Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by paddoboy, Jul 20, 2015.
Yep, it is called trolling.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Oh he was certainly serious. He also inferred the same confused notion in an earlier post.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I thought river was giving paddoboy a dancing lesson... Pad step back, box step,Pad step back, chasse and twirl.
Notice how randi beam has now disappeared after being exposed.
I have a question and observation about the expansion of the universe. Since stars undergo fusion, with mass burn into energy, and this energy output is able to escape the star, easier than does its contained mass, doesn't this means the mass/energy of the star is decreasing over time? According to GR, doesn't this also mean space-time is expanding around all active and radiant stars, as mass lowers and energy leaves?
My understanding (slight as it is) is that the space would be warped less as the mass decreases, but it would not expand in the same way that the universe is expanding. I am sure someone with more understanding will chime in.
Firstly the energy output/loss by any star, is very tiny compared to the overall mass of the star.
As any star loses mass, it gradually warps spacetime to lesser extents.
Spacetime expansion is observed over larger scales.
Over smaller scales, solar systems, galaxies, groups of galaxies, the spacetime expansion is overcome by gravitational attraction, so no spacetime expansion happens around any star/galaxy or even groups of galaxies. M31 [Andromeda] for instance, is gravitationally bound to the MW.
what about the energy the stars receive from all the other stars shining back at them? input vs output?
There is no doubt that there is a net loss of mass from stars. The sun loses about 4 million tons of mass each second!
Separate names with a comma.