The Big Bang and Inflation:

[origin]

Isn't it a rules violation to just post the same thing repeatedly?

Yep, it is called trolling.

 

[paddoboy]

I thought this reply to pad's statement that the universe is flat was an attempt to be funny, but I fear you were serious.

Oh he was certainly serious. He also inferred the same confused notion in an earlier post.

 

[sweetpea]

Isn't it a rules violation to just post the same thing repeatedly?

I thought river was giving paddoboy a dancing lesson... Pad step back, box step,Pad step back, chasse and twirl.

 

[paddoboy]

Avoiding our troll, this religious nut has spread his preaching nonsense to a book entitled. "The V-Bang: How the Universe Began."
http://www.amazon.com/The-V-Bang-How-Universe-Began/dp/1463732643
The same book he was pushing on his last foray into this forum, along with another denying Darwinism Evolution.
He has web sites, facebook pages and what not everywhere to spread his fanatical version of creation.
The latest foray today, under the handle randie beam is either a stooge or him again under another handle, as he has become noted for that elsewhere. Usual troll tactics.

Notice how randi beam has now disappeared after being exposed.

 

[wellwisher]

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?

 

[origin]

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.

 

[paddoboy]

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?

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.

 

[BdS]

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?

what about the energy the stars receive from all the other stars shining back at them? input vs output?

 

[origin]

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!