felt threatened by religion. There was "a creation". Which logically implies that there might therefore be a creator.
It was Erwin Hubble who discovered this. He measured the relative velocities of galaxies. He probably didn't expect the result he got. Which was that almost everything was heading away from him. As if he were the center of the universe.
This is the flaw of Tytower's statement above. There is no central point of the universe. Everything is moving away from everything else such that the center of the universe appears to be wherever you observe it from. The center of your universe is you.
Another 'issue' with the universe is that of Entropy. "It's all down hill from here."
It's about energy (and matter which can be considered to be the same thing).
Where did it all come from and where does it all end up. There's no evidence to suggest new matter and energy are created or destroyed.
The accounting ledger balances out for at unity for the universe.
This is the reason you will often hear about theoretical physicists looking for Asymmetry.
Where do things not add up and what is missing?
Why is there no free ride? Yet the big bang implies that somebody got a free ride.
Dark Energy also implies somebody might still be getting a free ride.
The question is - Can I get a free ride?
Yes I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
Last edited by irritant; 15-03-17 at 12:16 AM.
True freedom is the greatest gift a man can possess, yet is the one thing most easily and innocently given away, to crafty curses and binds cleverly disguised as blessings and gifts, in the pursuit of supposed achievement, status and power.
True freedom is the greatest gift a man can possess, yet is the one thing most easily and innocently given away, to crafty curses and binds cleverly disguised as blessings and gifts, in the pursuit of supposed achievement, status and power.
Ok, to follow through on the creation idea. Did computers "just happen", or did someone (pl.) think of an idea and developed it to the point we have now. Same with Cars, etc. etc. WE created them. I've tried the "big bang" theory. I'm still waiting for a nice cold beer to just appear in my empty glass. I even made it easy for beer to just "evolve" and put water in it. I'm still waiting. Meantime I am back to "creating" my own drinks. FWIW we may have been seeded here on Earth by another race from a distant galaxy, or we may have been a "creation" of God. Either way, we did not "just happen".
I'm out of my mind, but feel free to leave a message...
Lets start with the simplest examples Tytower.
The first is the hubble expansion which you incorrectly described as expanding from a central point.
The second is the cosmic microwave background
The third is the entropy of matter
This is just the most basic of explanations and the evidence has been tested, confirmed, retested and peer reviewed and corrected over the last 1000 years of human history. Your argument has been proven to be in error, incorrect and on occasions just complete fantasy.
Lets start with the trail of very obvious errors you have made up to this point in time.My conjecture here has always been that there is no one start time . No big bang , no creation by anything or of anything .Clearly only nothing can come from nothing . To see it otherwise is a a source of much bewilderment to me. .............
You're frequently incorrect with the statements you have made and make no effort to acknowledge or correct them.
Bewilderment, is actually just confusion. If you cannot get basic knowledge and theory correct, your never going to find answers you want to know.
It is however my fear that such errors will pollute the understanding of others reading this thread who do not take the subject too seriously.
The argument for "no time" is a fair one. Except that we experience it and it is a fundamental aspect of physics. There is no substitute explanation for it.
General relativity demonstrates very clearly that time is as variable as space. Time exists, it has a clear measurable start and it has defined end.
"Nothing can come from nothing" is also a fair statement. This is the first law of thermodynamics and entropy.
The universe obeys this law regardless of an inflationary universe or a steady state universe.
The problem still exists and the explanation for it much less coherent in a steady state. Entropy is still there. Rewind the history of the universe and you find that in both cases, it has a beginning.
We see no evidence for a violation in entropy in the universe. Therefore the steady state model just doesn't add up.
Nor does your whacky attempt to explain away evidence for the big bang, which sells it short by a few orders of magnitude.
The big bang of course also violates entropy, but only for the very shortest period of time.
No we don't know why but that is what all of the evidence points towards.
You'll just have to try harder and provide theories which are at least coherent. Maybe even testable and verifiable.
Yes I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
Bookmarks