Where did the light come from?

[Morat]

Whatever you say. Your theories change all the time. But you have to be blind to think that the universe isn't functioning with perfect order.

  Nice assertation. Back it up. Oh, and changing theories to better account for the facts would be a good thing, right?

  I mean, that's how it's supposed to work? You can't change the data, so you change the theory?

   Still, perfect order? How so? I guess I'm blind, because you'll have to explain it.

A spacecraft can orbit the earth for several years, perhaps even a couple decades, before its orbit becomes too irregular. The longest that a man-made craft has stayed in orbit was almost 16 years. For a good orbit, you need a precise speed in a direction for a given distance from the object that you're orbiting, mass also being a factor (more massive objects attract more strongly).

  And this has what to do with anything? If we wanted something to stay in orbit for a long time, we'd park it at a Lagrange point, not park it where it's orbit is constantly perturbed by the moon.

The moon has been in&nbsp;earth&nbsp;for <I>at least</I> 6000 years, we both agree. Of course, its path is slowly changing. The moon is so carefully positioned. How can anybody ever think that this&nbsp;is the result of chance, that&nbsp;this isn't intelligent design? I guess you can, if you're as stubborn as Morat.

&nbsp;&nbsp; "Carefully positioned"? How so? Why don't you learn about real models of lunar recession.

What i've learned&nbsp;about&nbsp;you, sir, is that you don't like conversation about science. You drag your heels on such conversations. Too bad. People like you are a stumbling block to science.

&nbsp;&nbsp; *snort*. From a man big on assertations, and little on "actual supporting data", you talk a lot.

Moment<I>UM</I>.

&nbsp; A spelling nitpick! How wonderful.

&nbsp;

Sbbn:

So what you mean for me to believe is that the planets according to the Big Bang theory were instantly placed in perfect path around a star and already moving and circulating around it?

&nbsp;&nbsp; Um, no. That would be listed under "Things the Big Bang doesn't say". Or "Really stupid Creationist Strawman number #1,003,356".

&nbsp; There were no planets, stars, or solar systems immediatly after the Big Bang. In fact, once the universe cooled enough for "normal" matter (of the kind we see today) to form, it was all hydrogen. Maybe a little helium.

How else do you propose the earth began to revolve around the sun? It just kinda came that way? On a side note.. the paths of the planets and Asteroid belt seem a bit too planned for the randomness of just up and happening... it would require more than&nbsp;7 planetary bodies moving through space to all be caught in a gravitational circle by the same star and each gather their own moons and all... the only one capable of life just happens to only have one that always faces it the same way... and that all the asteroids in the asteroid belt just kinda came that way. It all seems too planned...

&nbsp;&nbsp; I don't mean to be read, but it's obvious that you know nothing about astronomy. Period. Perhaps you should learn about it? Because even a basic astronomy text (like those used in high school) would discuss how the solar system (and the sun) formed.

&nbsp;&nbsp; It's not anything like what you described above. Try here for a very simple explanation.

&nbsp;&nbsp; As for the moon facing the same way at all times, there's very simple answer for it: gravity. Specifically, gravitational braking. After all, the force the Earth exerts on one side of the moon is much greater than the force on the other side. It's called, IIRC, "tidal lock". Heck, the core of the moon has actually been pulled off-center because of it.

 

[sbbqb7n16]

The point of the argument made by myself was that it was possible for the earth to fly through outer space and not be constricted only to be around the sun for it's entire existance... which was what was being said by the person with which I was arguing... I was never saying that the earth just kinda appeared in the solar system, have you ever studied scarcasm? It might help a bit... but the theory that earth initially traveled on it's own path wasn't my idea... I saw it in a report from a scientist. If I can find a website detailing it I'll post a link on here.

 

[Morat]

&nbsp; Please do. Rogue planets aren't impossible, but I've never heard anyone suggest any of the planets were such.

 

[sbbqb7n16]

I haven't found anything yet.. kinda hard to search for.. but I did hear another thing today... Morat you posted that the whole Solar system was once a big spinning ball of gas that eventually broke off into planets and the sun and moons and all. Correct? That's what your link says anyways... Have you ever heard of "Angular momentum" ? That if something is spinning around with an object on it (kinda like a child on a merry-go-round) if the object (a child) flies off it will still spin in the same direction? Have you heard/ do you know about that?

Here's a link just in case... http://www.astronomynotes.com/angmom/s1.htm

Well seeing as that is true.. and everything came from the one Big Spinning gas thingee... shouldn't everything spin the same way?? Why then do some planets spin oposite the rest? And why are there 6 moons that do as well?

 

[sbbqb7n16]

Well and here's a link I found using your own words at yahoo..

http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/space/10/06/space.planets.reut/

The question I believe was also raised as to whether or not Earth used to be as such...

 

[alexgb00]

Originally posted by Lacmeh
I guess, nobody ever told you, that the sun is a huge fusion reactor busy 24/7. Even at night the energy, that the sun emits hits earth. otherwise we would have a Marsian night with approx. -100 degree Celsius...

Lacmeth, we don't know for sure that&nbsp;Sol is undergoing fusion. Fusion doesn't work with regular hydrogen, but with heavier isotopes (deuterium and tritium), which are much more rare. But i don't get your point about the martian night.

&nbsp;

The forming of our solar system happened not with the sun having to force moving objects into orbits. First the earth and other planets were only gas balls, which grew more and more compact.

I assume this isn't something you observed for yourself, but something you read. Think, why did these balls clump up into the different planets, and not just one mass of gas. Also, how can it be that the earth was created by a "gas ball," but we have some heavy elements like plutonium (244 times as massive as hydrogen)? If the elements changed over time, why&nbsp;are Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune still gas?

The only reason, we think the earth is so special is, that we can´t observe other planets. We can only see other suns, but no planets, since planets don´t give light to observe.

Lacmeth, i don't understand. Above, you mentioned Mars, but now you say we can't observe planets? All eight of the planets in the solar system aren't suitable for life. They are flat out desolate. But do you know the reason we can't observe other planets besides these eight? Planets are rare. There are few&nbsp;star systems, unlike what Star Treck&nbsp;shows. You can't observe many other planets if you can find only a few.

There is no way, that the sun moved around earth.
Just put a 25 kilogram magnet down on the ground, then a 50 gram magnet. Which magnet moves to which? The same goes for planets and suns. Whatever has more mass, that is the greater gravitational force. And objects with the greater force move not to objects with the smaler force. It is the other way around

Yep, i agree.

God bless you Lacmeth!

 

[alexgb00]

sbbqb7n16, i about the law of angular momentum, you're correct. Even if the solar system was once one gas cloud, then something isn't right, because Venus is moving in the opposite direction of the rest of the planets. Uranus is spinning on its side, which is unusual. I guess at times, to make their theories fit, people can ignore physical laws.

God bless you, man.

 

[sbbqb7n16]

Originally posted by alexgb00
But i don't get your point about the martian night.

I think his point was "I don't understand what scarcasm is" Kinda took it the wrong way when other guy made a joke...

Thanks for the compliments I take em where I can get em!

And good questions by the way... God bless you!

 

[alexgb00]

Are you on the side of Creation, sbbqb7n16? Can i put you in my buddy list?

 

[sbbqb7n16]

Absolutely my brother! I shall do the same for you as well.. just to keep in touch and up to date....

originally posted by: lacmeh
the only reason, we think earth is so special is, that we can't see other planets

Or the whole "only planet that supports life" thing... whatever floats your boat

 

[alexgb00]

Originally posted by sbbqb7n16
Absolutely my brother! I shall do the same for you as well.. just to keep in touch and up to date....

Roger Wilco. I'll pray for you.

God bless, brother!

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Originally posted by alexgb00


I assume this isn't something you observed for yourself, but something you read.

From another Christian, lets not use that cop out...

After all you never saw Christ die and resurect personaly either, you just read about it.

Also, how can it be that the earth was created by a "gas ball," but we have some heavy elements like plutonium (244 times as massive as hydrogen)? If the elements changed over time, why&nbsp;are Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune still gas?

I think you are confusing gas as being a kind of matter rather than a state of matter...

Gas is simple a state of matter where the density of the atoms comprising said matter are spread thin and can be passed through with minimal resistance.

Like plasma, liquid and solid, gas is a state of matter. The pre-solarsystem nebula is refered to as a gas cloud because the overall density of the nebula was low.

 

[alexgb00]

Hello, Lewis. It's nice to talk with you again.

Originally posted by LewisWildermuth
From another Christian, lets not use that cop out...

After all you never saw Christ die and resurect personaly either, you just read about it.

That's a good example, except one difference. Christ's death was witnessed by His followers and enemies alike. The account of His resurrection is also a first-person account. The thing we're debating currently is not something ever witnessed by man, but rather a theory created to explain the solar system.

I think you are confusing gas as being a kind of matter rather than a state of matter...

Gas is simple a state of matter where the density of the atoms comprising said matter are spread thin and can be passed through with minimal resistance.

Like plasma, liquid and solid, gas is a state of matter. The pre-solarsystem nebula is refered to as a gas cloud because the overall density of the nebula was low.

You're right, Lewis. Even Pu can be in the gas state (elements can be divided into metals and&nbsp;non-metals, most gasses being non-metals), but that requires a very low pressure and high temperature. Supposedly, at the time the earth would've formed (~15 billion years after the BB) it's not likely this gas cloud would still be hot. But not even that -- it's the&nbsp;fact that the sun is mostly hydrogen. If our earth formed from the same gas cloud, why did the lighter particles gather into the sun and gas giants, but the heavier ones into the first four planets from the sun?

 

[Lacmeh]

Marsian Night:

The side of Mars, where the sun doesn´t shine upon, just like earth. This is the side, that gets quite cold.
Contrary to the Marsian day which has some bearable temperatures, I think.

When writing, that we can´t observe (currently) other planets, i meatn of course outside of our solar system. Since the principle of a telescope is to gather light rays, I don´t think, that any planet in Alpha Centauri system, which is only a few million light years removed from us (if memory is correct) can ever emit enough light so that we can see him.
People are having quite a hard time observing the outermost planets of our solar system. Based on the appearant anormalies observed in the planetary courses of the outer planets, it is beleived, that there is a tenth planet out there.

Other than Carbon, Nitrogen, oxygen, Hydrogen, iron, perhaps nickel and silicium the mas of the other elements is really small. The occurrence of the main elements can be reconstructed through fusion. The emergence of others, too, but I never cared learning about the theories behind it very much. it involved too many differenetial equations. I capitulated when I had to get the quantum numbers out of the Schrödinger equation,p.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Originally posted by alexgb00
Hello, Lewis. It's nice to talk with you again.



That's a good example, except one difference. Christ's death was witnessed by His followers and enemies alike. The account of His resurrection is also a first-person account. The thing we're debating currently is not something ever witnessed by man, but rather a theory created to explain the solar system.

Ahhhhh... But creation only has one witness God... And another point, the resurection was never witnessed, only the after effects. None of the 12 even witnessed the crusifiction. Yet you still believe... Not that it is a bad thing.

You're right, Lewis. Even Pu can be in the gas state (elements can be divided into metals and&nbsp;non-metals, most gasses being non-metals), but that requires a very low pressure and high temperature. Supposedly, at the time the earth would've formed (~15 billion years after the BB) it's not likely this gas cloud would still be hot.

The cloud was not in the strictest sence a gas cloud as in heat produces gas, it would probably be better refered to as a dust cloud, but once uppon a time someone refered to it as a gas cloud and it stuck...

But not even that -- it's the&nbsp;fact that the sun is mostly hydrogen. If our earth formed from the same gas cloud, why did the lighter particles gather into the sun and gas giants, but the heavier ones into the first four planets from the sun?

Light things only fall slower in an atmosphere, last I checked space had very little atmosphere... The feather and the lead ball thing in grade school science class, remember?

You have to have a pretty good amount of gravity to trap hydrogen for a long period of time, the Earths gravity can slow it's escape but it still escapes. Most of the hydrogen captured by the Earth is long gone, blown away by the solar wind.

One theory why the inner planets lack large ammounts of the lightest elements is that when the sun gained enough mass and ignighted its fusion reactor the preasure wave blew off the lighter elements that were not trapped from the planets that did not have enough gravity to hold them firmly.

 

[Morat]

Well and here's a link I found using your own words at yahoo..

&nbsp;Thrilling. As I stated, astronomers know there are such things as rogue planets. However, there is no indication any of those in our solar system are such. Rogues being captured into a stable orbit would be a rare event, I would imagine.

Lacmeth, we don't know for sure that&nbsp;Sol is undergoing fusion. Fusion doesn't work with regular hydrogen, but with heavier isotopes (deuterium and tritium), which are much more rare.

&nbsp; That's not correct. There are two fusion reactions occuring in the sun. One is the simple fusing of two Hydrogen atoms to make helium (since we're talking ionized hydrogen, it's also called proton-proton fusion), and the other is the slightly more complex CNO cycle.

I assume this isn't something you observed for yourself, but something you read. Think, why did these balls clump up into the different planets, and not just one mass of gas.

&nbsp; Gravity. Gravity works as an inverse square, remember? It wasn't a uniform gas, after all.

&nbsp;Also, how can it be that the earth was created by a "gas ball," but we have some heavy elements like plutonium (244 times as massive as hydrogen)? If the elements changed over time, why&nbsp;are Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune still gas

&nbsp; Um, "gases" in this sense mean "free atoms in space". Plutionium, uranium, lead, etc, would all be that way. Nebula's are primarily hydrogen and helium, but contain quite a bit of other elements.

&nbsp; Elements, by the way, don't change over time like that. However, a nice cyclotron or fusion event can do it.

Lacmeth, i don't understand. Above, you mentioned Mars, but now you say we can't observe planets? All eight of the planets in the solar system aren't suitable for life. They are flat out desolate. But do you know the reason we can't observe other planets besides these eight? Planets are rare. There are few&nbsp;star systems, unlike what Star Treck&nbsp;shows. You can't observe many other planets if you can find only a few.

&nbsp; Actually, modern research is indicating that isn't the case. Other planets seem to be quite common, and we're finding them everywhere we can look. The next generation space-telescopes will (hopefully) be able to resolve planets in the life-band, as opposed to the more arduous methods used now to find Jupiter sized planets.

sbbqb7n16, i about the law of angular momentum, you're correct. Even if the solar system was once one gas cloud, then something isn't right, because Venus is moving in the opposite direction of the rest of the planets. Uranus is spinning on its side, which is unusual. I guess at times, to make their theories fit, people can ignore physical laws.

&nbsp; Um, you do realize net angular momentum is conserved, right? So there's nothing particularly odd about a given planet or moon rotating in odd directions?

&nbsp; That's not "ignoring physical laws". It's understanding them in the first place.

&nbsp;

 

[Duane Morse]

The source is God. Don't forget what John said. God is light.
The Light is energy. All of it. Visable light, microwaves, x-rays, cosmic rays, etc. All energy, known and unknown.
Energy was before matter, and in fact all matter is energy. Energy that has been reformed.
So when God said "Let Light be", God was in fact defining and containing the energy into a usable form. And that is why light is dual natured, being both wave and particle. The wave is the uncontained, while the particle is the contained. The female and male aspects of Light, respectively.

Be seeing you
Duane

 

[Lacmeh]

I am not so heavily interested in astronomy. As far as I know, we have a hard time to detect other planets out there, because even fully formed, they don´t give that much light. Add to the fact, that the other stars and star systems are severl million lightyears away, that what we now see is not the present, but the very distant past.

As to what is going on in the sun, that´s pretty easy to know. I guess no one can coontest the fact, that the sun emits alot of radiation. Throug analysis of the emitted radiation one can easily discern the different elements. Therefore we know of which elements the sun consists. Combining the fact, that the conglomerate of the different elements emits alot of energy, there are only two possible solutions. For some reason,I can´t imagine an atom consisting of a neutron and a proton getting cut into half. So that leaves fusion,p

 

[Morat]

I am not so heavily interested in astronomy. As far as I know, we have a hard time to detect other planets out there, because even fully formed, they don´t give that much light.

&nbsp; Compared to the star they orbit, they give off none (they do reflect some). However, current methods of finding planets around distant stars use one of two processes. One is to find gravitational wobble in the star, caused by an orbiting body. The second is more rare, and requires that the body's orbit lie on the plane we're viewing through, so we can see the faint dimming as the planet passes between us.

&nbsp;&nbsp; Roughly 2 dozen or more planets have been located, primarily by the first method.

Add to the fact, that the other stars and star systems are severl million lightyears away, that what we now see is not the present, but the very distant past.

&nbsp; Um, no. The nearest star is roughly 4 light years away. Most of the stars we've discovered planets around are within a 50 or so lightyear radius.

&nbsp; A lightyear is many million miles. But we are seeing the past, true. 4 to 50 years ago.

For some reason,I can´t imagine an atom consisting of a neutron and a proton getting cut into half. So that leaves fusion,p

&nbsp; Tell that to the folks at Hiroshima.

 

[Lacmeh]

Um, that incident in Hiroshima was after Urane atoms got cut in half, not hydrogen atoms. You are hopefully aware of the fact, that the urane atom is about 200 times the size of the hydrogen atom and much more instable?
Ok we discovered planets 50 lightyears away.
Now there are two possibilities. Either, only in a 50 lightyear radius are planets around suns, or the chance of planets around suns is anywhere in the universe only with the current technology they aren´t seeable by human perception.