AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Astronomy News
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
It looks like a boot, about to stomp on L.A. Even if not an Extinction Level Event, it would make the entire globe of the earth ring like a bell for years!
(04-11-2015, 04:14 PM)John L Wrote: [ -> ]
(04-11-2015, 03:31 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]It would be perhaps extremely rare because in space everything tend to move in circular trajectories, but would the comet or asteroid also split before hiting the ground if it went straight, verticaly to the ground, instead of lateraly?

No telling. Its composition would most likely determine that. Fortunately, they rarely enter perpendicular to the ground. Either way, it would be a giant catastrophe.

IMO a perpendicular impact would be extremely rare, statisticaly bordering the impossible because all objetcs are following circular eliptics. Only in two cases this could happen:

- the two objects are on the exact same orbit, one going much faster than the other. (IN this case Earth and most planets would have cleaned their orbit already. And it's also unlikely that on object takes seat on the same orbit at a later time.)
Usualy in this case one object become the satellite of the other because the speed difference is too small, the encounter too smooth. The object would be caught in the gravity net. Imagine a net bending and a ball rolling into it: The ball doesn't fall straight in the center, it roll round the bottom before stoping.

- The orbit of the aproaching object is perpendicular to the ground and the speed high enough for the perpendicularity be maintained between the moment the asteroid could start to crack and the impact. If it's perpendicular just at the impact but not when gravitation pressure start to have an effect, it doesn't work. Here also if the speed is too small, the object has the time to collapse.

So it's only possible when the two objects fly in opposite directions or when their orbits a re perpendicular.
I'v read somewhere about opposite orbit but it's exceptional. Almost every object around the sun turn in the same direction and on relatively the same plane (± 30 degrees).

Ron, the impact would be so strong that it would smash all your creationist theories! S5
No, I think it would confirm them, by demonstrating pretty much what happened during the global Flood cataclysm. I have been saying for a long time that the Flood was caused by a massive disruption of the earth and all its systems by a shotgun blast of multiple large meteroid impacts. I also believe that is when most of the cratering of the lunar surface occurred.

By the way, in your theorizing about the angle of asteroid strikes, I think you are not properly accounting for the effect of gravity. According to experts, earth is hit at least once (and perhaps twice) a year by a meteroid with an impact energy equal to or greater than a Hiroshima nuclear explosion. Most of the time, this happens in water, since the earth's surface is 4/5 covered by water. If it hits land, it is likely to hit in a low-populated wilderness area, like desert, tundra, or the jungles of South America. It is only a matter of time until a city area is hit.

Earth and the other inner planets have not cleared out all the near-earth passing asteroids and comets. There are still a pretty large number of them. And remember also, in regard to orbits, almost everything in the solar system is arranged along the plane of the ecliptic. The solar system is pretty much as flat as a phonograph record. There are very, very few outlyers.
Ron, I'm not certain of the frequency of large objects entering the atmosphere, but most of them either burn up, calve, or explode in the atmosphere. In fact, even in the 1980s the US was still convinced that South Africa, along with Israel, were conducting illicit nuclear tests in the southern Pacific, due to the unexplained explosions, some in the hundreds of kiloton range. Not sure just when we finally realized they were detonating asteroids instead, but they are quite frequent, especially in the southern hemisphere for some reason.
Ron, this is true for most solar system objects, and from afar it looks like a vynil record. But it's not true for all of them, especialy if you believe in the Oort Cloud theory from which comets could come from all directions.

Imagine grains of sand falling on your gramophone: Enough to disrupt the beautiful music God has composed for us.

And there is a differnce between "near Earth objects" which are asteroids which cross Earth's orbit but can also be very far from Earth at other times, and "on the same orbit as Earth" which I mean the exact same trajectory the Earth takes around the Sun. Any object flying on such orbit would have invitably collided with earth already unless it's located at one of the Lagrange point where objects fly at the same speed as Earth and on the same orbit. There are actualy one or two known asteroids at some Lagrange points.
(search previous posts on previous pages of this thread)

you Wrote:No, I think it would confirm them, by demonstrating pretty much what happened during the global Flood cataclysm. I have been saying for a long time that the Flood was caused by a massive disruption of the earth and all its systems by a shotgun blast of multiple large meteroid impacts.
So, you believe that the asteroid responsible for the disapearance of the dinosaurs is the same as the one which caused the Flood when Noah was 400 years old?

Then the dinosaurs would be the Giants of the Bible, the Nephilins?

Everything is recouped scientificaly!
No, the nephilim were obviously humans.

By the way, I do not believe in the Oort Cloud. There has never been any confirmation of its existence. It is just a theory, little more than a wishful conjecture, as a way of explaining how the near-earth passing comets could still exist, when by rights they should all have been melted away from all their close passes to the sun in 12,000 years or so.

And I believe there was not just one asteroid, but a shotgun blast of many asteroids, that produced the global Flood of Genesis. Most of the craters we see on the surface of the moon happened not over millions of years, but over a few days or weeks. Were it not for the erosion caused by water and weather and living things, the surface of the earth would be as obviously cratered as the surface of the moon. The asteroid that hit where Iceland is, and the asteroid that impacted in the Gulf of Mexico, were just two of the last to hit, of the vast swarm that hit.
It's true that there has been a period of time in the past, at the begining of the Solar System, when meteor impacts were way more frequent than today. But, in cosmology, Ron, one week for the planets means several billion years for us.
When it's written that the World has been created in one week, each day of this week represent a different lapse of time:

1st Day / one millisecond for creating light right after the Big Bang,

2d Day/ 9.4 billion years to separate waters in different cosmic objects (creation of planets, including Earth, and stars)

3d Day/ 4.1 billion years to create the seas and continents on Earth and allow first appearance of vegetal life on dry land.

4th Day/ 1 year for placing the Moon around the Earth and define once and for all the seasons and the Horoscope. (According to some theories the Moon was created by The Giant Impact which took off a chunk of the Earth. Millions years laters, Earth's debris gathered and took a round shape, for some reasons this was placed after the creation of life and continents.... Maybe because the process finished after life appeared and started before. Hence "God did it" when it was finished, just one year after the previous event.)

5th Day/ 350 million years to create fishs and birds (actualy fish existed already before, but birds were harder to do, so they took more time).

6th Day/ 147.4 millions years to create the first human (add 2.2 million years if your basis is Sapiens Sapiens)

7th Day/ 200 thousand years sleeping!
That's a good exercise in conjecture, Fred. I will give you credit for that. S1 Many people believe something more or less like that. But it is useless to try to harmonize Genesis with the vast ages view of cosmology. The Bible says plants were created on the third day of Creation (Gen. 1:9-13), but the light they needed to live and grow was not created until the fourth day (Gen. 1:14-19). And then the creatures in the sea were not created until the fifth day (Gen. 1:20-23). Oops--wait a minute. Doesn't evolution teach that life began in the sea? So how do we have life on the land first, before life in the sea?

Also inconvenient for theistic evolutionists is the repeated statements at the end of each day "the evening and the morning were the" [first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth] "day." That seems to be speaking of pretty definite and regular periods of time, not vast eons.
And in the "Is this really news anymore?" category: Fresh evidence for how water reached Earth found in asteroid debris.

Quote:Water delivery via asteroids or comets is likely taking place in many other planetary systems, just as it happened on Earth, new research strongly suggests.

Published by the Royal Astronomical Society and led by the University of Warwick, the research finds evidence for numerous planetary bodies, including asteroids and comets, containing large amounts of water.

The research findings add further support to the possibility water can be delivered to Earth-like planets via such bodies to create a suitable environment for the formation of life.

Commenting on the findings lead researcher Dr Roberto Raddi, of the University of Warwick's Astronomy and Astrophysics Group, said: "Our research has found that, rather than being unique, water-rich asteroids similar to those found in our Solar System appear to be frequent. Accordingly, many planets may have contained a volume of water, comparable to that contained in the Earth.
(05-16-2015, 06:32 PM)Fredledingue Wrote: [ -> ]Interresting opinion about interstellar travels.

Let's be realistic!

Agreed! That's one of the most realistic appraisals from a SiFi writer to date.

I'm going to get Real here, because I have been thinking about this paradox a lot lately,......again. I think Arthur C. Clark's 1973 masterpiece, "Rendezvous with Rama" is the only practical alternative. If you haven't read the novel yet, I highly recommend it.

Basically, its about a huge O'Neill cylinder traveling through space, and entering our solar system. I've forgotten a bit about the story, but I believe the cylinder was in hibernation mode between stars, but came back to life once it entered a solar system.

O'Neill cylinders are THE most efficient way to live in space. You can create your own gravity naturally, have a habitat that is as large as you want it, and it can accommodate huge amounts of living space. When we finally get into space in a big way, the solar system is going to be filled with O'Neill cylinders, making room for trillions of humans.

Those same cylinders could be of practical use for going to a star. There wouldn't have to be a blue planet there for everyone to thrive. They already have their habitat. And I really don't see any real need to hibernate between stars, because by attaching a ram scoop at the bow of the cylinder, huge amounts of hydrogen(as in energy) could be harvested. Also, huge amounts of energy, and light, could be harvested from all the bright nearby stars. There could be a thriving colony in place, while making the journey.
"How" varies. What needs a solution is the why.

In the 1960's Mankind took the first step to populate the stars simultaneously with learning how to live forever and not die after four score years. This answers and asks the same questions. What do we do about not enough space?

The pressure is there to migrate so we will.
European space probe, thought lost, awakes in comet's shadows
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/1...KC20150614
It is really interesting that for a small body, being so far away from the heat of the sun, Pluto possesses such a young surface. And it can only mean one thing. There is still a great deal of heat from within, and it has completely resurfaced the surface in recent geological time.
Scientists believe they may have discovered another way to determine if there is life on other distant planets.

Will we soon spot Little Green PLANTS in space? Light from our closest star Alpha Centauri could reveal signs of alien life on its planets

Quote:The light coming from distant solar systems could reveal the existence of plants growing on other planets, according to astronomers.

Scientists have found that the pigments in the leaves of plants and other photosynthetic organisms reflect coloured light in peculiar ways, producing a distinctive fingerprint.

[Image: 2B2E402A00000578-0-Scientists_found_the_...311747.jpg]
Scientists found the light reflected by photosynthetic pigments in living organisms such as plants have a distinctive polarisation that can be distinguished from the light reflected by sand, rock, water or minerals (illustrated above). By searching for this fingerprint, it may be possible to detect plant life on other planets

This could also help to identify planets which may be habitable by humans – photosynthesis produces oxygen as a key by product.

The researchers hope to use the technique to search for signs of life on the planets orbiting our nearest stars including Alpha Centauri A and B, which are 4.37 light years from Earth.

Writing in the International Journal of Astrobiology, Professor Sventlana Berdyugina, from the University of Freiburg in Germany and a scientist at the University of Hawai's Nasa Astrobiology Institute, and her colleagues said: 'Photosynthesis, which provides organisms with the ability to use light as a source of energy, emerged early in the evolution of life on Earth.
Interesting. Looking at Pluto, I wonder if it looks younger than expected because it is out of the ecliptic and therefore misses many impacts?

Ceres certainly shows nominal impact craters everywhere. It is in the asteroid belt, which made it hard to discover, but is definitely in the ecliptic.
Good point.
Scientists have discovered that a nearby galaxy has not one, but two massive black holes circling at its center. This leads them to the conclusion that two galaxies had collided and merged.

Quasar powered by TWO monster black holes spotted: Whirling binary system reveals clues about how galaxies merge

[Image: 2BD6C2BE00000578-3216925-At_the_heart_of...878347.jpg]
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24