Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TravisM
Supernovae do expand in shells. If you were really curious you'd have found the reason they appear as shells... This is ridiculous. It's on the webpage associated with this board. 1987A... :-?
|
http://www.hep.upenn.edu/~max/ Tegmark’s web page has a very clear picture of a supernova Ia forming an unambiguous ring, rather than a shell.
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0203346
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0308533
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0008130
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9711271
http://lanl.arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9710294
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9512025
These papes, and a dozen others, try to explain and characterize the RINGs that formed in the wake and nebula of 1987A. Anyone can explain the formation explosive shells in open space. These are rings, and they radiate big time!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TravisM
Jupiter was made from the same accretion disk that the sun was... Ohmugawd, the ratios are the SAME!?
|
If Jupiter and the Sun were formed at about the same time, as current theory ascribes, and the Sun has been cooking for ions, why isn’t this reflected in the hydrogen/helium ratio? How can the sun burn without creating byproducts? We were hoping that, by comparing the H/He ratio on Jupiter with that of the Sun, we could confirm both the model for the creation of the solar system, and get a firmer estimate on the age of the system. We cannot do either because the model does not fit.
Sensors in the Jupiter probe launched by Galileo indicated ~80% of the mass of the heat shield system was ablated during entry. I wish I knew what erosion rates they were predicting, because that is survival by the thinnest of margins.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Evan
...The results are far from conclusive.
|
8)