Sun intead of Moon

Post » Mon Jun 03, 2013 8:03 am

No its not. For a object to actually become a sun, takes a large enough mass to ignite the thermonuclear fusion at its core required for it to actually *be* a sun. There are objects in the universe known as "brown dwarfs" which are essentially failed stars, as they don't have the mass required to sustain the fusion. They are essentially giant gas planets, many times the size of Jupiter.

A "mini-star" that could orbit the earth is impossible as far as we know. While stars can be that size (white dwarfs) their density would be very high, with a mass the same as the sun scrunched into a volume the size of the earth. We'd still orbit around that sun in that case due to the gravitational pull, and since white dwarfs are the product of a dying sun, we probably wouldn't be here anyway.

Edit: For reference, this is the actual size of the sun compared to earth: http://didyouknow.org/graphics/space/planetsizes.jpg

And the sun is a comparably small star: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_RsCCizsWvNw/SU7dwO8JYBI/AAAAAAAABQ0/BlEh-2hgKBw/s400/biggest+planets.jpg

User avatar
Kellymarie Heppell
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:37 am

Post » Mon Jun 03, 2013 3:10 am

....

.....

......

.......

What do they teach in science classes these days? I'm sorry, but if the sun didn't have a gravitational pull, the Earth wouldn't rotate around it.

It's a bit of a misnomer on brown dwarfs, they actually can achieve fusion, they just can't sustain it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-brown_dwarf are truly failed stars.

But yeah, the largest known sustained-fusion star is bigger than Jupiter.

User avatar
Stephanie Nieves
 
Posts: 3407
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:52 pm

Post » Mon Jun 03, 2013 10:20 am

It is true that global warming is an undeniable fact, much the same as gravity, the mailman and evolution are, but I think global warming is wholly the wrong word.

While technically correct it gives a wrong view in people's minds, as they think this means things should just warm up.

Of course, what really happens is when you put more energy into a meta-stable energy distribution system such as the weather is that changes between states become more frequent and violent, not that everything just gets a few degrees hotter. You can compare it to a system of conveyor belts that move something from one belt to the next. 'Heat' the system up (apply energy) and the belts will move faster. This does not mean that the thing moved changed, just that which belt it is on changes more rapidly.

So we would see (and do) more tornadoes, more storms, more extreme weather conditions.

I think climate change is a far better term to describe the man-made influence on the environment.

I have no idea why there are still people who deny such an obvious truth. I suppose the reality is that propaganda created by those who have a vested interest in the status quo is a powerful thing indeed.

I find such propaganda to be wholly distasteful and borderline criminal. These fatcats care about nothing but their own wallets and would (and do) sell their own grandchildren into a life of hardship due to climate devastation.

User avatar
Spencey!
 
Posts: 3221
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 12:18 am

Previous

Return to Othor Games