Posted on 10/01/2004 12:59:05 PM PDT by cogitator
Damn kids joyriding in Dad's deathstar...
Is there any other lists that I can get info on this?
Fascinating...
Some of the constellation names go back to the ancient Greeks, but they couldn't see the stars in the extreme south. A few hundred years ago some European astronomers traveled to the southern hemisphere and invented new constellations for the stars near the celestial south pole, including a bunch of dumb names like Microscopium (Microscope), Telescopium (Telescope), and Antlia (Air Pump). Not only is there no Moose constellation, but there's also no Squirrel.
I find this report hard to believe. In 1572 the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe observed a supernova which was so bright it could be seen in the daytime. He didn't report any X-ray flashes.
I don't believe you can see X-Ray flashes?
Were these flashes not picked up by instruments?
I was just kidding. Al Gore hadn't invented X-rays yet.
marked
Amazing! We can't predict when or where a hurricane will strike or go in a relatively short period of time. BUT, we "can" predict when a Super Nova WILL happen that has ALREADY happened millions of years ago!
Curiouser and curiouser, I tell you.
It's Bush's fault.
The timing is suspicious"
thanks, I needed a chuckle
Is that 7% figure right? That seems awfully dark. If you held a 7% reflective piece of paper in your hand in normal room light you would probably label it as black or very dark.
http://www.riegl.co.at/principles/e_gi004.htm
Thanks for quoting my all-time favorite movie line.
I don't know why that line struck such a deep and memorable chord; Rutger Hauer was pure magic when he spoke it.
Is this possibly one of those sterilizing explosions that wipe out life throughout the galaxy ?
Not nearly that much.
The Sun's illumination at noon on a cloudless day is roughly 10000 foot-candles.
For the full Moon at zenith on a cloudless night, the illumination is about 0.03 foot-candles.
So the Moon's brightness (as soon from Earth) is about 0.003% of the Sun's.
That figure is from the quoted section of my post, not my own text.
I've seen that similar statements, myself, though, that the moon is composed of rather dark material despite its appearing ice-blue-white or golden yellow to us at various times. I don't quite see how that can be, as dark looks dark even in bright sunlight.
I don't see how X-rays could propagate faster than visible light.
They cannot. In fact, X-rays are EM just at a higher frequency than visible EM (light).
Right, starting about 10 nm wavelength and getting shorter. So whatever produced them isn't also producing visible light.
One of the all time great movie lines.
Naw, Cheney got Halliburton a secrect contract to rebuild after causing the explosion.
It his fault. Bush isn't smart enough to know what a supernova is.
As a former psychology major (mostly experimental) I can say with some assurance that light and dark objects are labeled by relative reflectivity or relative luminosity. Against a dark sky the moon would appear light, even if it were made of coal.
Since it appears to be about as reflective as pumice, that's not far off. Imagine the effect on earthly life if it had a surface of beach sand. Full moonlight would be enough to read by easily.
Sad, but CNN gives us some real facts about this story - http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/10/01/space.explosions.reut/index.html
If we had bilateral talks with these stars this could have been prevented.
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.