The Sun and the solar system

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by kingwinner, Jan 23, 2006.

  1. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Har! Me? Worried about that little twit? You gotta be kidding!!!

    And you sure are observant, aren't you? NOT! Dummy, I don't even HAVE an Avatar! :bugeye:
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    look fellas.... and ladies...

    i could do what??

    discuss... what is already known and believed by all of you...

    and you could stand around and nod and say up... fusion and big bang.. yup...

    but what would i be doing?

    simply spouting what i have learned... as you all tend to do.

    i choose instead to discuss possibilities regarding alot of well known flaws in the very foundations of what you consider all to be common truth...

    i.e.. you beliefs in fusion... its not based on the laboratory of success is it?

    they say they just need to sustain the reaction... why?

    cause they cant seem to sqeeze enough blood out of this turnip to use...

    is it any wonder.?

    and you do know the big drawback of the fusion systems dont you??

    nuetron flux.... nuetrons no longer stay in the magnetic bottle.

    and if there is one thing fusion reactors, like the tokomak are good at, its is making nuetron flux.

    -MT
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Poor, poor Mosheh. You would have us discard proven facts, eh? Just how stupid can one person be??? Discard things that we understand and KNOW will work in favor of unproven assumptions on the part of an undereducated fool? I really don't think that's EVER going to happen.

    Look, the only one you've managed to impress with your "idea" is someone that doesn't know any more than you do. While science certainly can be wrong on some assumed points - like theories - it's not ever wrong about proven facts!

    Yes, we were wrong when we thought the sun went around the Earth. But that was only a theory. We now know the Earth revolves around the sun. By your standards, though, we should discard that knowledge and just say, "Gee, I don't know which goes around which."

    How stupid! And that's exactly what you are trying to get us to do with - again - proven facts about fission and fusion. Simply because YOU don't believe it means nothing at all. And it doesn't change the facts.

    We've attempted to show you documented evidence of why what we're saying is true. But just like a stupid pig-headed little kid you stand there with your head struck in the mud and refuse to open your eyes. Your self-education has FAILED you because you learned things incorrectly. It's just as simple as that.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    so??? the tokomak doesnt produce a nuetron flux???

    are you sure?

    -MT
     
  8. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    it's my understanding that it produces a magnetic feild

    describe what you mean by "neutron flux"
     
  9. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    The Tokamak (correct spelling) does produce some free neutrons. But since a magnetic field has no effect on them, as you noted, a physical shield is employed.

    The neutrons play no active role in fusion while they are a critical component of fission.

    It appears from what you've said here and earlier that your self-education pretty well stopped at fission. Or at least your understanding did.
     
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2006
  10. snake river rufus Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    855
    No that is not at all what I am saying

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. NACHMAN Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    36
    DON'T DOUBT, U'RE RIGHT. WITH TIME , THE SUN LOOSES ENERGY, SO IN MANY YEARS TO COME THE INTENSITY OF THE RAYS MUST HAVE REDUCED AND SUCH THE HELIUM AND H MUST HAVE REDUCED
    AM NOT CLEAR WITH THE OTHER QUESTION
     
  12. superluminal . Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,717
    The sun's luminosity is steadily increasing. As H is converted to He and on toward heavier elements (as the available H is exhausted) the energy output of the sun increases. Most people think that the sun has another 5 billion years before it begins to go red-giant. This is true, yet long before then the earth will become uninhabitable due to increased solar output. Maybe 500 million to 1 billion years.
     
  13. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650
    GEE.. im sorry.. i guess thats why they are selling it as a transmutation system to convert nuclear waste into safer stable stuff.....

    how?? hummmm.. oh yeah... the nuetron flux.

    gentlmen please... how much energy is required to force and 'electron capture'

    eh... eh..????

    well below that which is generated in the plasma chamber....

    is it any wonder?

    -MT
     
  14. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    And when did you come up with this nutty idea??????????
     
  15. Anomalous Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,710
    So what was it ?

    The sun having fusion, Fusion considered more powerful, sun loosing energy but will never explode, sun is smaller hence lesser gravity ?

    I always wondered how long would Sun last if it had been made up entirely of pure Uranium ?
     
  16. snake river rufus Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    855

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    No our sun will never explode. Very few stars have the mass required to explode. The sun doesn't "have' fusion, it uses the process of fusion. A star made of pure uranium is not possible. there was little or no uranium created during the big bang.
     
  17. Anomalous Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,710
    But Fusion can produce more energy.

    So they need lot of energy input to get the job done.

    But its Fusion.

    So U dont know the answer ?
     
  18. CANGAS Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,612
    If a star was formed by condensation of dust and gas, they would have to be pure Uranium in order to result in a star made of pure Uranium. However, the first few pounds of condensation would be a critical mass and a detonation. Therefore a star composed of pure Uranium could never form in the first place.

    U agree?
     
  19. Light Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,258
    Agreed. It could never form in the first place.

    "What if" questions can be fun at times, but when the conditions are impossible there really isn't much you can do with it.
     
  20. snake river rufus Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    855
    What are you talking about

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    You really aren't making any sense now. And you were bad about that before.
     
  21. Mosheh Thezion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,650

    the fact that you say this.. shows us all.. how little you know of the tokomak and its progress.. and hopeful future...

    gesh..

    -MT
     
  22. Anomalous Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,710
    It doesnt matter What I agree or not.

    So the sun is smaller and it wont explode even though its Fusion based. But a Uranuim star would explode even before it forms a star, so at what size will it explode, its amazing that fusion is still considered more efficient.
     
  23. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    anomalous
    do you agree that the dihedral ramastat is connected to the quadrocketsacket?
    and if that indeed is the case then the tricyclic hydrofirm would surely explode.
    now given that, would you also agree that fusion fumes would be lethal?
     

Share This Page