A Fishing forum. FishingBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » FishingBanter forum » rec.outdoors.fishing newsgroups » Fly Fishing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ring of fire



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 03:50 PM
slenon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default ring of fire

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/..._nsu_0205.html

--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
When the dawn came up like thunder

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/i...age92kword.htm



  #2  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 04:13 PM
riverman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"slenon" wrote in message
...
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/..._nsu_0205.html

--


I read about that yesterday on reuters. Looking at the first picture reminds
me that pictures like that always give me problems. It was similar in the
first StarWars when the DeathStar blew up and the Millennium Falcon was
racing away from the expanding wavefront, and in the background you could
see the same image as that picture.

The problem, of course, is that gamma rays travel at the speed of light, so
we would never be able to see an image like that one in the illustration. To
see that image, the light image of the expanding shell would have to travel
faster than the shell itself, which it cannot do.

What we'd see instead is a complete normal star, until the moment the
gamma/light shell hit us and we'd see the entire thing light up at once.
Like watching a flashbulb go off....you don't see the expanding sphere of
light...you just see the thing flash when the sphere of light hits you.

--riverman
(Science R us)


  #3  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 04:34 PM
Joe Ellis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"riverman" wrote:

"slenon" wrote in message
m...
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/..._nsu_0205.html

--


I read about that yesterday on reuters. Looking at the first picture reminds
me that pictures like that always give me problems. It was similar in the
first StarWars when the DeathStar blew up and the Millennium Falcon was
racing away from the expanding wavefront, and in the background you could
see the same image as that picture.

The problem, of course, is that gamma rays travel at the speed of light, so
we would never be able to see an image like that one in the illustration. To
see that image, the light image of the expanding shell would have to travel
faster than the shell itself, which it cannot do.

What we'd see instead is a complete normal star, until the moment the
gamma/light shell hit us and we'd see the entire thing light up at once.
Like watching a flashbulb go off....you don't see the expanding sphere of
light...you just see the thing flash when the sphere of light hits you.

--riverman
(Science R us)


Oh, really?

http://www.hubblespacephotos.com/sn1987a_ring.html

--

Joe Ellis
  #4  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 04:36 PM
slenon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

you don't see the expanding sphere of light...you just see the thing flash
when the sphere of light hits you.
--riverman
(Science R us)


No argument. It has been a long time since college Astronomy class. But
the image is interesting at least and the continual discoveries that come
from non-visible electro-magnetic radiation imaging are incredible. We've
come a long way from Willi Ley on the Disney Hour with his circular space
station model. It always thrills me when I see the space station overhead
now.

We have a room reserved on Merrit Island for the next shuttle launch.


--
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
When the dawn came up like thunder

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/i...age92kword.htm



  #5  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 04:40 PM
Joe Ellis
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"riverman" wrote:

snip

I read about that yesterday on reuters. Looking at the first picture reminds
me that pictures like that always give me problems. It was similar in the
first StarWars when the DeathStar blew up and the Millennium Falcon was
racing away from the expanding wavefront, and in the background you could
see the same image as that picture.


snip

.... and if ONE ring is impossible, then THREE...

http://www.hubblespacephotos.com/sn1987a.html

--

Joe Ellis
  #6  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 04:44 PM
riverman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Joe Ellis" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"riverman" wrote:

"slenon" wrote in message
om...
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/..._nsu_0205.html

--


I read about that yesterday on reuters. Looking at the first picture
reminds
me that pictures like that always give me problems. It was similar in the
first StarWars when the DeathStar blew up and the Millennium Falcon was
racing away from the expanding wavefront, and in the background you could
see the same image as that picture.

The problem, of course, is that gamma rays travel at the speed of light,
so
we would never be able to see an image like that one in the illustration.
To
see that image, the light image of the expanding shell would have to
travel
faster than the shell itself, which it cannot do.

What we'd see instead is a complete normal star, until the moment the
gamma/light shell hit us and we'd see the entire thing light up at once.
Like watching a flashbulb go off....you don't see the expanding sphere of
light...you just see the thing flash when the sphere of light hits you.

--riverman
(Science R us)


Oh, really?

http://www.hubblespacephotos.com/sn1987a_ring.html


The Hubble picture is of the dust and debris (mostly dust) left behind. The
artists conception picture is of the initail gamma ray flare (as was the
StarWars thingy). You wouldn't see the initial gamma blast coming (or even
the inital light blast), but you'd certainly see the debris left behind
afterwards.

--riverman


  #7  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 04:45 PM
rw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

riverman wrote:
"slenon" wrote in message
...

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/..._nsu_0205.html

--



I read about that yesterday on reuters. Looking at the first picture reminds
me that pictures like that always give me problems. It was similar in the
first StarWars when the DeathStar blew up and the Millennium Falcon was
racing away from the expanding wavefront, and in the background you could
see the same image as that picture.

The problem, of course, is that gamma rays travel at the speed of light, so
we would never be able to see an image like that one in the illustration. To
see that image, the light image of the expanding shell would have to travel
faster than the shell itself, which it cannot do.


That may disturb you, but what disturbs me is that if the burst happened
within 10 light years of Earth we'd all be dead.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.
  #8  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 05:03 PM
Frank Reid
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That may disturb you, but what disturbs me is that if the burst happened
within 10 light years of Earth we'd all be dead.


I got a tinfoil trifoil. I'm safe.
--
Frank Reid
Euthanize to reply

  #9  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 05:17 PM
Wayne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Frank Reid wrote:
That may disturb you, but what disturbs me is that if the burst

happened
within 10 light years of Earth we'd all be dead.


I got a tinfoil trifoil. I'm safe.
--
Frank Reid
Euthanize to reply



I already have a closet lined with tinfoil because of the government
radio waves beig beamed at us for brainwashing. I'll just duck in
there unless the government radio waves tell me to stand outside and
look up.

Wayne
to fish is human....to release Divine!!

  #10  
Old February 22nd, 2005, 05:36 PM
Wolfgang
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Frank Reid" wrote in message
...
That may disturb you, but what disturbs me is that if the burst happened
within 10 light years of Earth we'd all be dead.


I got a tinfoil trifoil. I'm safe.


Assuming that the solipsist point of view is unsubstantiated, I think it's
safe to say that all of us......including Stevie (bless his poor little
disturbed heart).....are safe......for the moment.

Wolfgang
who, possessed of an extraordinary imagination, is not at all sure that the
above assumption is necessarily tenable.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
my cat gets cover fire riverman Fly Fishing 1 January 24th, 2005 03:11 PM
OT Bells on bobtail ring ... Ken Fortenberry Fly Fishing 23 December 26th, 2004 12:42 PM
Kinshasa under fire! riverman Fly Fishing 25 April 1st, 2004 01:05 AM
Fire Wood FOR SALE, BRISBANE Buy now before winter!!! tony Fishing in Australia 4 March 17th, 2004 02:35 AM
Web ring and discussion forum updated and needing participation Michael P. Thompson Fly Fishing 0 November 13th, 2003 09:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 FishingBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.