Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The emission of gamma rays usually associated with something such as cobalt might be at certain energies in a lab on earth. If you want to claim that the identical thing happened for sn1987a then you would need to stop trying to talk down to us. You afraid of having your ideas scrutinized? You have a clear picture of what you are talking about? Stop blathering then and start displaying some facts.
Yes I am. But I don't scare easy. And the way I figure it, all an expert can do is provide more reasons to question what is supposedly known. You think I never talked to an astro whiz before??
The material would not have been visible until heated up by the supernova. Cold interstellar matter unless excited by radiation from a source of sufficient strength is extremely hard to detect even at much closer distances. Even with todays superior telescopes.
Sanduleak -69 202 was a blue supergiant and as such would have been rotating at a high rate. You expect ejected material to be preferentially ejected from the equatorial regions because of the lower effective gravity compared to the poles. It is more likely to get rings than a spherical mass ejection you would see from a red giant for instance.
If the neutron start is even slightly shrouded or no material is falling on it then its non-detection is not surprising. Same goes for a black hole.
Pulsars can only be detected if the radiation cones are pointing toward the Earth. The odds of this are not great. The opening angle of a pulsar is not that great.
Rubbish. What on Earth gives you this idea. I know, a lack of physics knowledge.
This is your resort to everything. An almost solipsism like attitude. How do you know the laws of physics were not the same the day prior to your birth and your parents and grandparents lived their entire pre-your birth lifetime in three minutes? The basic physics of the universe has been unchanged for billions of years. That's it, end of story.
. Inside your theory yes, so? prove that was the case and had to be the only possible scenario?
Woulda? Coulda? Shoulda? How about prove it was? You can't can you? You just need it to be so in your model I suspect? If not, then go ahead and show us.
False. Only if what you say was known and correct, rather than just needed and assumed.
Ha. So we cannot see what you predicted. I rest my case.
In your theory maybe. Convenient.
Not sure who you quoted there and were responding to. Not me.
Easy. Newspapers books movies history. Reasonable evidence.
No. That is a lie and unsupportable. That is your story. Nice try.
No. What I am saying is that your old fables are passe. Busted. So called science has no teeth. So gummin it can't help you here any more.
Strawberries are red, violets are blue, I am right, and God is too. Sleep on. Get back to us if you wake up.
So tell us why cold interstellar material should be easily visible? You can believe what the heck you want but you are in error.
Blue supergiants (in fact all stars above about 8500 degree photospheric temperatures) rotate quickly. Only when stars develope a deep surface convection zone can a dynamo mechanism operate that allows angular momentum to be transported and lead to rotational braking of the star. That early type stars are rapid rotators and most late type stars like the Sun are slow rotators has been known for decades. Many early type stars are rotating so fast they are egg shaped and are near break up velocity.
What is this needed nonsense. You think everything is some conspiracy. When pretty much every early type star is a fast rotator and thus basic physics implies mass ejected would be at the equatorial region why is this some stretch or conspiracy?
Whether convenient or not it is also likely the truth. You don't have a case, never have had, never will.
You said some nonsense about if a black hole was there we would never have sen the supernova. God only knows how you came up with that rubbish.
Not at all. All those newspapers and everything in the world was in accelerated time. Your parents didn't realise there lives were but 3 minutes in duration. That is no more silly than the argument you trot out time and time again. In fact it is basically the argument you have been pulling for a decade.
It is not a lie. It is observable. It is only not accepted when someone puts forth some contrived idea all was different and there is no way of knowing - a very similar idea to your parents lives lasted 3 minutes till you were on the scene. Both are completely made up and unsupported nonsense.
There were a number of isotope decays observed by Knodlseder, et al 2000. They include:
What I have posted so far in previous posts, this post, and the above links are a clear demonstration that you are grasping at straws and doing nothing more than MAKING STUFF UP.
OK, so how do you filter stuff out from the sn81987a data?
Ok so you can't talk about sn1987a now? You decided to resort to a spamathon session? How can we look at the simple facts of one example and what dust or other factors is used if you jump around like a flea?
No it is a demo of you dog jumping like a flea. Stand still and make a point.
As far as knowing the laws of the past, it is gumming it all the way. In the dark, and with both hands tied behind it's back no less.
I never said that. Why not address what is being said rather than talking weird. By the way, why after seven years did you start debating again, and on a Christian forum no less?
That is your attempt to explain things, yes. Name one star that did any such thing?
False. It is not known even as we speak. Really. In fact there are no late or early type stars That is in your dark imagination.
Name one.
How do we determine a star rotates fast? Heck you can't even tell us how far any star is. Nor how big. Nor what it is made of!
Childish and vague.
I doubt I said that. I said that the neutron star you promised is not there. Neither is the plan B black hole, You struck out.
Oh great. We finally get an actual astrophysicist and he is talking foolishness.
really? Where can we observe it?
Absurd. The fact is that the universe is very spiritual. That is known from the bible. Just because you want far away space to be able to contain only physical, 3 dimensional objects does not mean that all space obeys your wishes. Did you get too much 'education' to be able too admit you do not know?
