Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1
    Rojan Katar's Avatar
    Rojan Katar Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time



    With the biggest solar flares in years one could ask himself if our sun is
    groing older than it should be.

    We all know that it will become a giant red but some sat in 4.5 billion
    years and some say in only a few thousand.

    If I only rely on my astronomy courses it shoud be 4.5 billion years.

    Has someone got some more insight?

    Thanks

    Pete!



  2. #2
    Abdul Ahad's Avatar
    Abdul Ahad Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    "Rojan Katar" <p..lacelle@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<cRfsb.4072$IK2.362671@news20.bellglobal.com> ...

    .....and some say in only a few thousand....

    Sounds like old wives tales to me. The Sun taking 4.5 billion years to
    reach the red gaint stage agrees with my memory checks on the topic.
    The solar flaring of recent times is an erratic phenomena which in
    reality no one can properly explain. The Sun is a main sequence star
    of extremely good stability in light and heat output, when majority of
    stars we see out there have some degree of fluctuations. Whilst the
    current flaring is somewhat over and above what we expect in the 11
    year solar 'cycle', I would not get too alarmed as historically the
    Sun has behaved in similar ways before. There is no *trend* to suggest
    the Sun is about to go super nova!

    Abdul Ahad
    http://uk.geocities.com/aa_spaceagent/astronomy.html

  3. #3
    David Knisely's Avatar
    David Knisely Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    "Rojan Katar" <p..lacelle@sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<cRfsb.4072$IK2.362671@news20.bellglobal.com> ...

    These solar flares are small compared to some which also occur on
    sun-like stars. These "superflares" are many times more violent,
    although one model may indicate that these stars have very close
    companions which alter their behavior. The sun is behaving pretty
    much in a normal manner. Solar flares tend to be the most violent in
    the period after sunspot maximum (which we are now in). The fact that
    we have recorded the largest X-ray class flare in history isn't really
    all that sigificant, as we have only been observing the sun's X-ray
    output since the late 1970's.
    As for the sun, in a few *billion* years, it will become a red
    giant, although its energy output is very slowly increasing over time,
    and that may make life on our planet difficult to impossible in only
    about a billion years time. Clear skies to you.
    --
    David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
    Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
    Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

    **********************************************
    * Attend the 11th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
    * July 18-23, 2004, Merritt Reservoir *
    * http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
    **********************************************

  4. #4
    unk's Avatar
    unk Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    In article <3416b228.0311170651.6cf4b595@posting.google.com >,
    aa_spaceagent@yahoo.co.uk (Abdul Ahad) wrote:


    Abdul...it is doubtful that you have a memory that goes back 45 years
    let alone 4.5 billion years. When you consider that we've been in the
    scientific age with respect to the sun for less than 400 years and
    compare that to the textbook 'beliefs' about the age of the sun which is
    supposed to be on the order of 4.5 b.y. then we see that we have this
    fractional observational window of 400/4.5e9 which is 1 part in eleven
    and a quarter million. Surely you have the uniformitarianist mindset to
    think that this 1 part in eleven and a quarter million is absolutely
    representative of the entire spectrum of its supposedly 4.5 billion year
    history.

    I fantasize about newgroups not being occupied by people like you who
    are only able to regurgitate what the so-called (but never proven to be)
    experts have declared.
    --
    --
    BlueJay <ccrider@earthlink.net>
    for email replace the 'i' in ccrider w/a 'y'

  5. #5
    Abdul Ahad's Avatar
    Abdul Ahad Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    >

    So you don't believe in going to school and learning about scientific
    concepts from text books and teachers then? No, I haven't personally
    been around for 4.5 billion years, but I have a mind that can look at
    the universe, make logical deductions about other stars in similar and
    dis-similar leagues as our own Sun, look at stars at different stages
    of their evolution and life cycles, then *project* these observations
    and thoughts into the past, present and future. My statements are
    reasoned within limits of human capability.

    Are you capable of any of these things I wonder? If you are able to
    add comments that would be *useful* in some way to this group, then
    please do so.

    AA

  6. #6
    george's Avatar
    george Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    Well, it was a rather dumb question to begin with really. Sol seems fine--it
    predates you and will likely continue after you are gone.



    "Abdul Ahad" <aa_spaceagent@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:3416b228.0311190241.563fbc5d@posting.google.c om...



  7. #7
    unk's Avatar
    unk Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    In article <3416b228.0311190241.563fbc5d@posting.google.com >,
    aa_spaceagent@yahoo.co.uk (Abdul Ahad) wrote:


    I believe in going to school to learn to differentiate between concepts
    which are labeled 'scientific' but are not and those which really are
    'scientific' or at least reasonable and logical. You believe that some
    stars are in different stages of their 'evolution' when, in fact, you
    have merely bought into the idea that stars that appear different from
    each other are in a 'different stage' of 'their evolution' without
    really knowing the origin or nature of stars themselves. In other
    words, you are able to regurgitate the thoughts of other people and to
    use such thoughts as the basis of your logic without questioning the
    validity of their assessment of the data in the first place.

    For example, I would guess that you believe that the age of the Sun is
    related to the age of the Earth and you believe that the age of the
    Earth is related to the ratio of various isotopes in rocks. But the
    belief that isotopic ratios is an indicator of age is based upon a
    specific notion of the origin of heavy elements. You probably suppose
    that certain heavy elements are produced in supernovae by thermonuclear
    fusion events, that is, in energetic collisional events between the
    nuclei of lighter elements. See, you have a whole set of beliefs that
    are not 'scientifically' substantiated but rather are so universally
    accepted as true that they are considered to be so beyond any reasonable
    doubt.

    Now comes onto the stage the idea that there is some sort of very
    'heavy' dark matter which resides in the cores of galaxies (and other
    places). Do you suppose that this heavy dark matter was formed by the
    collision and fusion of lighter elements? Perhaps you never considered
    the origin of this 'heavy, dark matter'?

    We have experimental data that demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt
    that heavy elements can decay into lighter daughter products. Did it
    ever occur to you that almost all elements are decay products of heavier
    elements? Or that heavy elements are not fusion products but fission
    products? If so, then, what could you say about the age of a star or of
    the Earth that was accurate?
    --
    --
    BlueJay <ccrider@earthlink.net>
    for email replace the 'i' in ccrider w/a 'y'

  8. #8
    Abdul Ahad's Avatar
    Abdul Ahad Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    > Now comes onto the stage the idea that there is some sort of very

    You don't say!!! You are clearly a man(?) of knowledge in this field
    of cosmic processes and elemental make up of stars & galaxies.
    Cosmology and Stellar Evolution are *not* areas of any specialism to
    me, so I regret not being able to engage in this conversation further.
    Not necessarily due to lack of knowledge or fascination, but because
    of time!

    I am sure there are other well versed people in this group, so you may
    want to take this further with some of them in a separate post on this
    news group. My original reply was merely stating that: the Solar
    flares of recent weeks is NOT a hugely abnormal phenomena in the grand
    scheme of how stars generally behave and that we should not overly
    concern ourselves with that. Obviously there are millions of
    additional bits of facts one could analyse, but the bottom line
    conclusion will be what I just said.

    cheers
    AA

  9. #9
    CeeBee's Avatar
    CeeBee Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    unk <ccrider@earthlink.net> wrote in alt.astronomy.solar:



    You fantasize about non-experts.

    Experts can deduce a lot from the total mass of a star, fule consumption
    in the fusion process, observating other stars and using the scientific
    method to come to a theory about the possible age and possible future
    ahead of the Sun..

    You don't have to follow a car for an hour to know something about its
    speed, and how many kph it's doing if it's passing you at a constant
    speed.
    You don't have be around for 100 million years to have some knowledge
    about the eating habits of dinosaurs.

    You don't have to read another messages from you to know that you have
    zilch understanding of the scientific method.

    --
    CeeBee


    "I am not a crook"


    Google CeeBee @ www.geocities.com/ceebee_2


  10. #10
    unk's Avatar
    unk Guest

    Default Ia our sun groing old before its time

    In article <3416b228.0311221400.3038a234@posting.google.com >,
    aa_spaceagent@yahoo.co.uk (Abdul Ahad) wrote:


    You've never had the knowledge to contribute anything meaningful.
    That's why you've been marked as a mere regurgitator.



    And I pointed out that you have not sufficient data to say anything
    reasonable about the 'grand scheme' of 'how stars generally behave'.
    --
    --
    BlueJay <ccrider@earthlink.net>
    for email replace the 'i' in ccrider w/a 'y'

 

 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Day time vs Night time
    By William in forum Amateur Astronomy Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-17-2004, 06:15 PM
  2. Ia our sun groing old before its time
    By Rojan Katar in forum Solar Viewing Forum
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-28-2003, 02:59 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0
Powered by vBulletin®
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:46 AM.