Whats wrong with the sun?

[Louis_Keyl]

(see ya later US players)

:LOL:!!!!


copy paste or not, its some interesting info as i am a fan of the Universe. But to keep my humour touch... 2012 IS COMING!!!!

Now seriously... Nice information, interesting to read

[Jamal]

i hope no retard posts in here its 'burning out'


If the sun shoots out again but with a one time huge force, depending on how far it reaches, it will be pretty cool to see or pretty bad if it reaches close enough to inflict damage.

[Gandalf]

Scientists, do not have any agendas behind them. They do not do science for the sake of money. I would really feel sorry for the person who does science for the sake of money, as that's just sad. Beside that, scientist also tell how the world works, rather than is it good or bad.

Unfortunately your view is limited to scientists in countries like Russia, who still seem to be owrking for science mainly. In the US and other countries, the salaries of scientists get paid by companies or government they do research for. As a result any scientific report where the data does not match the desired outcome will have a conclusion that either asks for more study, or does not fully match the rest of the data in the report, as peopletend to read only the conclusion.

[Gandalf]

Exactly. Global warming cannot be justified seeing as we have had some of the coldest winters in decades quite recently, climate change can be explained, but not global warming on it's own. As for it being something caused by man...that seems to be the easy answer to everything, which in simple terms means that no-one really has a clue what is causing it.

It is not an easy answer but a lucrative one. It allowspeople to sell things and governments to raise taxes.
What worries me most however is that the effects of the measures people strive for seem to be completely unknown, and there for might be more damaging as the problem.

Apart from that, the three volcanic eruptions this year have put more CO2 in the atmosphere as all human activity. And only one of them was so kind to reduce its carbon footprint by stopping all air traffic...

[Leon.]

Stars in general are truly fascinating cosmic objects. Some are millions times larger than our sun, and some are much more minuscule compared to our sun. Our sun is just the right size. Larger stars are often identified by the apparent and absolute luminosity. You cannot tell how big a star is just by looking at it, because small objects look bigger up close, antonymous to large objects from far away.

Smaller stars tend to be tons more bright in color than larger stars, typically more to the white or light blue side of the scale, and are much hotter. Larger stars are more bright in luminosity, are closer to the red side of the scale, and are much cooler. Temperature of stars can be determined by the apparent luminosity and absolute luminosity, because we know that brighter stars are much cooler. We also know that cool, large stars are brighter, hence we can determine its size. The reason is obvious behind the brightness of the larger stars.
Refer to this graph.


As you can see, as luminosity increases, the lower the temperature and the more redder the star gets. Our sun is somewhere along the middle of the main sequence.

Lower magnetism on the sun is going to reduce the amount of ultra-violet radiation given out from it, and consequently, Earth's ozone layer will be unable to regenerate from UV rays splitting Oâ‚‚, so we are not going to freeze over. If anything, it's going to get hotter. But since our sun is a main sequence star and basically a base for the "average star" which is determined by the possibility of life, this is not going to be permanent. A star cannot change that fast (unless a supernova was occurring). Our sun still has tons of hydrogen to convert into helium, so it's not going to suddenly change like that as well. In the event that it does run out of hydrogen, it'd have to resort to the converted helium, which it will later convert into many other elements, until it reaches iron; iron killed a star. Not to mention, the sun would expand to huge distances and become a red super-giant, which would completely engulf all of the inner planets.

Think of this as the sun's period, like the female's menstrual cycle. It comes and goes, and it's nothing out of the ordinary. The sun is what it is, and literally can't turn its back on us that fast.

[Jubin]

Unfortunately your view is limited to scientists in countries like Russia, who still seem to be owrking for science mainly. In the US and other countries, the salaries of scientists get paid by companies or government they do research for. As a result any scientific report where the data does not match the desired outcome will have a conclusion that either asks for more study, or does not fully match the rest of the data in the report, as peopletend to read only the conclusion.

Not unfortunate at all. I have just different definition of scientist than you do, Gandalf. for example, a person who does research for company, so working for a company is not a scientist, but a researcher.

[Gandalf]

Not unfortunate at all. I have just different definition of scientist than you do, Gandalf. for example, a person who does research for company, so working for a company is not a scientist, but a researcher.

Incorrect. The people are working for the Government or an University, and there for are scientists.
However their funding comes from the private sector or is by Government directive.

While they should remain independent as scientists, if they are aware that their paycheck depends on the outcome of their research being favourable, it is pretty easy to use scientific language in a way htat hides the results.

[Jubin]

Incorrect. The people are working for the Government or an University, and there for are scientists.
However their funding comes from the private sector or is by Government directive.

While they should remain independent as scientists, if they are aware that their paycheck depends on the outcome of their research being favourable, it is pretty easy to use scientific language in a way htat hides the results.

We once again, did not talk from the same people. but ok. The scientists in the University. Yes, it is true, that they get funding from private sector or from the government. What isn't true is that they will twist the truth just to get a bigger paycheck. What is actually a big part of scientists work? Articles articles articles in known scientific publications. If a scientist do not publish any articles he is not really a scientist and will loos any kind of funding. Now what do scientific articles have to do with funding? Well other scientist read these articles and give reviews if it is a bad one the scientist will lose his reputation and also his funding as well.

Conclusion: Scientific world is self-correcting one, where one individuate can't just twist the truth for his own benefit without serious consequences.

[Gandalf]

We once again, did not talk from the same people. but ok. The scientists in the University. Yes, it is true, that they get funding from private sector or from the government. What isn't true is that they will twist the truth just to get a bigger paycheck. What is actually a big part of scientists work? Articles articles articles in known scientific publications. If a scientist do not publish any articles he is not really a scientist and will loos any kind of funding. Now what do scientific articles have to do with funding? Well other scientist read these articles and give reviews if it is a bad one the scientist will lose his reputation and also his funding as well.

Conclusion: Scientific world is self-correcting one, where one individuate can't just twist the truth for his own benefit without serious consequences.

Then explain last years climate change problem... where a group of scientists were caught changing data and writing reports to make it fit in to the lucrative climate change movement.
There are several other examples I can give, where scientists publish articles and research reports, however with conclusions written to fit the purpose of the funding.

Recently I had a nice fight with people over a report stating that Russian men die young as a result of acloholism in its conclusion. When reading the full report, it was a research done in three areas that had suffered from economic crisis during the Yeltsin area, and the scientists interviewed family of the deceased men in a specific age group on alcohol consumption 
When reading the report the conclusion should have been that during the economic downturn a significant increase in death by alcoholism was found in the specific age group.
The conclusion however stated that Russian men die young due to alcoholism, fitting rather well in the Governments efforts to reduce drinking.

The people writing the report are accepted scientists, and their research and any article regarding it was passing any review. The only thing where a broad generalization was made was in the conclusion of the report, the part that gets released to the press.

[Jubin]

Then explain last years climate change problem... where a group of scientists were caught changing data and writing reports to make it fit in to the lucrative climate change movement.
There are several other examples I can give, where scientists publish articles and research reports, however with conclusions written to fit the purpose of the funding.

Well you explained yourself there. But those scientists like you said in that example were caught. Could you tell me, how they were caught? Or could you, even show me their paper? Unless it is in Russian, then it won't help me at all. Also you can't generalize like that. Otherwise Bianconeri would soon bring me as a proof against evolution just because I am a scientist as well.

Recently I had a nice fight with people over a report stating that Russian men die young as a result of acloholism in its conclusion. When reading the full report, it was a research done in three areas that had suffered from economic crisis during the Yeltsin area, and the scientists interviewed family of the deceased men in a specific age group on alcohol consumption 
When reading the report the conclusion should have been that during the economic downturn a significant increase in death by alcoholism was found in the specific age group.
The conclusion however stated that Russian men die young due to alcoholism, fitting rather well in the Governments efforts to reduce drinking.

The people writing the report are accepted scientists, and their research and any article regarding it was passing any review. The only thing where a broad generalization was made was in the conclusion of the report, the part that gets released to the press.

Well what was the age group the men died in that specific area at that time? At young age? If so, we can logically deduce that the press release was kind of right.

 :ps:

[Oliver]

I've even taught some people in here some physics even though English is not my native language as well.

That's just the estonian ability of being better at english than some of the native speakers. I've personally corrected erroneous grammar usage by some of the most prominent brits that have played on Argonath.

нет, the glass is too small?

[9r2e5i3k]

the glass is too small?

vodka glass.

Unless you drink directly from the bottle or a regular glass, it should look normal  :poke:

[Oliver]

Unless you drink directly from the bottle or a regular glass, it should look normal  :poke:

You're not looking at it from a russian's perspective

[Fuzzy]

(see ya later US players)

I found another guys..check it out:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1171951/Meltdown-A-solar-superstorm-send-dark-ages--just-THREE-years.html

[Altair_Carter]

Unless you drink directly from the bottle or a regular glass, it should look normal  :poke:

Uh, you should go to Russia, my friend.