Supernova killed Mammoths?
Yousuf Khan
supernova created havoc on Earth leading to the extinction of mammoths
and other megafauna from the Younger Dryas Boundary, as recently as
13,000 years ago. However, the theory seems pretty outlandish even at
the outset.
> Supernova Waves Rolled Over Mammoths
> "A distant supernova that exploded 41,000 years ago may have led to the
> extinction of the mammoth, according to research that will be presented
> by nuclear scientist Richard Firestone of the U.S. Department of
> Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab).
> Firestone, who conducted this research with Arizona geologist Allen
> West, will unveil this theory at the 2nd International Conference "The
> World of Elephants" in Hot Springs, SD. Their theory joins the list of
> possible culprits responsible for the demise of mammoths, which last
> roamed North America roughly 13,000 years ago. Scientists have long eyed
> climate change, disease, or intensive hunting by humans as likely suspects.
>
> Now, a supernova may join the lineup. Firestone and West believe that
> debris from a supernova explosion coalesced into low-density, comet-like
> objects that wreaked havoc on the solar system long ago. One such comet
> may have hit North America 13,000 years ago, unleashing a cataclysmic
> event that killed off the vast majority of mammoths and many other large
> North American mammals. They found evidence of this impact layer at
> several archaeological sites throughout North America where Clovis
> hunting artifacts and human-butchered mammoths have been unearthed. It
> has long been established that human activity ceased at these sites
> about 13,000 years ago, which is roughly the same time that mammoths
> disappeared. "
> http://www.astrobio.net/index.php?option=com_news&task=detail&id=1726
The summary of the theory is that a supernova occurred 250 lightyears
from here, 41,000 years ago. Then a series of events happened over time
triggered by the explosion. First a bunch of iron filings came from the
supernova, arriving on Earth 7000 years later or 34,000 years ago; which
means the iron filings were travelling at nearly 3% c or 10,000 km/s!
The iron filings embedded themselves in Mammoth tusks from that age. And
then finally a 10 km wide comet formed from the supernova debris and
arrived about 13,000 years ago and hit the Earth, which would mean it
was travelling at 2700 km/s when it hit! Wouldn't a 10 km wide comet
travelling at 2700 km/s be much more devastating than the comet that
killed the dinosaurs?
This theory seems totally absurd to me.
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
Sounds like something contributed from Sirius B.
How about Sirius B having contributed an icy Selene as of 13,000 BP?
~ BG
tad...@comcast.net
>
> - Show quoted text -
One of the earliest signs of paranoia is making associations between
unrelated data and *inferring* a causal relationship rather than
looking for *evidence* of a causal relationship.
For example, "Firestone contends that these peaks, which represent
radiocarbon spikes that are 150 percent, 175 percent, and 40 percent
above modern levels, respectively, can only be caused by a cosmic ray-
producing event such as a supernova." There is no consideration that
they may be separate events.
They are many possible and more plausible sources of the high-energy
radiation which can convert atmospheric N-14 to C-14.
Tom Davidson
Richmond, VA
Puppet_Sock
> then finally a 10 km wide comet formed from the supernova debris and
> arrived about 13,000 years ago and hit the Earth, which would mean it
> was travelling at 2700 km/s when it hit! Wouldn't a 10 km wide comet
> travelling at 2700 km/s be much more devastating than the comet that
> killed the dinosaurs?
Um. 2700 km/s? So, that's why the Earth isn't here any more.
Maybe you should work out the energy involved in a 10 km
comet moving at 2700 km/s.
Socks
Yousuf Khan
My point exactly, that's nearly 1% c. Plus how is it possible that a
comet can even coagulate out of the material travelling at those speeds,
let alone a 10km wide one?
Yousuf Khan
Yousuf Khan
> One of the earliest signs of paranoia is making associations between
> unrelated data and *inferring* a causal relationship rather than
> looking for *evidence* of a causal relationship.
>
> For example, "Firestone contends that these peaks, which represent
> radiocarbon spikes that are 150 percent, 175 percent, and 40 percent
> above modern levels, respectively, can only be caused by a cosmic ray-
> producing event such as a supernova." There is no consideration that
> they may be separate events.
>
> They are many possible and more plausible sources of the high-energy
> radiation which can convert atmospheric N-14 to C-14.
Plus a supernova that was 200-250 ly's away is right on the edge of
disaster. The Sterilization Event. I think if it happens less than 200
ly's away it's fatal.
Yousuf Khan
Uncle Al
>
> This was an article from 2005, outlining a theory that a nearby
> supernova created havoc on Earth leading to the extinction of mammoths
> and other megafauna from the Younger Dryas Boundary, as recently as
> 13,000 years ago. However, the theory seems pretty outlandish even at
> the outset.
It would be obvious from
1) radiation-induced isotopic signatures in ice caps,
2) genetic discontinuities re Chernobl wildlife,
3) the remnants - a nebula from shed mass; a neutron star or black
hole.
3) everything in North America being deep fried, plus planetary
(certainly atmospheric) consequences. That also eliminates a
targetted gamma ray burst,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_ray_burst
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
BradGuth
Sirius B was much closer, and as such vibrant stars tend to go, it was
a nasty one of 8+ solar masses to begin with, and perhaps worth 5.33
solar mass as a red supergiant.
~ BG
Eric Flesch
large animals went extinct at the same time. Surprise -- people
hunted them to extinction. Why is this so hard.
Eric
Uncle Al
so stipulated, Sirius B popped to achieve its current status. Where
did there rest of its mass go? There is no surrounding nebula. You
are an empirical idiot.
BradGuth
Your dearth of physics, science and otherwise perpetual obfuscation is
noted, as is your inability to deductively figure much of anything
out.
I believe we are surrounded by its original mass, as well as still
surrounded by its original molecular cloud of 1.2e5 < 1.2e6 solar
masses.
~ BG
Benj
> > Sirius B was much closer, and as such vibrant stars tend to go, it was
> > a nasty one of 8+ solar masses to begin with, and perhaps worth 5.33
> > solar mass as a red supergiant.
>
> so stipulated, Sirius B popped to achieve its current status. Where
> did there rest of its mass go? There is no surrounding nebula. You
> are an empirical idiot.
Al you just never get it. The nebula precipitated down to earth and
formed a layer of soil in which daisies grew. Mammoths ate the
radioactive daisies and all died. Over time radioactive half-life
decayed radiation away so that none is now observed. QED.
Eric Gisse
[...]
> This theory seems totally absurd to me.
>
> Yousuf Khan
Good. It is complete nonsense.
Uncle Al
Hey stooopid, Sirius is 8.6 lightyears away. How fast do supernova
ejecta propagate through the interstellar medium? Then, where is the
compositional and isotopic signature in ice caps for the mass pulse
arrival?
idiot
Yousuf Khan
> Sirius B was much closer, and as such vibrant stars tend to go, it was
> a nasty one of 8+ solar masses to begin with, and perhaps worth 5.33
> solar mass as a red supergiant.
And still not big enough to become a supernova, as revealed by the fact
that it left behind a white dwarf rather than a neutron star or black hole.
Yousuf Khan
Yousuf Khan
> Al you just never get it. The nebula precipitated down to earth and
> formed a layer of soil in which daisies grew. Mammoths ate the
> radioactive daisies and all died. Over time radioactive half-life
> decayed radiation away so that none is now observed. QED.
I like this story, it's quite imaginative. A little light on the factual
side, but a great story. :-)
The mammoths ate the radioactive daisies and died, but humans survived
it? What are we, the cockroaches of the Pleistocene?
Yousuf Khan
Benj
> The mammoths ate the radioactive daisies and died, but humans survived
> it? What are we, the cockroaches of the Pleistocene?
>
> Yousuf Khan
Given current world affairs, it seems like a viable theory to me! :)
Speaking of cockroaches: The following is a TRUE story and not bull.
There was a chemistry department at a major US university. Back in the
day when radioactivity was the "hot" research topic they had a very
large cobalt 60 source. For "fun" the graduate students used to catch
cockroaches, tie strings around them and drop then into the source to
see what happens. Amazingly what happened of course, was they
discovered the amazing radiation resistance of cockroaches. Well,
naturally a few got away. Now get this. This ancient building was
build like an old factory with sewers in the form of channels in the
floor loosely covered with cement slabs where the experiment sinks all
drained. Believe it or not the roaches lived down in there thriving
among all the dire chemicals! Soon there were mutant roaches at LEAST
3-4 inches long scurrying about the place like some 50's horror movie!
They weren't flesh-eating monsters or anything so mostly everyone
ignored them, but they were TRUE. "Entertainment" was to take a
squeeze bottle filled with acetone and corner a mutant roach, spray it
with the solvent and set it afire! Too cool! They'd flip on their
backs with legs going frantically as they died. All they needed would
be to make some kind of loud high-pitched scream and it would have
been PERFECT!
Eventually the university decided to tear down the old building and
build a new one. Which then raised the SERIOUS question of what to do
about all the mutant roaches? Many faculty and administrative meetings
were held to plan the attack. The LAST thing the school needed was
mutant roaches streaming from the construction site in all directions
toward local neighborhoods. Eventually a "containment" plan was
created where the building was surrounded with a barrier and the whole
rubble sprayed with insecticide. I'm told the plan worked as predicted
and today there is a nice new roach-free building. I know this all
sounds like a B-movie script but I swear it is all true! :)
You find a chemist from the right school and era and they will confirm
every word.
BradGuth
at best 0.1 c. (86+ years to get Sirius B ejecta/flack to us)
>
> Then, where is the
> compositional and isotopic signature in ice caps for the mass pulse
> arrival?
That's the problem, it's science missing in action, and apparently of
weird conditional laws of physics that simply doesn't add up to what
the recent and nearby birth and evolution of the Sirius star/solar
system by rights should have represented.
What would a slow nova from Sirius B do to our environment of that
era?
What would a supernovae from Sirius A+B+C do to our environment of
today?
btw, terrestrial ice data is only going to take us back a million
some odd years.
On a similar topic note: at 600 ly, what is a 20 solar mass nova
going to do to us?
~ BG
BradGuth
Most of our supposedly intelligent species that couldn't hunt by
moonlight, nor swim or fly, and needed to be situated within the
tropics as well as highly educated in order to tie our own shoelaces,
didn't arrive until after the peak (18~20 KBP) of the last ice-age
this extremely icy and wet Eden w/moon will ever see (not that a few
earlier forms of extremely primitive and obviously robust and fuzzy
kinds of humanity didn't exist/coexist before).
The single biggest indicator towards thawing out was 11, 711 years
ago.
http://survive2012.com/news/2008/12/ice-age-ended-suddenly-in-9703bc.html
http://my.opera.com/nielsol/blog/2008/12/15/ice-age-ended-precisely-11-711-years-ago
~ BG
YKhan
> The single biggest indicator towards thawing out was 11, 711 years
> ago.
> http://my.opera.com/nielsol/blog/2008/12/15/ice-age-ended-precisely-1...
Interesting, it looks like this is actually an academically accepted
theory. Not any of that stuff in the first blog about Atlantis or
things like that, but the date has been established by an ice-core
drill.
Yousuf Khan
Antares 531
The genetic mutation that gave EMH Cro Magnons the ability to utter
and recognize complex speech patterns and form complex sentences was
the event that caused the break-away. The Fox P2 gene that results in
the development of sophisticated vocal organs and neurology, which
enables the use of nouns may have been the keystone, here.
Facial/throat physiology and neural development that enables the
control of these speech organs very effectively is what I'm talking
about.
Most vertebrates use some form of verb/adverb communications along
with body language for a minimal level of communication. They use
grunts, squeals, growls, clucks, whines, roars, etc., as a form of
verbs and adverbs, but they don't use nouns, therefore they can not
tell stories about where they have been and what they learned. Complex
information describing individual experiences can not be passed along
to their descendants. Some level of intuitive pre-programming of their
brains is all that gets passed along.
A hen with a clutch of newly hatched chicks demonstrates this very
effectively. The hen will take the chicks out to search for food as
soon as they are all hatched. If the hen sees a hawk flying nearby she
will utter a trilling sound with an ascending pitch, equivalent to the
verb, hide, quickly, and the chicks will immediately duck under any
available cover and remain absolutely quiet and motionless until the
hen starts uttering her soft gentle clucking sound again. They
interpret this clucking sound as the verb, come, and they respond by
coming out of hiding and following the hen. But, they can't go back to
the chicken coop and tell stories bout the hawk that flew over them,
scaring the bejabbers out of them all. They don't have a noun for
"hawk."
Gordon
Antares 531
wrote:
I have searched for but not found any reliable indications that the
glacial/interglacial cycles are caused/controlled by solar cycles. The
solar output may oscillate (throb) with a period of about 110,000
years, resulting in a change of solar output that produces these
glacial/interglacial cycles here on Earth. Gordon
BradGuth
Other research groups are equally pinning this window down to within a
similar date.
It's as though Eden/Earth finally got its clear skies and seasonal
tilt after having been nailed by something the size and mass of our
Selene/moon, as of roughly 800~900 years prior.
~ BG
BradGuth
Not likely any local solar throbbing, unless our sun is the one and
only star that long-term throbs before it runs out of hydrogen.
~ BG
BradGuth
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 08:16:26 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
>
>
>
> <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jun 20, 10:17 am, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Benj wrote:
> >> > Al you just never get it. The nebula precipitated down to earth and
> >> > formed a layer of soil in which daisies grew. Mammoths ate the
> >> > radioactive daisies and all died. Over time radioactive half-life
> >> > decayed radiation away so that none is now observed. QED.
>
> >> I like this story, it's quite imaginative. A little light on the factual
> >> side, but a great story. :-)
>
> >> The mammoths ate the radioactive daisies and died, but humans survived
> >> it? What are we, the cockroaches of the Pleistocene?
>
> >> Yousuf Khan
>
> >Most of our supposedly intelligent species that couldn't hunt by
> >moonlight, nor swim or fly, and needed to be situated within the
> >tropics as well as highly educated in order to tie our own shoelaces,
> >didn't arrive until after the peak (18~20 KBP) of the last ice-age
> >this extremely icy and wet Eden w/moon will ever see (not that a few
> >earlier forms of extremely primitive and obviously robust and fuzzy
> >kinds of humanity didn't exist/coexist before).
>
> >The single biggest indicator towards thawing out was 11, 711 years
> >ago.
> >http://my.opera.com/nielsol/blog/2008/12/15/ice-age-ended-precisely-1...
Perhaps my chickens are smarter than yours. Perhaps humans are the
most snookered and dumbfounded species on Earth, and least capable of
surviving from scratch, so to speak.
Far too many other complex forms of life are sufficiently pre-educated
and physiologically better equipped from the very get go.
~ BG
BradGuth
Put Sirius ABC together, and what do you got?
~ BG
YKhan
> Put Sirius ABC together, and what do you got?
A main sequence star, a white dwarf, and mythical brown dwarf or
lower.
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
Now your true colors are showing, and it's another false flag of
colors at that.
If you can't think outside the box, why didn't you just say so to
begin with?
Obviously you can't do the math, nor read and/or much less comprehend
anything that supports an idea other than your own. Have you ever
discussed anything with William Mook? (because he thinks exactly like
your narrow and closed minded self)
Name any sufficiently nearby star that's a threat to our solar system,
except the Sirius star/solar system.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> The genetic mutation that gave EMH Cro Magnons the ability to utter
> and recognize complex speech patterns and form complex sentences was
> the event that caused the break-away. The Fox P2 gene that results in
> the development of sophisticated vocal organs and neurology, which
> enables the use of nouns may have been the keystone, here.
> Facial/throat physiology and neural development that enables the
> control of these speech organs very effectively is what I'm talking
> about.
I don't think this came only with the early modern humans, it most
likely existed with Neanderthals, and probably came from an earlier
common ancestor.
Yousuf Khan
Yousuf Khan
> Now your true colors are showing, and it's another false flag of
> colors at that.
It seems you are discovering my "true colors" every other week. Tell me,
are my colors something that you forget the location of, and need to
rediscover on bi-weekly basis? If so, then why not just take down a note
and then remember we to find them again later?
> If you can't think outside the box, why didn't you just say so to
> begin with?
Well, I love thinking outside the box. But I stop short of kicking
around the box like a football, stomping on it, and running it over with
a truck.
> Name any sufficiently nearby star that's a threat to our solar system,
> except the Sirius star/solar system.
Betelgeuse, Spica, Shala.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGqHP26rn5U
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
So, you obviously do not believe in panspermia, or much less in ETs.
If the modern day human species of Eden is it (all there is of
terrestrial evolved intelligent life to behold) within our forever
expanding universe, and since our supposed intelligent span of having
existed thus far is worth roughly 0.0001% the life of this one-of-a-
kind planet that we've pretty much used up with few if any off-world
options, as such doesn't exactly speak well of God's plan or of
whatever intelligent design, does it.
Out of the overall lifespan of Eden and that of our unusually passive
sun being worth at least 10 billion years and at most 15 billion
years, of humans as having most recently survived and evolved as the
only intelligent species for all of 10~15 thousand years (before then
merely dumbfounded heathens existed as being eaten alive by other
superior species), as such doesn't exactly speak well for whatever
balance and/or progression of nature that obviously doesn't naturally
favor the species of humanity.
In another thousand some odd years there will not be a sufficient
magnetosphere or fossil fuel resources to support all but 10% of the
peak number of humans, and another thousand years later is not even
worth thinking about because perhaps only 5% of us will be surviving
above minimal standards. The human population of this planet may peak
at 12 billion within the next few hundred years, and after that it'll
become a nearly continual cult/cabal blood-bath over the remaining
resources.
~ BG
threejaguar
> And still not big enough to become a supernova, as revealed by the fact
> that it left behind a white dwarf rather than a neutron star or black hole.
Exactly.
At some point in its history, Sirius B had a Sol-sized ordinary nova,
and left a planetary nebula behind ... but white dwarfs are long lived
( 10^200+ years ) if they don't get involved in a Type 1a.
Sirius B may have dumped its planetary nebula long before Sol was
formed, for all we know.
YKhan
> On Jun 20, 10:12 am, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > And still not big enough to become a supernova, as revealed by the fact
> > that it left behind a white dwarf rather than a neutron star or black hole.
>
> Exactly.
>
> At some point in its history, Sirius B had a Sol-sized ordinary nova,
> and left a planetary nebula behind ... but white dwarfs are long lived
> ( 10^200+ years ) if they don't get involved in a Type 1a.
Actually, a star that goes white dwarf, doesn't go nova. I used to
think that a nova was the final result of a small star death too, but
it's actually a much calmer death. Planetary nebula form without a
nova explosion.
Novas are just the result of a companion star to a white dwarf
schloffing off some of its outer atmosphere onto the dwarf. This over
time builds up and results in a periodic nuclear explosion on the
surface of the white dwarf. A Type Ia supernova is an even bigger and
faster schloffing off of material from the companion to a white dwarf
resulting in a bigger nuclear explosion resulting in the complete
annihilation of the white dwarf.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova
> Sirius B may have dumped its planetary nebula long before Sol was
> formed, for all we know.
Actually, we know quite a bit about Sirius B, and Sirius A as well.
The whole Sirius system is only about 250 million years old, while SB
ran out of fuel only 120 million years ago and became the white dwarf
that it is now. By comparison the Sun and its planets are over 4.5
billion years old, so the Sun was already ancient by the time SB was
born and died. At its peak, SB was 5 solar masses, estimated.
Its white dwarf remnant is approximately 1 solar mass, making it one
of the most massive white dwarfs known. If it added another, 0.4 solar
masses, it could've been a neutron star, thus it could've gone
supernova. But close isn't good enough, it either is massive enough to
go supernova, or it isn't, no honourable mentions.
Sirius A is 2 solar masses right now. There is possibly also a
hypothetical brown dwarf or a Jovian planet, not yet proven, pre-named
Sirius C, which is obviously much less than 1 solar mass (probably
less than 0.1 solar masses). Brad's pet theory is that SA + SB + SC
overall mass might have been big enough to go supernova. But of
course the whole system doesn't go to death at once, just each star at
a time. If all of that mass had been concentrated into a single star,
then it might have been a candidate for supernova.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius
Yousuf Khan
BURT
Won't we eventually get picked off like the mammoth? What is going to
shield us?
YKhan
> Won't we eventually get picked off like the mammoth? What is going to
> shield us?
Well we didn't get picked off the last time it supposedly happened
which killed the mammoths. So it's likely not a supernova that killed
the mammoths, just good old climate change.
Yousuf Khan
BURT
Right. My point is won't a supernova eventually get us?
Mitch Raemsch
BradGuth
Too far away, wrong kind of stars and going in the wrong directions.
Sirius B was kicking serious gamma and hard-X-ray butt as of recently,
before having been an extremely bright kind of UV (slow nova), and lo
and behold it seems we're headed back towards one another. Good thing
Sirius A isn't going postal, although Sirius B could implode into a
neutron star.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> On Jun 23, 1:54 pm, YKhan <yjk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well we didn't get picked off the last time it supposedly happened
>> which killed the mammoths. So it's likely not a supernova that killed
>> the mammoths, just good old climate change.
>
Well, if we exist long enough, sure. So far they're saying the nearest
supernova candidates are still safely 100's of LY's out. Betelgeuse
going will be just a spectacular fireworks display for us.
Yousuf Khan
Yousuf Khan
> Too far away, wrong kind of stars and going in the wrong directions.
Of course, that's because that's all we have that's near us.
> Sirius B was kicking serious gamma and hard-X-ray butt as of recently,
> before having been an extremely bright kind of UV (slow nova), and lo
> and behold it seems we're headed back towards one another. Good thing
> Sirius A isn't going postal, although Sirius B could implode into a
> neutron star.
Sirius B has to be much closer to Sirius A for that to happen. In fact,
Sirius A itself has to get into its own red giant stage. Since SA is
twice the mass of the Sun, it's got less time than the Sun to reach that
level, but that's still at least 1 billion years. In a billion years,
we'll have gone around the galaxy 4 times, and the Sirius system will be
a long way away from us.
Yousuf Khan
BURT
It is not going to kill us?
YKhan
Not unless it gets much closer to us when it blows. It's 600 ly's out
right now, it should be below 100 ly's to be at all dangerous
(probably closer than 50 ly's). That is unless it bursts as a
hypernova and its axis of rotation is aimed right at us, then we won't
be safe from its gamma ray burst for less than 6500 ly's.
Yousuf Khan
Yousuf Khan
threejaguar
> On Jun 23, 10:32 am, threejaguar <threejag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sirius B may have dumped its planetary nebula long before Sol was
> > formed, for all we know.
>
> Actually, we know quite a bit about Sirius B, and Sirius A as well.
> The whole Sirius system is only about 250 million years old, while SB
> ran out of fuel only 120 million years ago and became the white dwarf
> that it is now. By comparison the Sun and its planets are over 4.5
> billion years old, so the Sun was already ancient by the time SB was
> born and died. At its peak, SB was 5 solar masses, estimated.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius
>
> Yousuf Khan
So if Sirius B's planetary nebula had any effect on Earth, it would
have been during the early Cretaceous, but nowhere near the KT
boundary event. And said nebula remnants would be spread out, with the
outside of it over 100 lightyears away, and difficult to detect since
we would be almost in the nebula's remnant's dead center ( off by ~10
LY ).
Thanx.
BradGuth
The Sirius star/solar systems burned through and/or having tossed away
at least 8.5 solar masses within 200 million years. You do the math
as to how freaking bright (mostly UV) that nearby source of
illumination to our environment was. In addition to contributing a
great deal of UV, we're talking hard-X-rays and at least soft gamma to
boot.
Since you and none others can say with any reasonable agreement as to
where our passive solar system was in relationship to the recent birth
and rapid stellar evolution of the vibrant Sirius star/solar system,
as such I'll stick with my interpretation that has us orbiting the
mutual barycenter that was unavoidable considering the horrific mass
of that molecular cloud as having given birth to those impressive
Sirius stars.
~ BG
BURT
>
> - Show quoted text -
Local stars remain local.
MJitch Raemsch
BradGuth
Wow, that explains everything. Here I'd thought everything was moving
around and somewhat interrelated to one another. Thanks much.
~ BG
BradGuth
True enough, at 100 ly is where the massive Betelgeuse and all that
surrounds that bloated star could eventually become problematic for
us.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> So if Sirius B's planetary nebula had any effect on Earth, it would
> have been during the early Cretaceous, but nowhere near the KT
> boundary event. And said nebula remnants would be spread out, with the
> outside of it over 100 lightyears away, and difficult to detect since
> we would be almost in the nebula's remnant's dead center ( off by ~10
> LY ).
Exactly, and on top of that, not only is there no planetary nebula
affecting us, from either Sirius B, or any other star system, we seem to
be inside an enormous interstellar bubble where there is even less
material in our immediate surroundings than in most places in the
galaxy. The local interstellar bubble is thought to be as a result of a
clearance that was done from a long-ago supernova. It's also known as
the "Local Fluff".
The local bubble and interstellar material near the sun
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=19168434
Local Interstellar Cloud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Interstellar_Cloud
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
That is true, except the helium flashover or slow nova of Sirius B
transpired somewhat recently, and it may have flared up more than
once, especially via feeding off Sirius A and/or of whatever Sirius C
used to represent. Perhaps Sirius C is an extremely compact version
of Sirius B, or some kind of new dwarf or conceivably even a kind of
dwarf black hole that isn't on the books.
~ BG
YKhan
> That is true, except the helium flashover or slow nova of Sirius B
> transpired somewhat recently, and it may have flared up more than
> once, especially via feeding off Sirius A and/or of whatever Sirius C
> used to represent. Perhaps Sirius C is an extremely compact version
> of Sirius B, or some kind of new dwarf or conceivably even a kind of
> dwarf black hole that isn't on the books.
Ah, true love is unrequited. Your love for Sirius C and the Sirius
system knows no bounds. :-)
If Sirius C was a black hole, it would've been easier to detect
because it would've been affecting the orbits of Sirius A and B much
more obviously.
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
Not if it’s mini black hole or possibly proton/neutron mass was only
<0.06
Much like the extremely small and very stealth mass of an electron or
positron barely affects the proton or neutron of an atom.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> On Jun 28, 9:50 am, YKhan <yjk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If Sirius C was a black hole, it would've been easier to detect
>> because it would've been affecting the orbits of Sirius A and B much
>> more obviously.
>>
>> Yousuf Khan
>
> <0.06
>
> Much like the extremely small and very stealth mass of an electron or
> positron barely affects the proton or neutron of an atom.
And how exactly do you expect a black hole of such a small mass to be
created?
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
> BradGuth wrote:
> > On Jun 28, 9:50 am, YKhan <yjk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> If Sirius C was a black hole, it would've been easier to detect
> >> because it would've been affecting the orbits of Sirius A and B much
> >> more obviously.
>
> >> Yousuf Khan
>
> > <0.06
>
> > Much like the extremely small and very stealth mass of an electron or
> > positron barely affects the proton or neutron of an atom.
>
> And how exactly do you expect a black hole of such a small mass to be
> created?
>
> Yousuf Khan
Perhaps LHC, or who knows. It was just a suggestion, one of many.
A solid ball of thorium that's <0.06 solar mass (white dwarf core)
isn't going to be terribly large.
~ BG
Yousuf Khan
> Perhaps LHC, or who knows. It was just a suggestion, one of many.
>
> A solid ball of thorium that's <0.06 solar mass (white dwarf core)
> isn't going to be terribly large.
Iron is the last stage core that can possibly form. Beyond iron, you
lose energy if you try to fuse towards that.
Thorium, Uranium, etc. are all formed after a supernova explosion and
outside the core, since at that moment you are trying to lose energy.
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
True, but a nearly spent stellar core should still be losing energy
for quite some time before becoming 100% iron. Thorium seems to fit.
~ BG
threejaguar
> True, but a nearly spent stellar core should still be losing energy
> for quite some time before becoming 100% iron. Thorium seems to fit.
Statement doesn't make sense.
The star is still creating energy, just in lesser amounts, until it
bottoms out at SI -> Fe at the core. No thorium is created up to this
point.
Elements heavier than Iron-56 are transmuted during the actual
supernova itself ... and any thorium made is going to get distributed
over that star's local area with alacrity ... it ain't going to be
moving slow enough to form a "core" of any kind.
BradGuth
Nothing of a star 100% transforms into one singular element. Why must
everything with you be 100% all or nothing?
~ BG
threejaguar
>
> Nothing of a star 100% transforms into one singular element. Why must
> everything with you be 100% all or nothing?
Don't presume to know how I think.
And don't mischaracterize my statements.
Elements heavier than Iron-56 require more energy input than can be
had by mere fusion. Elements in a star just before nova are all fusion
products, with a very tiny amount of heavy elements from the last
generation of stars. A nova remnant is going to be mostly Iron and
lighter elements. A supernova remnant may contain heavier elements,
but will be, at the very least degenerate matter, if not neutronium.
Your thorium core is a fantasy, in my opinion.
BradGuth
It was merely a suggestion. In that you've got nothing objective in
favor of your interpretation, so I'll stick with the likes of spent
stars offering thorium for quite some time unless they've turned
themselves into a pure neutron star.
Since we're all made of star stuff, Earth could have a thorium gas/
vapor core, if not something of mostly H3 and He3.
~ BG
Uncle Al
[snip crap]
> Since we're all made of star stuff, Earth could have a thorium gas/
> vapor core, if not something of mostly H3 and He3.
idiot
The Earth's core by seismology and gravitation is the size of Mars,
<http://www.splung.com/kinematics/images/gravitation/variation%20of%20g.png>
http://www.typnet.net/Essays/EarthGrav.htm
volume = 1.72x10^20 m^3
mass = 1.72x10^24 kg
Now then, idiot Brad Guth, show us how 1.72x10^24 kg of thorium-232
and its decay daughters would not keep the whole Earth molten for
about 6 billion years after accretion. You've got density problems
too, git.
H-3, with a half-life of 12.32 years, is beneath contempt even for a
cacaristocrat like yourself.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
BradGuth
> BradGuth wrote:
>
> [snip crap]
>
> > Since we're all made of star stuff, Earth could have a thorium gas/
> > vapor core, if not something of mostly H3 and He3.
>
> idiot
>
> The Earth's core by seismology and gravitation is the size of Mars,
>
>
> volume = 1.72x10^20 m^3
> mass = 1.72x10^24 kg
>
> Now then, idiot Brad Guth, show us how 1.72x10^24 kg of thorium-232
> and its decay daughters would not keep the whole Earth molten for
> about 6 billion years after accretion. You've got density problems
> too, git.
>
> H-3, with a half-life of 12.32 years, is beneath contempt even for a
> cacaristocrat like yourself.
>
> --
> (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Send a few dozen gamma emitting probes into the hollow (plasma filled)
core of Earth. Should be easy compared to camping out on Mars.
Being that Earth and most every other planet and moon is made entirely
of star stuff, we should have a look-see as to exactly what makes this
planet tick.
~ BG
Uncle Al
You are too stooopid to know you have been falsified and insulted. In
order to maintain an untenable position you must be actively ignorant
- though stupidity, religion, or insanity are passively adequate.
It's impossible to make a comeback when you haven't been anywhere.
idiot
--
Uncle Al
Yousuf Khan
At this point, I'd suggest you save your breath. It's not getting
through to him.
Yousuf Khan
BradGuth
At least I have an actual opinion, instead of being a parrot.
How about the gravity pull of Sirius (1.417e17 N), or especially from
the original 1e6:1 molecular cloud of 2.5e37 solar masses (1.528e20 N)
at 500 ly. Where the hell did it go? Why was our solar system
unaffected?
~ BG
threejaguar
Sirius B made a planetery nebula, not a supernova shell. A simple
nova. Many magnitudes lower in energy. Passed through Sol system
around 200mya, and kept expanding. The Cretaceous dinosaurs were
probably impressed by the light-show.
The shell is probably pretty damned tenuous by now ... but finding
good evidence of it would be good for a doctorate for someone.
BradGuth
We detect and thus image such molecular shells at millions of light
years away. So, where's the Sirius B shell of perhaps 1.25e7 solar
masses that so recently passed through our solar system?
Perhaps Sirius B or C was more of a supernova.
~ BG
threejaguar
Hmmm ... you complain that the nova remnant should be more visible ...
and then you hypothesize a supernova remnant in it's place.
Wouldn't a supernova remnant be even more visible?
Your not even being internally consistent within the same post.
palsing
> We detect and thus image such molecular shells at millions of light
> years away. So, where's the Sirius B shell of perhaps 1.25e7 solar
> masses that so recently passed through our solar system?
>
> Perhaps Sirius B or C was more of a supernova.
>
> ~ BG
Sirius B's planetary nebula was created about 120 million years ago.
Planetary nebula shells only last about 20,000 - 30,000 years, so it
is long, long gone. Sirius B was not big enough to go supernova.
There is no direct evidence of a Sirius C, just a few unproven
theories. In any case, it would be very, very small.
\Paul A
BradGuth
I don't think so, because more of everything gets converted into
energy.
>
> Your not even being internally consistent within the same post.
Perhaps Sirius C was the original supernova, and Sirius B was just a
soft/slow nova of the red supergiant helium flashover, or vise versa.
At any rate Sirius A is next, and we're getting closer by 7.6 km/s and
accelerating.
~ BG
BradGuth
> On Jul 5, 5:57 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote;
>
> > We detect and thus image such molecular shells at millions of light
> > years away. So, where's the Sirius B shell of perhaps 1.25e7 solar
> > masses that so recently passed through our solar system?
>
> > Perhaps Sirius B or C was more of a supernova.
>
> > ~ BG
>
> Sirius B's planetary nebula was created about 120 million years ago.
Are you suggesting the Sirius star system is only a little over 120
million yeas old?
If you are speaking of the red supergiant flashover, make that at most
64 million years ago, if not considerably more recent.
>
> Planetary nebula shells only last about 20,000 - 30,000 years, so it
> is long, long gone. Sirius B was not big enough to go supernova.
Such substantial molecular clouds that formulate such massive stars do
not just vanish into thin air, so to speak, instead they'll just keep
expanding outward at a very predictable velocity (< 3000 km/s) unless
some other gravity seeds are intercepted along the way (such as our
sun). Otherwise a cloud of < 1.25e7 solar masses from the original
birth/creation of those Sirius stars can't be any too far away, if in
fact that's how it all started as of 200~250 million years ago (or is
it merely 120 million years ago by your accounting?).
>
> There is no direct evidence of a Sirius C, just a few unproven
> theories. In any case, it would be very, very small.
>
> \Paul A
Yes, such as < .06 solar mass, but what was it originally worth?
~ BG