reportingsjr Posted November 29, 2006 Author Share Posted November 29, 2006 Little explosion things? You mean freaking huge mongous explosion things?ohhh ahh! http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap061127.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 Speaking of ginormous explosions, here is one:http://www.eurekalert.org/images/release_g...ESA112905_1.jpgThe Crab Nebula near Taurus is actually the result of a supernova that was witnessed by people on July 4, 1054. It was visible in daylight for 23 days, and at its brightest was 4 times brighter then Venus (the brightest object in our sky other then the sun and moon). It was recorded by both Chinese astronomers and indians living in what is now Arizona and New Mexico. The Crab Nebula is also M1, which is the first object recorded by Charles Messier of objects that appeared blurry or didn't look like stars (Messier objects). A little less then 1000 years later, that's what it looks like.The closest supernova since the invention of the telescope was seen in 1987:http://www.nmm.ac.uk/server/show/conMediaFile.6568http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_1987ABut wait, there's more. Here's a supernova from 1994 near lenticular galaxy NGC 4526:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:SN1994D.jpgAnd this is just a cool picture. M64, the Black Eye Galaxy:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...ckeyegalaxy.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted November 29, 2006 Author Share Posted November 29, 2006 Ohh nice pics! Where do you find these?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted November 29, 2006 Share Posted November 29, 2006 I knew what the crab nebula was, so a Google search worked there (good image of it though, I haven't seen that level of detail yet). I also knew about SN1987A, so I searched for that and went to the Wikipedia page, and clicked around on that page. I can get lost in Wikipedia for a while if I'm not careful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted November 29, 2006 Author Share Posted November 29, 2006 Ahhh yes! Wiki and google for everything . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmedwa04 Posted November 30, 2006 Share Posted November 30, 2006 I just got this really amazing book the other day, and I thought you may like to know a bit about black holes that was in it... Black Holes are places where gravity is so strong that it sucks everything in, including light. If you fell into a black hole you'd strech like spaghetti. Black holes form when a star or galaxy gets so dense that it collapses under the pull of its own gravity. Black holes may exist at the heart of a galaxy. Gravity shrinks a black hole to an unimaginably small point called a singularity. Around a singularity, gravity is so intense that space-time is bent into a funnel. Matter spiralling into a black hole is otrn appart and glows so brightly that it creates the brightest objects in the Universe - quasars. The swirling gases around a balck hole turn into an electrical genorator, making it spout jets of electricity billions of kilometers out into space. The opposite of black holes may be white holes which spray out matter and light like fountains. No Light is able to escape from a black hole. Scientists know where they are because they affect the light emmitted by nearby stars. ...Fasinating Fact...Black holes and white holes may join to form tunnels called wormholes - and these may be the secret to time travel! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share Posted November 30, 2006 Well, I knew almost everything up there. Except the spaghetti thing, which they cant prove. And the space and time is a funnel, also they cant prove, Ive never heard the matter spiraling creating electricity. But ok! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chocolate570 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Well, I knew almost everything up there. Except the spaghetti thing, which they cant prove. And the space and time is a funnel, also they cant prove, Ive never heard the matter spiraling creating electricity. But ok!They can and have proved the 'spaghetti thing'. :)And he never said it creates electricity. It creates light, in the same way that the sun creates light. :)Space-time is not a funnel. It's a 4-dimensional fabric which can be bent, and with a black hole, broken, which is the 'funnel' shape you see. That is why it's impossible to theorize what's on the other side of a black hole. We don't have enough knowledge about four dimensional physics to come close to figuring it out. A couple of more interesting facts are that black holes have Event Horizons, the point at which nothing can escape, but also the Inner Horizon: where all of the light and matter end up, swirling around. If you ever made it that far in, the light of the inner horizon would immediately blind you, as it would be nonillions of times brighter than the sun.Every galaxy (theoretically) has a black hole in the middle, which is the only reason we have galaxies--because the black holes bring them together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Get this man to space!http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/11/30/s...reut/index.html Every galaxy (theoretically) has a black hole in the middle, which is the only reason we have galaxies--because the black holes bring them together.That's not entirely true. Some smaller galaxies, refered to as open clusters, are just groups of stars that are mutually bound by eachother's gravity. My astronomy teacher would be proud.But, for any large galaxy, it is theorized that a supermassive black hole hangs out in the middle. We have some pictures of our own in the middle of the Milky Way (or, at least as much as we can see of it, we can see the last bit of light emitted by things rushing into it). The only reason it's a theory and not a law is because we haven't looked into the middle of every large galaxy. So, it's a theory until we find a large galaxy with no black hole in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmedwa04 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Wow, you have an astronomy teacher!@reportingsjr I am not saying that any of that is true, I am just merly quoting it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feck Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Those truly are amazing pictures, that i've also not been reminded of since first published.What amazes me more though is the fact that there so far away that what we're actually looking at took place sometime in the distant past.If you think about it, we could if possible, travel so far away into outer space and look back upon the earth and see the dinosaurs, if imaging resolution of that kind was also possible.Take that theory further and we could travel so far away and witness the big bang, if the big bang theory is also true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Yeah, we would need some sort of near-instant travel, be able to go 65 million light years away, bust out a huge telescope, and figure out why the dinosaurs died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted December 1, 2006 Author Share Posted December 1, 2006 Ya, we all wish. I have never really known anything about Stephen hawking, other than he is in a wheel chair and really famous. , maybe I should look into him X-D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmedwa04 Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Me neither. If space time is wrapped, it is possible to go into space and then come back to earth and your body clock may have only experienced 24 hours but the earth has experienced a week. If you get me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justsomeguy Posted December 1, 2006 Share Posted December 1, 2006 Yeah. That's one phenomenon about black holes. Since they distort spacetime so much, assuming it was possible for an observer to actually see the object enter the black hole, the observer would see the object enter at a normal rate. But if you were the object entering, you would never see yourself reach the black hole, time would slow down the closer you got. I read that, I can't understand why that is the case, but it's weird to think about. Also, if you had two clocks set to each other precisely, and one of the clocks was sent at a speed near the speed of light, after the trip the two clocks would be off. The act of travelling that quickly makes time move at a different rate for the traveller. Which is sort of encouraging, maybe if we developed the technology to travel that quickly and we could go to a "nearby" star, here on earth it would be 6 years before we heard anything back, but maybe the people travelling would only experience a year or so of boring travel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted December 2, 2006 Author Share Posted December 2, 2006 0.o, I knew about the "the faster you go the faster time is" from a nasa thing. They had two atomic clocks, and they put one in a plane and the other on the ground, plane flew really fast and the two clocks were different from each other (not exactly a huge difference though!). Pretty neat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feck Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 what amazes me about all of this light speed talk is the fact that although light takes around only 8 minutes to reach us from the suns surface, it can take anywhere between 17,000 yrs to 50 million years to reach the surface of the sun from the suns core. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted December 2, 2006 Author Share Posted December 2, 2006 Yeah, that is pretty cool! Look at this movie of the sun rotating:http://pcl.physics.uwo.ca/SunEarth/SEfig/photosp.mpgThat was taken over about an 8 month period. Pretty cool .You can see the suns solar wind here:http://pcl.physics.uwo.ca/SunEarth/SEfig/mk3.mpgI guess they put that in a position where they were pretty much exactly north and had a camera with a lens that had a black disk where the sun was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmedwa04 Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 Wow, so you can actually travel forward or back in time, but why hwen you go on an aeroplane does your watch not be wrong appart from you being in a different time zone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted December 2, 2006 Author Share Posted December 2, 2006 Where do you live edward? Times zones are just sections of the world, you dont actually travel back in time, just everyone has their own clocks set differently from other people. This was created because trains in the US had some issues. Every 15 miles directly west you went the time changes by one minute, so the time when trains would get places and leave was really messing things up. So the made time zones! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feck Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 This whole time light speed paradox has always had me hugely puzzled, i suppose like most other people.I know there are no definite answers to my next question, but i would love to hear peoples own theories.Imagining that all of this could be true.If I as an observer, observed someone travelling at the speed of light for say eight minutes by my watch, how much time do you think would have ticked by on their watch?, whilst travelling at the speed of light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holmedwa04 Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 Where do you live edward? Times zones are just sections of the world, you dont actually travel back in time, just everyone has their own clocks set differently from other people. This was created because trains in the US had some issues. Every 15 miles directly west you went the time changes by one minute, so the time when trains would get places and leave was really messing things up. So the made time zones!It says in my profile But what I was saying, appart from the fact about time zones, why when you go on a plane doesn't your watch go wrong because you have traveled either forward or backward in time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted December 2, 2006 Author Share Posted December 2, 2006 Feck, you cant be sure (yet). So that question isnt answerable, yet.Edward, try re-reading that. you dont actually travel back in time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feck Posted December 2, 2006 Share Posted December 2, 2006 I know it was a sort of trick question in that I've always been confounded by the time difference theories with regards to light speed.What I'm getting at is that if our observance of someone travelling at the speed of light is hugely different to the actual person travelling at the speed of light, then surely that also applies to our observance of the time it takes light to travel from the sun to earth.If our observation of the time it takes for light to get here is 8 minutes, then this is surely a distortion of the time it actually takes for the light particle to get here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reportingsjr Posted December 3, 2006 Author Share Posted December 3, 2006 1/2 a second. :)So Steve, where are you?!? Post some cool pictures or links X-D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now