space noob

It's said that there are only 6 categories of different string theories and around over 600 known different models, what's yours?

The time that we experience is not at the same speed as the black hole, it's relativity is no different than ours if you could safely stand close enough to watch without being affected the universe surrounding would speed up and you would see objects entering the event horizon if time is infinite without considering the big crunch then doesn't the black hole have as much time as it needs? It just seems that the laws of physics govern that the objects would inevitably "have" to be dragged into the event horizon

10 billion light years away? 3.7 billion years after the big bang, wouldn't we be looking at unevolved galaxies, it makes no sense to compare them to ours, or am I thinking wrong? Is this a new article? I feel like I've read this before, Why can't the acceleration be like Christos Tsagas states, just an illusion, that way it would define that all forces would work the same way, still retaining dark flow and relativity would still be in affect, for this to be true I think all that needs to be changed is the existence of dark matter, don't we already know that dark matter isn't really there? i'm not too advanced in the Christos Tsagas area but it's still a possibility given my current knowledge of the universe but hey i'm no genius

http://sciencenetlinks.com/science-news/science-updates/solar-power-from-moon/ The science behind it shows it can be done and meet global demands, but could it be done? The moon is smaller than earth so it's not like putting panels around the equator but it's still a huge surface to cover, there would be countless trips to space, huge wastes of money and decades of planning Putting panels around the equator could be a simpler task There is water frozen under the moons surface which it is believed could be used to launch space crafts from the moon using hydrogen, it still takes a lot of fuel to get there in the first place though, even so by the time this could be done the population may even double and everyone may have electric cars, the global electrical usage may exceed that of the moons supply, then of course there's the man power Anne working in space to consider, What are your thoughts?

http://www.englishforums.com/English/EinsteinsRiddleFish/bhvj/post.htm Don't write the answer to the riddle in the comments, just write Howe long it took you, or if you gave up, be honest This has probably been done on here before but i'm new so you'll have to excuse me please I'll go first, it took me just under ten minutes and a page of working it out, I got there but not with ease Good luck

Where did you get the 15 mile diameter from?

If I could find the name change option using my phone then I would most likely change my name but technology skills somewhat lack that of the average human being in my generation, Although I would only change it to space newbie, Nice save spyman :-D you're very good at going in depth, possibly the best answer I could have asked for, thank you

Eh? So vy canis majored is bigger but it has a smaller mass than R136a1? Would that be because vy canis majoris is nearing the end of it's life and R136a1 is young?

Now that the discussion has been derailed I may never bee able to get more in depth about hypervelocity stars

Well I think my name is more suited to the term newbie, in England, a noob is a newbie but if anyone asked me then I shall explain and it doesn't bother me in the slightest if they think it's the latter of your two definitions, However thank you for your concern, also I think your latter definition may have been intended as a joke to insult noobs

Well, I Suppose you could say it was misinterpreted, when I started to study space it seemed like most people leaned towards big crunch, or the fate of the universe question was mostly answered by the big crunch It's also what we got taught was most likely at uni

My apologies, I think that I have already explained the problems I have had uploading links, now that I know how to do it there shouldn't be a problem and second apologies for my behaviour, it was uncalled for http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_fate_of_the_universe#section_3 under the heading "theories about the end of the universe" the big crunch is one of the top 6 outcomes, Einstein http://www.thestargarden.co.uk/GeneralRelativity.html The great Stephen Hawkins http://www.pbs.org/wnet/hawking/universes/html/osci.html http://m.zimbio.com/Stephen+Hawking/articles/WpRvKtpjskD/Bang+Crunch+According+Stephen+Hawking Further info http://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_bigbang.html It's only a theory until proven right or wrong, everyone retains the right to their own beliefs The big crunch is dependent on a finite universe and is not the only possible outcome of a finite universe x

Larger stars like the vy canis majoris, become so large by exerting their energy faster, canis is the largest star known and probably has the shortest life span of any other known star, lasting merely millions of years I think the clump theory also explains large stars the best

I got into astronomy when I got depression and obsessed about being dead, I got Thanatophobia, I wanted to answer questions, but obviously there is no answer for what happens when you die, I took in as much science as I could, I took only the new testament as the old was ridiculous and plus the fact that i'm Roman Catholic and then I applied science and found no flaws, apart from the Jesus miracles obviously, i'm still convinced that there is some truth behind religion by trying to explain with science about how eternal life could be possible, if there was a God The closer my relationship with science gets the beliefs I have about God don't shrink, sometimes they get stronger Science is absolute truth and God is belief, creationalism shouldn't really exist if you ask me but if you believe the Bible you would need to believe all of it right? Well even in the Bible it says that people have pretended to go forth in his name and spread his word, rio you can pick and mix what to believe

At the speed of a hypervelocity star, would even this Tiny amount of friction not have any affect at all? Like the faster you travel jumping into water the more chance you have of dying, It's speed is impressive, for something other than a wave to move at this speed and given it's size, it's a huge feet From what I've read about this star, everyone keeps going back to the idea that a super nova from the birth of nebula or galaxy, I can't remember, did push it out, I think I did read that they had traced it to it's origins

galaxy core that is active or an active galaxy nucleus, pretty close nevertheless, I don't think that the black hole is part of the quasar though, the black hole is said to power the quasar and even bring the quasar into being

http://mostodd.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/bright-black-holes/ This website does mention quasars but speaks over all of the black hole, the next is from Stanford university, http://oso.stanford.edu/lectures/73-black-holes-the-brightest-objects-in-the-universe Information about a lecture The next is from NASA http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2000/ast15may_1m/ please forgive me for not using links, I only use my smart phone now instead of a computer, I didn't know how to copy and paste URL's i'm 20 but I didn't get into my gadgets like the rest of my generation

I don't have to back up anything to you, you are not the question poster, I am not an index, you have your own internet, go use it, most people follow Einstein and many other god fathers of science, it's the most common belief that the big bang will stop as compared to will never end, as it's not expanding at the same rate it always has, scientists across the globe have even given the universe a time limit as to how long it has left

George lemaitre and Albert Einstein both worked together after Einstein stood up and applauded Georges work on the big bang, After which they both further the study and Came to the conclusion that depending on circumstances a big crunch had the potential to recreate a second big bang, if one had not already taken place, How about doing your own research, i'm Fed up of trying to explain things to you, I don't care what you believe, go on the internet or better yet actually read books about the great man himself

Well everyone with a physics degree knows that you can't travel at the speed of light which would slow down time, The next option apart from that, would be a time machine, so that option is out the window when I say the easiest way, it's the only do-able way, I was under the impression a lot of people shared the view professor Brian Cox and Stephen Hawkins, both use this model in ways of travelling forward through time Thanks for helping but i'm a girl That's were the saying - it's all relative- Comes into it, time can only be experienced at the same rate but when closer to an object of a higher mass looking outwards objects would be faster than before, for example time moves slower standing next to the pyramids but to the person standing there it makes no difference,

Straight off a website the material closest to the event horizon hits other materials so often that there is a great deal of friction, and with friction comes heat. The hottest parts of the disk can become really hot, millions of degrees hot. Until all of the material heats up into a plasma which forms a second superheated ring inside the accretion disk. This plasma disk, being so hot, is also very bright because when objects heat up they give off light. As well as being powerful, they are bright. In fact these kinds of black holes, active black holes, are the brightest continuously emitting objects in the whole universe. So there you go, the brightest things in the universes are black holes. That greatly confuses and pleases me, the perfect case of not judging a book by its cover.

TrES-4 may interest you, it's the largest planet known and it's as dense as cork, according to Physics laws then it shouldn't exist, although it's the biggest known planet, it is only nearly twice the size of Jupiter, it's actually quite near to us which makes it possible that there are much bigger planets in the galaxy never mind the universe

Einstein said all of what I said about big bang-big crunch, the majority of scientists believe that the big bang will stop expanding, regardless of whether the universe is expanding or not That's why people believe that the possible outcomes will either be a big-crunch or big freeze Whether I believe it or not is questionable but theory of the big bang being created by a black hole or a similar event could have triggered the big bang is a widely studied area, if it was so contradictory then people would have already come to the conclusion that it is impossible, the universe itself has black hole qualities, until the loop quantum gravity problem is solved we cannot really understand anything, if we live in a universe where the best way of explaining everything is saying "there are an infinite amount of me's in an infinite amount of universe, each one being different somehow our all would be doing the same thing" or basically "a different Loey in another universe yet somehow occupying the same space is about to sit down with the talking unicorn and the Jewish mixed race homosexual Nazi enthusiast from next door" how can the only way of making sense of the universe be the most Ludacris explanation and yet afterwards we still think or universe would now make sense

Considering we are all here because we enjoy astronomy it's a wonder why so many arguments kick of inn the forums

Sorry, mass not weight, there's a reason that I give myself the screen name "space noob"