Fayt Zelpher Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 I take it that you haven't done any Astrophysics courses... Because I have! When the sun does expand outward (as a result of becoming a Red Giant), there's a chance that the outer shell being shed by the sun could push the Earth out of the diameter of the sun. Of course, when that happens, the Sun will boil the Earth's oceans and make our planet much like today's Mercury, so it's more or less a moot point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 I take it that you haven't done any Astrophysics courses... Because I have! And I'm sure in the astrophysics class you totally took you judiciously studied the blowoff of mass the Sun will experience. And you can explain to me in clear concrete terms why it is utterly evident the Earth will be consumed as the Sun expands. Fire up the Google engine. You need to start validating that "class" you took, bro. Well I think that now a Planet that can support life has been found, the destruction of the earth doesn't really matter. We just have to focus all of our science and money on inventing a spaceship that can get everyone the hundreds of billions of miles to this other planet. The destruction of our native habitat doesn't matter? Why care about terraforming another planet, really? Why not just put together satellites that better simulate Earth's environment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NinjaMonkey Posted October 22, 2010 Share Posted October 22, 2010 (edited) And I'm sure in the astrophysics class you totally took you judiciously studied the blowoff of mass the Sun will experience. And you can explain to me in clear concrete terms why it is utterly evident the Earth will be consumed as the Sun expands. Fire up the Google engine. You need to start validating that "class" you took, bro. Take That! From WikipediaEarth's fate is precarious. As a red giant, the Sun will have a maximum radius beyond the Earth's current orbit, 1 AU (1.5×1011 m), 250 times the present radius of the Sun. However, by the time it is an asymptotic giant branch star, the Sun will have lost roughly 30% of its present mass due to a stellar wind, so the orbits of the planets will move outward. If it were only for this, Earth would probably be spared, but new research suggests that Earth will be swallowed by the Sun owing to tidal interactions. Is that good enough for you? Edited October 23, 2010 by NinjaMonkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 Take That! Is that good enough for you? You are not getting his point. "Research suggests," and "some speculate" never mean that is what will happen. "And you can explain to me in clear concrete terms why it is utterly evident the Earth will be consumed as the Sun expands." Are you able to prove that the Earth will be swallowed just as tomorrow will be October twenty-third? Or do you agree that there's room to debate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NinjaMonkey Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 (edited) You are not getting his point. "Research suggests," and "some speculate" never mean that is what will happen. No one can predict the future with 100% accuracy. The theory that the Earth will be swallowed is the most likely one, however and is predicted by using very sophisticated computer models. "And you can explain to me in clear concrete terms why it is utterly evident the Earth will be consumed as the Sun expands." At first the Earth's orbit will widen, due to the Sun's weakened gravitational pull. But the Earth's gravitational field will also induce a "tidal bulge" on the Sun's surface (like the moon does on the oceans). This bulge will lag just behind the Earth in its orbit, slowing the Earth down enough so that the Earth falls into the Sun and becomes engulfed. Edited October 23, 2010 by NinjaMonkey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 (edited) No one can predict the future with 100% accuracy. The theory that the Earth will be swallowed is the most likely one, however and is predicted by using very sophisticated computer models. At first the Earth's orbit will widen, due to the Sun's weakened gravitational pull. But the Earth's gravitational field will also induce a "tidal bulge" on the Sun's surface (like the moon does on the oceans). This bulge will lag just behind the Earth in its orbit, slowing the Earth down enough so that the Earth falls into the Sun and becomes engulfed. See, look, I can post a link that shows how divided the situation is. You just copied this all from a website, however. You don't actually know shit about what you're talking. My point was that there wasn't a consensus as to its fate. Which you have yet to prove in your favor. So points for your snobbish elitism that no one on the planet but you would possibly think is deserved. Edited October 23, 2010 by Esau of Isaac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 No one can predict the future with 100% accuracy. The theory that the Earth will be swallowed is the most likely one, however and is predicted by using very sophisticated computer models.How many other theories do you know of, and how much research have you done to prove so?Seems to me like none. Billions of years from now, I could say that it's just as likely that we'll get bombarded by enough asteroids and comets that the Earth is just blown to bits. Any of these are plausible in the time-frame given. I agree that it is the most likely one, in my uneducated opinion. At first the Earth's orbit will widen, due to the Sun's weakened gravitational pull. But the Earth's gravitational field will also induce a "tidal bulge" on the Sun's surface (like the moon does on the oceans). This bulge will lag just behind the Earth in its orbit, slowing the Earth down enough so that the Earth falls into the Sun and becomes engulfed. I wasn't asking you to explain to me what happens. I was asking for concrete proof of it's supposed inevitability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NinjaMonkey Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 I wasn't asking you to explain to me what happens. I was asking for concrete proof of it's supposed inevitability. That's like asking for proof that I'm gonna be run over by a bus tomorrow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 That's like asking for proof that I'm gonna be run over by a bus tomorrow. Precisely. Don't you remember what you first implied? I take it that you haven't done any Astrophysics courses...Because I have! "I took a class! I now know how the Earth will be destroyed! It's the ONLY probable way!" "Prove it." "That's like asking for proof that I'm gonna be run over by a bus tomorrow." If you're taking that type of stance right now, I'm curious as to the reason why you didn't say this when Esau said it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Laufeyson Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 What about that prediction that in 2029, the astroid, Apophis is supposed to collide with the Earth? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 (edited) What about that prediction that in 2029, the astroid, Apophis is supposed to collide with the Earth? I saw something on that (History channel). I don't think it's been ruled out. If I remember correctly, I think it's been suggested that it's not actually on course for Earth. Edited October 23, 2010 by Phoenix Wright Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted October 23, 2010 Share Posted October 23, 2010 That's like asking for proof that I'm gonna be run over by a bus tomorrow. Hey, we're supposed to be talking about sobering inevitabilities here, not unlikely miracles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freohr Datia Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 Well I'd say poop money, why not consider it's the end of the world and our financial problems are what's gonna get us killed? I say restart the money business stuff when we get to the new planet. But how fast can we go compared to the speed of light? I hope it's fast or else it'll take much longer than 20 years to reach this place. That way we can still be alive when we reach it. But the older people that know how to control our technology and all that stuff might possibly die on the way so we'd have to teach several other people to know how to control the ship and so on. And sadly, since we'd hardly have time to prepare if there was a huge crisis, we likely won't have time to build very many ships, so there's likely not enough for everyone. So if you're not a person of importance....... sadly, they may just have to leave you behind, because I don't think enough people will know how to build what's required for all of us. Did it say whether or not the size of the planet was close to ours or not? Hopefully it's larger than earth (but also hopefully that wouldn't mean it has stronger gravity than earth, or just not by too much). Or if it's the same/smaller size, then at least it should have a higher percentage of land above water so that way we could fit everyone if everyone could make it. And I'm sure there may be some things I haven't covered yet. But there's still many things we'll have to learn, and if there is a crisis coming to us, then really pick up the pace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanarkin Posted October 24, 2010 Share Posted October 24, 2010 (edited) But how fast can we go compared to the speed of light? I hope it's fast or else it'll take much longer than 20 years to reach this place. That way we can still be alive when we reach it. But the older people that know how to control our technology and all that stuff might possibly die on the way so we'd have to teach several other people to know how to control the ship and so on. Actually its impossible to reach the speed of light in a machine, IIRC from a show i saw, the speed of light would kill a human being. But there is another more effective way of travelling. Hyperspace, in which space infront of you is destroyed(? Can't remember what was the word but o well this shall do i suppose...?) and the space behind you is expanded. This moves space and brings the location closer to you. This is faster than the speed of light IIRC. Edited October 24, 2010 by SlayerX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kintenbo Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 Putting a date on the Earth's end isn't really that good an idea. No one knows, so why try, other than to make subjects for comedians to make fun of? Oh, and also create corny movies to make people feel special! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esau of Isaac Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 (edited) Actually its impossible to reach the speed of light in a machine, IIRC from a show i saw, the speed of light would kill a human being. But there is another more effective way of travelling. Hyperspace, in which space infront of you is destroyed(? Can't remember what was the word but o well this shall do i suppose...?) and the space behind you is expanded. This moves space and brings the location closer to you. This is faster than the speed of light IIRC. It's impossible to reach the speed of light not because of the speed killing a human, but because of the theory of special relativity. As an object increases its velocity, so too does its mass increase, and because of that the amount of energy required to accelerate that velocity. At the speed of light, a given object's mass would be infinite, and thus the amount of energy to reach such a velocity would be infinite. Edited October 25, 2010 by Esau of Isaac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zanarkin Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 It's impossible to reach the speed of light not because of the speed killing a human, but because of the theory of special relativity. As an object increases its velocity, so too does its mass increase, and because of that the amount of energy required to accelerate that velocity. At the speed of light, a given object's mass would be infinite, and thus the amount of energy to reach such a velocity would be infinite. Reading that made me realize thats what it said on the show... Ah well, i'm coming her from hazy memory, but doesn't the speed of light, where we able to travel at it, stop time for us? I suppose then it wouldn't really matter how long a trip takes... Anyways back on topic, I always thought the idea of the end of the world predicted in a mayan calendar was ridiculous. Its a circle, it never ends, it just begins anew. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fayt Zelpher Posted October 25, 2010 Share Posted October 25, 2010 Reading that made me realize thats what it said on the show... Ah well, i'm coming her from hazy memory, but doesn't the speed of light, where we able to travel at it, stop time for us? I suppose then it wouldn't really matter how long a trip takes... Well, not exactly. If I accelerate to the speed of light (hypothetically speaking, since this would require the generation of infinite momentum), then no time would pass relative to the Earth. That is, if I travel at 99% of the speed of light to a planet 10 light years away and come back, then about 20 years would pass on Earth, but only 20*(sqrt(1-((.99c)^2/c^2))) = 2.83 years would pass for the astronaut. So, even though the astronauts would have time pass slower than normal compared to the Earth, many Earth years would still pass. Now, as for the practical considerations, it may in fact be possible to cover more distance than light does while technically still traveling at less than the speed of light. This being based on the fact that mass also increases relativistically, which causes spacial distortions due to gravitational bending of spacetime, by which one could actually have a vessel traveling along compressed space, but for all I know, this could just be me pulling stuff out of my rear at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.