Skip to comments.
Giant star Betelgeuse mysteriously shrinking: study
AFP on Yahoo ^
| 6/9/09
| AFP
Posted on 06/09/2009 9:46:50 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-103 next last
To: NormsRevenge
Someone is turning the light out.
61
posted on
06/10/2009 3:44:26 PM PDT
by
TASMANIANRED
(TAZ:Untamed, Unpredictable, Uninhibited.)
To: Salamander
Not making this easy for me at all, are you?
62
posted on
06/10/2009 7:14:56 PM PDT
by
SoldierDad
(Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Infantry Soldier presently instructing at Ft. Benning.)
To: SoldierDad
Nobody said it was gonna be easy.....;-D
63
posted on
06/10/2009 9:12:45 PM PDT
by
Salamander
(Cursed with Second Sight.)
To: NormsRevenge
I have read for years that this star ebbs and flows in brightness.
64
posted on
06/10/2009 9:14:53 PM PDT
by
Boiling Pots
(Barack Obama: The final turd George W. Bush laid on America)
To: Salamander
And, you never promised a rose garden either.
65
posted on
06/10/2009 9:18:00 PM PDT
by
SoldierDad
(Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Infantry Soldier presently instructing at Ft. Benning.)
To: prismsinc
Huh? What the hell are you talking about? Your statement made no sense, was contradictory, and if I interpret correctly, not even CLOSE to the working theory of how star lifecycles function.
I don’t call myself an evolutionist, I think it has lots of holes, but when those who actively oppose it can’t even refute a theory by restating the most basic aspects of it, it makes you look like a friggin’ idiot and does your position a disservice.
66
posted on
06/10/2009 10:14:12 PM PDT
by
Crazieman
(Feb 7, 2008 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1966675/posts?page=28#28)
To: prismsinc
Not even close! Want to try again?
67
posted on
06/10/2009 10:16:54 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
To: Crazieman
Well, how does it work then Einstein? I have a basic understanding of the nuclear fusion process, hydrogen is the fuel and helium is the by-product.
What is the name of the woman that proved Einstein’s theory of relativity, genius? Since you’re so smart...
68
posted on
06/10/2009 10:19:48 PM PDT
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: MHGinTN
Instead of ridiculing me for going by 35 year old elementary school memory, why don’t you correct me then, and be productive in the process, genius?
69
posted on
06/10/2009 10:23:39 PM PDT
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: prismsinc
What’s the name of the woman that proved Einstein’s theory of relativity?
70
posted on
06/10/2009 10:26:39 PM PDT
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: prismsinc
I’m not deriding you. But you have confused the forming of a white dwarf with the process which a much larger star goes through to form a black hole. Our star will likely eventually become a white dwarf, but is not massive enough to collapse into/become a black hole. And the phrasing regarding ‘taking in helium’ is, well, cryptic at best.
71
posted on
06/10/2009 10:29:50 PM PDT
by
MHGinTN
(Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
To: Swordmaker
What we are seeing now was 527 light years ago....
So we should be able to see this star go super nova...
To: dragonblustar
Would the gamma rays travel faster than light ?
To: MHGinTN
It’s cryptic, yes, but it’s cryptic based on a 35 year old recollection.
Also, while nuclear fusion is complex, the fuel and by-product aren’t. Hydrogen in, helium out. That’s all most of us need to know, really.
Sorry, but the previous poster got a bit smarmy about it and you got caught in the crossfire.
Do you her name, BTW?
74
posted on
06/10/2009 10:44:08 PM PDT
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: prismsinc
Before Sir Arthur Eddington did it in 1920?
75
posted on
06/10/2009 10:58:41 PM PDT
by
PeaceBeWithYou
(De Oppresso Liber! (50 million and counting in Afganistan and Iraq))
To: PeaceBeWithYou
Apologies. I meant the mass-energy equivalence formula
76
posted on
06/10/2009 11:07:48 PM PDT
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: PeaceBeWithYou
Actually, I was right the first time. Eddington evidenced it, but he never actually physically mathematically proved it.
It was a woman. What was her name?
77
posted on
06/10/2009 11:12:30 PM PDT
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: prismsinc
Are you thinking of Emmy Noether?
78
posted on
06/10/2009 11:36:35 PM PDT
by
PeaceBeWithYou
(De Oppresso Liber! (50 million and counting in Afganistan and Iraq))
To: SoldierDad
Arrrgh!
I’ll be humming that wretched song in my head all day!
79
posted on
06/11/2009 4:42:32 AM PDT
by
Salamander
(Cursed with Second Sight.)
To: PeaceBeWithYou
80
posted on
06/11/2009 6:38:43 AM PDT
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-103 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson