WEEKEND TICKETS GOING FAST!

PRICES GO UP AT THE GATE

PURCHASE TICKET
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
The Sun
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09 , edited 4/9/09
We all know what the sun is, its a yellow dwarf star, a thermonuclear fusion engine, fusing hydrogen into helium. The sun was formed about 4.57 billion years ago, we ( should ) all know that, we also should know that the sun is what allows us to live, without it we would just be a frozen rock, but most people don't know that the sun is also going to be the death of all life on earth, the Sun is gradually becoming more luminous (about 10% every 1 billion years), and its surface temperature is slowly rising. The Sun used to be fainter in the past, which is possibly the reason why life on Earth has only existed for about 1 billion years on land. The increase in solar temperatures is such that already in about a billion years, the surface of the Earth will become too hot for liquid water to exist, ending all terrestrial life(I've even heard that in only a mere million years its going to have expanded 11% ending all life on earth) . and there is nothing we can do to stop it, all life is going to die because of the sun. The sun gave us life, and its going to take all life away.


Thoughts ( I though about putting all the technical data on the sun here too, but it'd be a lot to read, if anyone still wants it, i'll put it up)
19676 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09
'Moving to mars might be are next step. '

O hell by that time chances are humans will be no more anyhow. ''maby something that can take a hotter planet might take over from there.
559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / Feminism is made...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09
Or humans will be extinct as the latest information about Mars only shows millennial? water cycle (and it is only a theory backed by spherical rocks, canyons, and some iron reactions only possible with water). Besides, the sun will start to produce iron (after carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, etc, following their atomic masses and ends at iron (NOVA)) and expand in the process so Mars will also be dead.
And based on your statistics, the million years might mean that we already moved out to space, which is not going to be Mars as that one is on almost the same range as Earth when it comes to the point where water exists as liquid.

Maybe the last satellite (can't remember it's name) will find an Earth-like environment in a new star since the universe has a lot of elements (from Hydrogen to Iron are produced by stars) that supports life. Or maybe Earth is unique that our Sun is the beginning and end of life?

Or maybe we just do not know.
19676 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09

jewishplayer wrote:

Or humans will be extinct as the latest information about Mars only shows millennial? water cycle (and it is only a theory backed by spherical rocks, canyons, and some iron reactions only possible with water). Besides, the sun will start to produce iron (after carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, etc, following their atomic masses and ends at iron (NOVA)) and expand in the process so Mars will also be dead.
And based on your statistics, the million years might mean that we already moved out to space, which is not going to be Mars as that one is on almost the same range as Earth when it comes to the point where water exists as liquid.

Maybe the last satellite (can't remember it's name) will find an Earth-like environment in a new star since the universe has a lot of elements (from Hydrogen to Iron are produced by stars) that supports life. Or maybe Earth is unique that our Sun is the beginning and end of life?

Or maybe we just do not know.


25 to 30 light years away there is another Earth like planet. So finding planets like earth is not that big of a pain, we already able to.
5355 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
77 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 4/9/09
all i know the hottest part of the sun is page 3!!! http://www.page3.com/ www.thesun.co.uk
18989 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
www.crunchyroll.com
Offline
Posted 4/9/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:

Or humans will be extinct as the latest information about Mars only shows millennial? water cycle (and it is only a theory backed by spherical rocks, canyons, and some iron reactions only possible with water). Besides, the sun will start to produce iron (after carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, etc, following their atomic masses and ends at iron (NOVA)) and expand in the process so Mars will also be dead.
And based on your statistics, the million years might mean that we already moved out to space, which is not going to be Mars as that one is on almost the same range as Earth when it comes to the point where water exists as liquid.

Maybe the last satellite (can't remember it's name) will find an Earth-like environment in a new star since the universe has a lot of elements (from Hydrogen to Iron are produced by stars) that supports life. Or maybe Earth is unique that our Sun is the beginning and end of life?

Or maybe we just do not know.


25 to 30 light years away there is another Earth like planet. So finding planets like earth is not that big of a pain, we already able to.


I thought earth was the only terrestrial planet? o.O
559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / Feminism is made...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09 , edited 4/9/09


Yeah, they even found one with liquid water (through the use of element light spectrum using waves most likely) but it had heavier water so it was doubtful that it has life.So far, none of the Earth-like planets and planets at the same conditions of Earth regarding its distance from a star has life in it. But the satellite launched last March was suppose to look for more.
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09

macphapie wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:

Or humans will be extinct as the latest information about Mars only shows millennial? water cycle (and it is only a theory backed by spherical rocks, canyons, and some iron reactions only possible with water). Besides, the sun will start to produce iron (after carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, etc, following their atomic masses and ends at iron (NOVA)) and expand in the process so Mars will also be dead.
And based on your statistics, the million years might mean that we already moved out to space, which is not going to be Mars as that one is on almost the same range as Earth when it comes to the point where water exists as liquid.

Maybe the last satellite (can't remember it's name) will find an Earth-like environment in a new star since the universe has a lot of elements (from Hydrogen to Iron are produced by stars) that supports life. Or maybe Earth is unique that our Sun is the beginning and end of life?

Or maybe we just do not know.


25 to 30 light years away there is another Earth like planet. So finding planets like earth is not that big of a pain, we already able to.


I thought earth was the only terrestrial planet? o.O


Nah, mars is a terrestrial planet, so is venus, and mercury too, basically any planet that is not a gas giant (juipter, saturn, and further) is a rocky planet. there are other rocky planets all over the universe and in our galaxy, and some of them have life on em too, earth isn't the only planet with life.
559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / Feminism is made...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09
Well, actually, as of now, the only planet with life is Earth, based on our current knowledge. Other planets that are capable of supporting life with life are not found yet. Water is theoretically the main requirement of life (as seen on Earth), "terrestrial" goes hand in hand with "aquatic."

The whole asteroid belt is terrestrial too if we just go by the land masses that is distinguishable from water, though, they only have frozen water, maybe no water but they probably do.
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09

jewishplayer wrote:

Well, actually, as of now, the only planet with life is Earth, based on our current knowledge. Other planets that are capable of supporting life with life are not found yet. Water is theoretically the main requirement of life (as seen on Earth), "terrestrial" goes hand in hand with "aquatic."

The whole asteroid belt is terrestrial too if we just go by the land masses that is distinguishable from water, though, they only have frozen water, maybe no water but they probably do.


The kupier belt has frozen water, blocks of it, and there are some moons that have frozen water too, but water isn't nessassarily a requirment for life, it is for us, but that doesn't mean it is for all life out there, there are plenty of other chemicals that an organism could use to live.
6298 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / karakura town
Offline
Posted 4/9/09
but that will still take avery looonnnggggg time........ no need to worry..
559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / Feminism is made...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09 , edited 4/9/09

Allhailodin wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:

Well, actually, as of now, the only planet with life is Earth, based on our current knowledge. Other planets that are capable of supporting life with life are not found yet. Water is theoretically the main requirement of life (as seen on Earth), "terrestrial" goes hand in hand with "aquatic."

The whole asteroid belt is terrestrial too if we just go by the land masses that is distinguishable from water, though, they only have frozen water, maybe no water but they probably do.


The kupier belt has frozen water, blocks of it, and there are some moons that have frozen water too, but water isn't nessassarily a requirment for life, it is for us, but that doesn't mean it is for all life out there, there are plenty of other chemicals that an organism could use to live.


All of those organisms alive on Earth actually has access to water. They do have different source of energy but the one thing they have in common is water. A source of water. Liquid water actually. Which is of course the reason why we pretty much look for water as it is the basis of life based on our current science.
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09 , edited 4/9/09

jewishplayer wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:

Well, actually, as of now, the only planet with life is Earth, based on our current knowledge. Other planets that are capable of supporting life with life are not found yet. Water is theoretically the main requirement of life (as seen on Earth), "terrestrial" goes hand in hand with "aquatic."

The whole asteroid belt is terrestrial too if we just go by the land masses that is distinguishable from water, though, they only have frozen water, maybe no water but they probably do.


The kupier belt has frozen water, blocks of it, and there are some moons that have frozen water too, but water isn't nessassarily a requirment for life, it is for us, but that doesn't mean it is for all life out there, there are plenty of other chemicals that an organism could use to live.


All of those organisms alive on Earth actually has access to water. They do have different source of energy but the one thing they have in common is water. A source of water. Liquid water actually. Which is of course the reason why we pretty much look for water as it is the basis of life based on our current science.


As far as I know not all lifeforms need water, some bacteria and other various single celled life doesn't nessassarily need water or oxygen, they can survive on other things such as arsenic for example. There are some bacteria that "breathe" arsenic and use it to break down nutrients and release energy much the same way humans use oxygen. So on other planets it's perfectly possible that a multi-celled evolved lifeform uses arsenic as a source of life the same as we use water for life, hell it could even breathe hydrogen. Life on earth isn't a standard for all universal life. I dunno why we tend to think that other life needs earth like conditions, hell life could even exist on a moon of juipter or saturn where its -200+ degrees.
Scientist Moderator
digs 
52086 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 4/9/09

Allhailodin wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:

Well, actually, as of now, the only planet with life is Earth, based on our current knowledge. Other planets that are capable of supporting life with life are not found yet. Water is theoretically the main requirement of life (as seen on Earth), "terrestrial" goes hand in hand with "aquatic."

The whole asteroid belt is terrestrial too if we just go by the land masses that is distinguishable from water, though, they only have frozen water, maybe no water but they probably do.


The kupier belt has frozen water, blocks of it, and there are some moons that have frozen water too, but water isn't nessassarily a requirment for life, it is for us, but that doesn't mean it is for all life out there, there are plenty of other chemicals that an organism could use to live.


All of those organisms alive on Earth actually has access to water. They do have different source of energy but the one thing they have in common is water. A source of water. Liquid water actually. Which is of course the reason why we pretty much look for water as it is the basis of life based on our current science.


As far as I know not all lifeforms need water, some bacteria and other various single celled life doesn't nessassarily need water or oxygen, they can survive on other things such as arsenic for example. There are some bacteria that "breathe" arsenic and use it to break down nutrients and release energy much the same way humans use oxygen. So on other planets it's perfectly possible that a multi-celled evolved lifeform uses arsenic as a source of life the same as we use water for life, hell it could even breathe hydrogen. Life on earth isn't a standard for all universal life.


I guess it would depend on how the organism participated in cellular respiration. Plants use CO2 and most animals use Oxygen. Some bacteria are anaerobic and don't use oxygen. Theoretically if the organism had a completely different form of cellular respiration then it could breath whatever worked within that form, of course they would also have to store energy completely differently and have organelles that used the energy differently.
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 4/9/09

digs wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:

Well, actually, as of now, the only planet with life is Earth, based on our current knowledge. Other planets that are capable of supporting life with life are not found yet. Water is theoretically the main requirement of life (as seen on Earth), "terrestrial" goes hand in hand with "aquatic."

The whole asteroid belt is terrestrial too if we just go by the land masses that is distinguishable from water, though, they only have frozen water, maybe no water but they probably do.


The kupier belt has frozen water, blocks of it, and there are some moons that have frozen water too, but water isn't nessassarily a requirment for life, it is for us, but that doesn't mean it is for all life out there, there are plenty of other chemicals that an organism could use to live.


All of those organisms alive on Earth actually has access to water. They do have different source of energy but the one thing they have in common is water. A source of water. Liquid water actually. Which is of course the reason why we pretty much look for water as it is the basis of life based on our current science.


As far as I know not all lifeforms need water, some bacteria and other various single celled life doesn't nessassarily need water or oxygen, they can survive on other things such as arsenic for example. There are some bacteria that "breathe" arsenic and use it to break down nutrients and release energy much the same way humans use oxygen. So on other planets it's perfectly possible that a multi-celled evolved lifeform uses arsenic as a source of life the same as we use water for life, hell it could even breathe hydrogen. Life on earth isn't a standard for all universal life.


I guess it would depend on how the organism participated in cellular respiration. Plants use CO2 and most animals use Oxygen. Some bacteria are anaerobic and don't use oxygen. Theoretically if the organism had a completely different form of cellular respiration then it could breath whatever worked within that form, of course they would also have to store energy completely differently and have organelles that used the energy differently.


Well like i said some bacteria use arsenic for food and air and to break down nutrients and all that good stuff, so its perfectly plausable that another organism on another planet could do the same, or even use something different like nitrogen or helium, our scientists are fucking idiots if they think all life needs "Earth like" conditions, thats retarded, while yes thats how it happened for us, it doesn't mean it's a universal standard. there could be life on planets that are - 200 degrees and survive by drinking liquid nitrogen and we'd never find it because we'd never look, its stupid to think that all life needs earth like conditions.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.