Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ronnie67

  1. Conservation of angular momentum if what causes clouds to flatten out into a disk. The interstellar dust and gas cloud that the Sun and Solar System formed from, along with other stars. started to rotate when the bow-shock wave of matter and energy from one or more relatively nearby supernovae encountered the interstellar dust and gas cloud. The other stars that formed at the same time that the Sun did dispersed long ago. If you want to look at a relatively young open star cluster that still has traces of nebulosity around it, look at the Pleiades with binoculars after sunset tonight. If you have REALLY good naked eye vision, you might even be able to see the tiny Little Dipper shape of the brightest of the Pleiades. There's another open cluster called the Hyades relatively close by that bright orange giant star Aldebaran is in front of. Aldebaran is the "eye" of the bull constellation of Taurus Clouds interstellar gas and dust clouds flatten out because of conservation of momentum mass and energy. This does NOT completely explain some planetary systems. When astronomers started discovering planetary systems with planets that revolve around their primary star in the opposite direction to the star's rotation, scientists originally said "That can't happen, because it violates the conservation of mass/matter, energy, and momentum". Some OTHER forces acted on planets with orbits like that AFTER the planets were formed. Scientists gave a name to the effect using the last names of two people that begin with "M" and "R."
  2. Cheers Bob for the help, will give it a go tomorrow, its a bit late to try now, just finished work so brain power is down lol Ronnie
  3. lol, though I dont know what you are talking about above, I am interested in meteors so I am going to keep popping on over here and read your finds, what equipment are you using and are you scanning these meteors, plus is there a program I can access to maybe learn a little more Ronnie
  4. Well guys this is over my head, been reading some of your posts and though find it somewhat fascinating I have no idea what going on lol, I thought I would pop on over to this topic to see what discussions you are all having, so hope you do not mind, I cannot help in any of your queries, I give you all a thumbs up before I leave you all. Ronnie
  5. I don't suppose you got a picture, would have loved to see it
  6. For many years I have had formal discussion among a select few on the topic of multi universes, we are not altogether sure of what actually lies out there. However I do believe somewhere hidden is that certain key which will unlock this mystery, many have spoken of black holes, how they hold that something magical within the singularity, getting to find that out can be somewhat of a dilemma, though saying that in years to come someone might find a way of getting around the obstacle of gravity, but that's another story. So yes I definitely believe we live in a multi universe. Nice topic for a discussion Ronnie
  7. Hi guys I just wanted to pick your brains sort of speak, it would be most appreciated if you could help. here are the questions. a) The luminosity of the Sun is 4*10^33 erg/s, and its radius is 7*10^10 cm. You are tasked with building a solar power plant in the Arizona desert, using solar panels with 10% efficiency. How large an area (km^2) must your solar panels cover to match the power output of a large nuclear powerplant (about a GigaWatt)? Please enter your answer in units of km^2 The Keck telescope on Mauna Kea has an angular resolution on Earth of half an arcsecond. How far away (in meters) could you read ("resolve the letters of") a book with 3 mm square type, using the Keck telescope on Earth? c) In space, the angular resolution of the Keck telescope is govererned by the diffraction limit. How far away could you read the same book, using the Keck telescope in space? Please express your answers in units of meters. These questions are from a free astronomy topic from coursera, anyone can join for free, its fun but some of the questions have placed me in a stump, I cannot move forward until I complete these three. Ronnie
  8. We should use this link for all who are registered on the course to communicate with one another if we need help and so on, just a thought
  9. Thanks for the link, just registered on the course, I have another link for you all to look at, named coursers, they have loads of courses on astronomy, check it out and see what you think. Introduction to Astronomy is a great course so is Galaxy and Cosmology, there are many others also.
  10. Excellent I might take your path after this one, I too have a great interest in astronomy, especially the cosmology side of things, I have been personally studying the black hole for a number of years and it's soooo fascinating
  11. Good look on achieving your goal on a full degree, are you hoping to explore your knowledge or are you looking to change yr career, being 48 I think for me it's more of knowledge for me, expanding the brain cells, always been fascinating in space, however the only space I have exploded is the space between my ears lol. On a serious note I would like to teach a small group, more of a club, where we can all sit and exchange our ideas and so on, so doing this course will be a great start, do you know coursera do loads of free astronomy courses, I have completed About three all together, you also get a certificate at the end of the course, but, they are not credited courses, but great fun, check it out Ronnie
  12. Hi Avo thanks for all that, I am looking at enrolling in 10th October is the closing time for the course. So Jay T if you want to start the course we me you have until October to enroll, unless you are doing it next year . Avo I would very much appreciate those text books if you are sure you do not need them, I can then have a good read before starting. How do I cover the postage.
  13. Thanks guys, sorry about the mistake, its S10 which I will be taking and S282 is in fact one of the modules, I have been interested in astronomy from being a young boy, now i am 47 I just want to broaden my knowledge more, I have taken a number of free on line courses and I think I am ready to push even further my doing an OU course. thanks again Ronnie
  14. Hi all , I am looking at participating in taking a OU course S282, I was hoping those who have taken up this course can help me in finding the right books to read and which would be the best modules and so on. Thanks guys
  15. according to the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle, rotating black holes should create and emit particles.Hawking radiation reduces the mass and the energy of the black hole and is therefore also known as black hole evaporation.
  16. This is a question if a black hole emits radiation why is it a black hole when radiation would cause the black hole to be slightly blue
  17. We know from gravity measurements made by Galileo that Europa is a differentiated body. The most plausible models of Europa’s interior have an H2O-ice layer of thickness 80-170km. Europa's surface temperature averages about 110 K (−160 °C; −260 °F) at the equator and only 50 K (−220 °C; −370 °F) at the poles, keeping Europa's icy crust as hard as granite. It also has roughly 15 miles of solid ice. A mole-like thermal drill designed to cut through the icy surface of Jupiter’s moon Europa could be on a future mission slated for launch in 2020.
  18. I think it's a load of rubbish myself, it's as if I said the universe emerged from a large super black hole whereby all the mass of the universe could not be contained and eventually the black hole gave way and caboom the Big Bang emerged. Have a nice day! Ha ha ha
  19. Today, physicists accept the dual nature of light. In this modern view, they define light as a collection of one or more photons propagating through space as electromagnetic waves. This definition, which combines light's wave and particle nature, makes it possible to rethink Thomas Young's double-slit experiment in this way: Light travels away from a source as an electromagnetic wave. When it encounters the slits, it passes through and divides into two wave fronts. These wave fronts overlap and approach the screen. At the moment of impact, however, the entire wave field disappears and a photon appears. Quantum physicists often describe this by saying the spread-out wave "collapses" into a small point. I have trouble visualizing a particle transforming into a wave and vice-versa. The quote says that light travels away from a source as an electromagnetic wave. What does that even look like? How can I visualize "a wave"? Is that supposed to look like some thin wall of advancing light? And then, the quote says, at the moment of impact, the wave disappears and a photon appears. So, a ball of light appears? Something that resembles a sphere? How does a sphere become something like an ocean wave? What does that look like? My (completely uneducated) guess is, by a particle becoming a wave, does that mean that this expansive wave is filled with tons of ghost copies of itself, like the one electron exists everywhere in this expansive area of the wave, and then when it hits the wall, that property suddenly disappears and you're left with just one particle. So, this "wave", is really tons of identical copies of the same photon in the shape and form and with the same properties of, a wave? My guess comes from reading about how shooting just one photon still passes through two slits in the double-slit experiment. So the photon actually duplicated itself?
  20. Hi Helen I am sorry but I cannot excess yr documents, tried but using ipad I guess it's not compatible, sorry Ronnie
  21. Hi Helen I have just read yr post as I have been busy, will look at what you have put forward and hopefully get back to you Ronnie
  22. This is something we discussed as a teenager, myself and my friends had a debate many years ago on the same topic, we each believed that alternative earths exist somewhere out there, a bit like a mirror image of our own, but each with its own story,. It reminds me of Stargate SG1. But who knows trillions of planets are out there and we are definitely not the only planet to sustain life, oh no that means there's hundreds of me out there ha ha ha.
  23. Interesting read, that's all I am going to say for the moment, it would be more interesting if she could freeze or actually stop light travelling. One that would be something to talk about
  24. Over a century ago, Albert Einstein anticipated odd things happening on a spaceship travelling at speeds close to that of light (roughly 300 000 km/s) and impossible things happening when travelling at the speed of light. It is not necessary here and now to go into why this should be, but these predictions are enough to convince much smarter people than me that the speed of light is a fixed, fundamental speed limit in the Universe and that no material objects can ever attain or exceed this crucial speed. However some theoretical physicists have gone for a walk on the wild side by speculating on the possible existence of particles which always travel faster than light, avoiding the complications of acceleration past the cosmic speed limit. Physicist Gerald Feinberg even gave them a name, tachyons (from the Greek takhus, meaning “fast”, and the English ”-on”meaning “elementary particle” (yes, really)). There is a history of particle physics predicting the existence of theoretical particles needed to fill gaps in our knowledge which are later discovered to be real, neutrons being the classic example. Could this happen with tachyons? If they existed tachyons would be really, really bizarre things, for example they would always be moving faster than light, dropping to less than 300 000 km/s would be as impossible for them as exceeding this speed is to us. Stranger still, their mass would be imaginary. “Imaginary” is used in its mathematical sense, meaning a multiple of the square of -1, whatever that may mean in the real world. Not only that, adding kinetic energy to a tachyon would make it slow down, but it would take infinite energy to drop its velocity down to the speed of light! Conversely, a tachyon shedding energy would continuously accelerate. This leads to a subtle argument against tachyons existing.
  25. Tachyons if they exist have more momentum, in proportion to how much slower they travel. The faster they travel, the less energy they have. They are also expected to loose gravitational energy as they travel. Thus speeding up. So the object of an tachyon engine would be to fire the particles as slowly as possible. This sounds great you would only need to fire a minor stream of tachyon particles at extremely slow speed to get amazing thrust. However the problem remaining is no different from trying to fire mass particles at the speed of light. Where do you get the energy to accelerate them? Or in the case of the tachyon, to decelerate them, you must put the energy in. Remember it takes nearly infinite energy to accelerate a particle to the speed of light. The same would hold true for stopping the tachyon. What you propel with an engine is of minor importance in comparison to what you use to power it in the first place.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.