Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 91 to 119 of 119

Thread: shooting something into the sun

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    543
    Lone Wolfe,
    ( this is of course totaly off course, I mean off topic ,off thread...but)
    your (American ) breed of environmentalists thinks nuclear power as something good and friendly .......?!?!
    That is a totaly outlandish notion for me !

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,743
    Quote Originally Posted by satori View Post
    Lone Wolfe,
    ( this is of course totaly off course, I mean off topic ,off thread...but)
    your (American ) breed of environmentalists thinks nuclear power as something good and friendly .......?!?!
    By "they", I meant the businesses. Not the environmentalists. My bad. I was mocking Environment's views about the businesses.

    That is a totaly outlandish notion for me !
    What, environmentalists think that nuclear power is good and friendly, or the idea of nuclear power being good and friendly? But yeah, this is pretty off topic.

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    543
    sorry, LW, my limited grasp of the english vernacular...
    .... for a second i was led to believe that the American devision of the (I know globaly organized !) environmentalists could in fact have come to embrace nuc tech ('cause GlobWarm)....that was what would have struck me as queer...!

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,045
    Quote Originally Posted by satori View Post
    sorry, LW, my limited grasp of the english vernacular...
    .... for a second i was led to believe that the American devision of the (I know globaly organized !) environmentalists could in fact have come to embrace nuc tech ('cause GlobWarm)....
    that was what would have struck me as queer...!
    Since you are having language problems, I won't take that comment the wrong way. Take this to another thread if you want to discuss it. Nuclear is an excellent energy option.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    543
    It is a minor topic, Van Rijn, but you are treating me unfairly!
    If you were more familiar with your very own language, you would have easily read thru the few short posts prior to this one and you would have found it totaly unnecessary to remind me of the deviation sin...... repeat :Totaly Unnecessery !!!
    if the topic on hand is so touchy for you, you can't resist the urge to respond.... Then please play fair ....and don't take your personal convictions on the subject as a selfunderstood given...

    bytheby : i have zero affiliations to any environmental organisation nor to any gun club were i would practice this sort of from the hip shooting routine of your's

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    6,269
    If I could kill 10,000 SUVs to save one speckled owl I'd do it.
    My travel blog Mostly about riding a motorcycle across the US and Europe. Also has cool things that happen in between.

  7. 2007-Feb-22, 10:38 PM

  8. #97
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    543
    hey crosscountry you are biking on dangerous lands here !

  9. #98
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,743
    Quote Originally Posted by crosscountry View Post
    If I could kill 10,000 SUVs to save one speckled owl I'd do it.
    If I could kill 10,000 speckled owls to keep my SUV, I'd do it.

    Unless you're willing to pay for a new vehicle for me? I need something that can hold a lot of space, though, and go long distances. Without it, I pretty much can't do what I need to do.

  10. #99
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    543
    crosscountry,
    if it should come to some ugly turf war here (highly likely), you can't count on me to assist you, as i mmuuuust go sleep.....

  11. #100
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,743
    Quote Originally Posted by satori View Post
    crosscountry,
    if it should come to some ugly turf war here (highly likely), you can't count on me to assist you, as i mmuuuust go sleep.....
    Good night, don't let the speckled owls bite.

  12. #101
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    18,045
    Quote Originally Posted by satori View Post
    It is a minor topic, Van Rijn, but you are treating me unfairly!
    I am? Perhaps you misunderstood the intent of my comment.

    if the topic on hand is so touchy for you, you can't resist the urge to respond.... Then please play fair ....and don't take your personal convictions on the subject as a selfunderstood given...
    Let's see, I said I wouldn't take your comment the wrong way, said nuclear was an excellent energy option, and suggested that you take this to another thread if you wanted to discuss it. (And that's because nuclear power, as others have noted, is not the topic of this thread.)

    You'll have to explain why that is in any way unfair. I don't get it - and you seem to be far more touchy about my comments than I am of yours.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  13. #102
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    7,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Lonewulf View Post
    If I could kill 10,000 speckled owls to keep my SUV, I'd do it.

    Unless you're willing to pay for a new vehicle for me? I need something that can hold a lot of space, though, and go long distances. Without it, I pretty much can't do what I need to do.
    There is a big difference between people, such as yourself, who buy SUVs because they need them for what only they can do and those buy them as status symbols. Parking a Hummer on the grass at the golf course is not off-roading!

  14. #103
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    6,743
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaptain K View Post
    There is a big difference between people, such as yourself, who buy SUVs because they need them for what only they can do and those buy them as status symbols. Parking a Hummer on the grass at the golf course is not off-roading!
    I don't think that Crosscountry was being specific as to who's SUV he intended on taking away.

  15. #104
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    6,269
    nope, not specific. funny the replies though.


    It was probably a poor example but I'm just saying your status symbol shouldn't infringe on nature just because you want it to.
    My travel blog Mostly about riding a motorcycle across the US and Europe. Also has cool things that happen in between.

  16. #105
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Longmont, CO
    Posts
    3,490
    SUV's should not be looked at as a status symbol. They should be looked at as a practical transportation device for those who need to carry a lot of stuff through less than optimum travel routes. If you're a soccer mom driving your kid around on public roads, you don't need one. If you're ANYONE who does not need an SUV, you should not have one. I don't have a problem with those who actually need one. It's the vast majority of SUV owners who do NOT need one, but instead have one for the sole purpose of having one that I don't like.

    On a side note, one of my favorite cars is the subaru outback. Mine gets 26mpg combined, and has plenty of room to cart stuff around (I carry a lot of junk around). It also is decently capable on dirt roads, snow, in the mountains, etc. It's a great choice for those who need some SUV-like characteristics without having to go all the way (some people really do need a full SUV - again, I have nothing against them).

  17. #106
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    543
    (And that's because nuclear power, as others have noted, is not the topic of this thread.)

    You'll have to explain why that is in any way unfair. I don't get it - and you seem to be far more touchy about my comments than I am of yours.
    (your qoute Van Rijn (with my highlighting))

    Let me first observe, Van Rijn, that from your (relatively) mild response to my somewhat hysterical post (I grant that) I gather that you might be a decent character after all....

    As much as I would like, I can't spare you the reproach of having treated me unfairly though and even continuing to do so !
    If you study the previous posts with due scruteny you will easily find, that it was me, yes me and nobody other, who made the initial attempt to keep this thread "clean", quote (satori) :
    Lone Wolfe,
    ( this is of course totaly off course, I mean off topic ,off thread...but)
    upon this statement follow two lines of condensed prose (plus a short threeliner to correct some misunderstanding on the part of my interlocutor) and............................................... ...............nothing more .........period.

    now am i realy accusing you unfairly of unfairness.....?



    and stop that OT-Babbling on SUV s all of you for the Mods sake

  18. #107
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    8,774
    My bad introducing nuke into this thread. I was only talking of the space elevator commments we´ve discussed in another thread, involving sending the stuff to the Sun. A Space Elevator launch at noon could cancel out some 15% of the Earth´s orbital speed, and combined with chemical/ion thrusters could allow for a highly elliptical, sun-intercepting orbit. It was designed as a thought experiment, since space elevators are beyond our tech horizon. This is all it had in common with this thread, and discussing nuclear here is off-topic.

  19. #108
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1
    Looking at this tread it "hit" me that if you you should try this it would be much like trowing something against the wind. It will move into the sun for some time then it will avaporate, and the solar wind will blow the gas out again.

  20. #109
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    3,043
    Thread necromancy alert, 10 years.

    Fred
    Hey, you! "It's" with an apostrophe means "it is" or "it has." "Its" without an apostrophe means "belongs to it."

    "For shame, gentlemen, pack your evidence a little better against another time."
    -- John Dryden, "The Vindication of The Duke of Guise" 1684

    Earth's sole legacy will be a very slight increase (0.01%) of the solar metallicity.

  21. #110
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    12,154
    Quote Originally Posted by bnesheim View Post
    Looking at this tread it "hit" me that if you you should try this it would be much like trowing something against the wind. It will move into the sun for some time then it will avaporate, and the solar wind will blow the gas out again.
    It's an interesting question, albeit a bit unrelated to the original question. I imagine that if you launched a probe directly into the sun, it would gradually evaporate, and I wonder what would happen to the gas particles. It might well be that the lighter atoms will be cast away, but that the heavier ones will may their way into the interior of the sun. I'd be happy to hear other views though.
    As above, so below

  22. #111
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    24
    How does the material that forms a new star overcome angular momentum as the nebula if forms from begins to collapse and spin?

  23. #112
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    34,200
    Quote Originally Posted by ronin View Post
    How does the material that forms a new star overcome angular momentum as the nebula if forms from begins to collapse and spin?
    A tornado or toilet flush don't have to worry about angular momentum, do they?
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright
    "It is the duty of the writers to seduce me into suspending my disbelief!" Paul Beardsley

  24. #113
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Norfolk UK and some of me is in Northern France
    Posts
    6,725
    Quote Originally Posted by ronin View Post
    How does the material that forms a new star overcome angular momentum as the nebula if forms from begins to collapse and spin?
    in terms of the OP angular momentum and linear momentum are linked. In the case of fluids there are pressures so that the centre of a vortex is at lower pressure than the surrounding fluid and that pressure difference causes centripetal movement. But as density goes down the link between particles is less clear if they don't hit each other. Eventually the mean free path is so long that you need another explanation which is gravity. If you imagine a "free" particle with momentum experiencing a net gravity sideways force its path changes to a curve. This effect clearly tends to focus a group of particles increasing density. However it is true for all particles and they are not all travelling the same paths so impacts start to occur. The net momentum and the net angular momentum begin the take over from long mean free paths. A travelling probe in free fall can use large masses to swingshot its own trajectory, thereby achieving a large change in momentum vector by a smaller navigational correction. Once free of Earth, a probe aimed at say the moon should be able to find a trajectory that would set it on course for the sun, hopefully the reaction on the moon is then too small to force it out of its orbit.
    sicut vis videre esto
    When we realize that patterns don't exist in the universe, they are a template that we hold to the universe to make sense of it, it all makes a lot more sense.
    Originally Posted by Ken G

  25. #114
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    12,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    A tornado or toilet flush don't have to worry about angular momentum, do they?
    You seem to be dismissing it, but it is a real issue in the mainstream field of star formation, called the angular momentum problem. In fact it just happens that I wrote a press release for a researcher who is doing research in that very area. She hypothesizes that a sort of shock wave develops and that some particles are case either upward or downward (our of the plane of the disk) so that that momentum takes the energy that allows the particles to slow down. But it's not a simple issue. It is likely related to the fact that the sun, while having 99% of the mass of the solar system, only has 3% of the angular momentum.
    As above, so below

  26. #115
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,005
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    A tornado or toilet flush don't have to worry about angular momentum, do they?
    AIUI (and IANA Meteorologist), a tornado happens precisely because the angular momentum gets trapped in material in a small volume and takes time to dissipate to nonthreatening levels. In the aftermath of an EF-4 around here, I was struck to see that the broken-off trees had not been really snapped off, the crowns had been twisted off. That much wind shear betrays a lot of angular momentum.

  27. #116
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    You seem to be dismissing it, but it is a real issue in the mainstream field of star formation, called the angular momentum problem. In fact it just happens that I wrote a press release for a researcher who is doing research in that very area. She hypothesizes that a sort of shock wave develops and that some particles are case either upward or downward (our of the plane of the disk) so that that momentum takes the energy that allows the particles to slow down. But it's not a simple issue. It is likely related to the fact that the sun, while having 99% of the mass of the solar system, only has 3% of the angular momentum.
    Thanks.

  28. #117
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Falls Church, VA (near Washington, DC)
    Posts
    7,250
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    It's an interesting question, albeit a bit unrelated to the original question. I imagine that if you launched a probe directly into the sun, it would gradually evaporate, and I wonder what would happen to the gas particles. It might well be that the lighter atoms will be cast away, but that the heavier ones will may their way into the interior of the sun. I'd be happy to hear other views though.
    Suppose a load of nuclear waste was inbound on a course that would take it to the photosphere if it did not evaporate first. I would expect evaporating material to be pushed back like the tail of a comet, and that it would be so widely dispersed that it would be no threat to us on Planet Earth. It would be interesting to get an engineering estimate of how deep a steel container would penetrate before evaporating completely.

  29. #118
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    12,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornblower View Post
    Suppose a load of nuclear waste was inbound on a course that would take it to the photosphere if it did not evaporate first. I would expect evaporating material to be pushed back like the tail of a comet, and that it would be so widely dispersed that it would be no threat to us on Planet Earth. It would be interesting to get an engineering estimate of how deep a steel container would penetrate before evaporating completely.
    I don't think they would be pushed back out but I could be wrong. Even if they were it would be a very diffuse cloud, so I don't see why it would pose a threat. There is already 4 billion tons of uranium in the oceans.
    As above, so below

  30. #119
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,426
    There is the question of how much a given mass of material would have to disintegrate for the solar wind to be able to affect it.

    I doubt any object - altered for the purpose dropping into the sun - would vaporize much before it made starfall.

    Consider best/worst case of a chunk of uranium - each atom 238 times more massive than hydrogen - as a 50kg ball of metal. How much could vaporize in the fall to the surface?

    Especially if it contained in an ablative casing that protects its integrity all the way down.


    I'm not even entirely sure that atomic uranium as a gas is light enough to get blown away by the wind.

    After all - that is why the rocky planets are near the sun, and the gaseous planets are farther out. It can blow gasses, but not iron and nickel not so much.



    Besides, you could always set its trajectory to make impact on the side of the sun such that it dissipates over a year while Earth orbits.
    Last edited by DaveC426913; 2017-Apr-13 at 11:46 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Help with shooting stars
    By mradam67 in forum Astrophotography
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 2011-Nov-08, 01:45 AM
  2. Shooting the moon
    By phunk in forum Astrophotography
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 2011-Jul-22, 08:01 AM
  3. How Big Was the shooting star I saw
    By wiggy in forum Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2011-Jun-27, 10:00 AM
  4. shooting star
    By Star_Scream in forum Astronomy
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2006-Dec-14, 02:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •