Jack_Racz said:
No they don't, the sun has no influence on planets creation. Planets are formed by dust and gases merging under intense pressure. The sun didn't cause any of that.
The gravitational force of the nebula that was slowly becoming more compact and turning into the sun, did cause that. The planets make up soemthing like 2% of that nebula. So I'd say the "sun" does cause it.
Who says we can't live without light? There are amphibious creatures in caves who never see light at all. As well as some kinds of algae and insects.
Without light the biosphere of earth would COLLAPSE. Plants and photosynthesizing algae would die within days, and animals would follow. My knowledge of bacteria is sub-par, but I think it's possible some bacteria would survive.
PS There r also fish that live in caves without light. They also have eyes...eyes that do not function. These r called vestigial organs, and it is evidence for evolution....Sorry, but u walked right into that one, and I couldn't resist.
MinDach said:
Sorry I am really not up with all this, but have you ever looked out in to space, I think they can look real far now, have you ever seen any other sun out there, I have not hear about one being found, well how in the world do thoses stars just keep on shining, how come there are even there if they have to have a Sun to exist, there are lots of stars out there with not much sun light if any or could it be that God was the first light.
The sun = a star. Stars r not living things. They do not need light to "survive". Only hydrogen.
Jack_Racz said:
Absolute zero??? That is not possible to achieve. Absolute zero means nothings moves, everything is frozen... even if the sun wasn't there particles would still move.
You're right on this one. But life is unable to survive in temperatures much warmer than absolute zero.
Jack_Racz said:
Life does not depend on light. Creatures at the bottom of the ocean never even see any light, but they still live...
Organisms that practice photosynthesis need light. And if they died off, everything would follow. It's a domino affect. It really is a fragile system.
Jack_Racz said:
And light doesn't necessarily mean heat...
True. But I think most if not all sources capable of producing light must produce heat as well (I may be wrong on this...).
Jack_Racz said:
Neptune isn't near absolute zero... it has an atmosphere, and we don't know what the surface looks like.
You're right in that it is nowhere near absolute zero, and that it has an atmosphere. But it does not have a "surface". It is a Jovian planet and a gas giant. Same goes for Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus. It may be possible that it has some liquid, or solid elements at its core, but it has no surface in the same sense of the wordas earth does.
Jack_Racz said:
Deep waters are heated by vents from the center of the earth, not from the sun. That's if they are heated at all... Off topic question, what happen to all sea life during the ice age? Did they die when large parts of the sea's froze?
Not all life needs heat to survive, or light. But as I've said before, plants and photosynthesizing algae
do.
Jack_Racz said:
What does the sun's particular gravity have to do with the creation of the earth? Don't take this as an attack, but I have a specific gravity, does that mean I helped create somethings after I was born? Of course not... If the sun's gravity had anything to do with the creation of the planet the planet would have been pulled closer to the sun, as would every other planet. The sun ahd no part in the creation of the planet earth with the exception of our orbital path.
The planets, comets, meteors, moons, asteroids, etc were all made from the same cloud.
Jack_Racz said:
I still don't see how gravity has anything to do with life.
I admit that I don't know enough about that to contribute something to the argument. However, without gravity, the earth would not revolve around the sun, and therefore would be drifting around aimlessly in space, where it would be impossible for life to begin. So, it makes logical sense. Just my 2 cents on that....
theseed said:
It does in regards to the moon, the tidal waves it makes, allows life to exist. If the moon was to far or too close or to big or too small, this planet would not be suitable for life. But with the help of the moon's gravity pulling on the earth, it does.
I'm not sure if this is entirely accurate. The moon's gravity and it's affect on tidal waves surely play a part in the ecosystsem, but I really doubt that life could not exist without the moon.
mrburns said:
Also, the moon keeps our axis of rotation in the same place, 23 degrees or so off the vertical. Without it, the Earth could rotate in all 3 directions (e.g. pitch, roll, yaw) and it would be uninhabitable.
But what the sun's gravity has to with Earth only involves its orbit, not the formation of the Earth. The Earth would have formed, and formed as a sphere, regardless of the sun's gravity. When everything we can see in space is also the same shape it minimizes the uniqueness of just our sun having that kind of effect.
This is kinda tricky. First the definition of the sun must be defined. Do u mean the fully formed sun, or the nebulonic cloud, or r both applicable? If both, then without the gravity of the center of the nebulonic cloud out of which the entire solar system was made, the earth would not have formed. But then gravity would not exist, and if gravity did not exist, there would be no nebiulonic cloud in the first place.
Jack_Racz said:
Oops, missed something...
Absolute zero is UNACHIEVABLE... It can not happen, something will always be moving, all the way down to the molecular state. The theory of absolute zero is that if it is achieved all matter will be destroyed. There will be no energy, no kenetic or potential energy... Everything ceases to be. Outerspace is cold, and without a star so close the planet would be cold, that's it. Just cold. We assume that life can exist only as we exist. Who's to say that's true?
I agree 100%. Even the most "remote" regions of space r far warmer than absolute zero. And we don't know all of the pre-requisites that the plethora of possible and potential life in the universe need in order to form and survive.
MinDach said:
You are using a theory about what size the stars are, i am saying that our sun is the largest. You nor I have never been there. My point would be if all these stars you call Suns were the same as our sun, then all of space would be in full light, and another theory the is no end for light. I know more about human nature, then about the stars, why a certain question would be asked. If people are really searching for God and Jesus, or what are they really looking for?
I'm sorry, but this is absolute gibberish. Where do u get this stuff? Let's look at it closer:
1) The sun is not the largest star. It's a little bigger than a medium sized star, and it is only a medium heat star. It's rather insignificant, and so is our solar system.
2) The thing about the universe being in full light if all stars were as big as our sun makes me want to cry. Really, it does. It's one of the most random and uneducated things I've ever heard in my life.
If a civilization of the other side of the universe looked thru a telescope at Sol, they would see it the same way we see other stars, small, insignificant, and they would only see a speck of light. the light still reaches them, tho it may be faint. The reason the sun is so bright is cuz we r so close to the sun.
Jack_Racz said:
Our sun is a star. All the stars you see at night are a range of different sizes. Most of which are bigger and brighter than ours. The logic you are using is the same as if I was to say, "Since that 8ft basketball player looks smaller than me from two miles away, he must be shorter than 6'1'' of me."
Stars look smaller to us because they are unbelievably far away. That is proven fact.
Hooray for logic!
