Astronomy and Cosmology

In one of my earlier posts i had asked why is it that photons are affected by gravity inspite of having zero rest mass and was informed that this happens because of general relativity. if force particles are affected by mass then do stars warp the energy fields of force carrying particles. This could have implications on the direction and intensity of force carrying particles in systems like binary star systems. Please provide some insight.

Summary of the previous article:"Why the massive body deforms space?"The black hole works as a collider,extorts all particles from vacuum,thus the vacuum is devastated and the space-time is reduced,deformed.The being reduced space-time round a massive body is transformed to energy of gravitational waves.I offer idea of detecion of gravitational waves. Gravitational waves aries from vacuum particles.Need to do a tube,placed into the pipe superconducting guantum interferometer,interferometer pulls out all photons from a vacuum(to use opening of the Swedish phisicists that got light from a vacuum).Into the wall of pipe to make out of material absorptive photons and mayby o…

A smaller mass is attracted to a larger mass by the distortion in space time created by the larger mass. As a smaller mass comes in the field of a larger mass its path in space is modified by this field. Even the smallest mass feels the effect of the larger mass but if the object is massless (zero rest mass) then ideally it should not be effected by this field. A beam of photons has zero rest mass but if we consider the effect of gravitational lensing paths of photons from a distant star are signficantly bent indicating that photons do indeed have some rest mass. Is this true? After all gravitational force is a function of the masses of the interacting…

Is space really continuous? After all matter is a local distortion of space time which itself is encapsulated energy. Then what is dark matter / dark energy?

According to string theory there is no time before Planck time and no length (dimension) smaller than Planck Length. According to Hawking space time evolved from a singularity. If we truly try to apply theory of conservation of energy it points to a violation. After all if nothing is smaller than Planck Length then some finite mass must have been present at Planck time. Which implies some finite energy must have converted into mass at this point. But can we create energy out of nothing. Here we have a situation where there is finite mass in finite time with energy of unknown origin. Where did this energy come from? Any pointers? Thanks in…

As the more massive planets and stars move around their chosen orbits they disturb the space time matrix significantly producing waves or disturbances. How is it that the gravitational attractive force between planets always prevents these waves or disturbances from throwing an orbiting object out of its chosen trajectory (it seems obvious that the larger the masses in question the more likely it is that they produce some effect (albeit transient) in the space time fabric.) Further applying chaos theory it may even be theoretically possible that due to superluminal communication these ripples are felt at the very edges of the universe. (i guess you could superimpose t…

Do the planets lose energy of motion (there is no friction in space) and will they continue in space as long as their parent star(s) exist ?

I read somewhere that we can see galaxies that are farther away than what the age of the universe is and they say that this is because the universe is expanding. I'm still a bit unclear on how an expanding universe can do this. So if anyone can clarify is this is true or not. This then led to me to believe that the fact that the universe expands has an effect on the speed of light. The speed of light should be faster in the direction that the universe expands and it should be slower in the direction against the speed of light.

I tend to rant in other sections because I've done a satisfactory amount of research in other sections.... But I want to start here by freely admitting that I know very little about astronomy. Not going to pretend at all. But a discussion elsewhere lead me to a question I'd like to ask here: Are you aware of examples of a single system in which a star orbits a non-star (not counting black holes)? And, I'm looking for a clear orbit.... I know that technically while the earth orbits the sync the earth does pull the sun a bit, so technically they're orbiting about eachother.... Just in a -very- weighted fashion. But to my knowledge, stars tend to be the most ma…

The observatory of Lisbon has published a video of Comet ISON, causing panic. The comet will be visible DURING THE DAY on all the planet on November 29 2013. See the shocking video here: http://third-secret.pro-forum.co.uk/h51-comet-ison ps :enable java-script if you have problems to load the video The 10 km wide core of comet will practically touch the surface of the sun, if the comet survives its orbit will be changed irreversibly, and it will be a Russian roulette for earth. If we believe their calculations ISON WILL BE ON COLLISION COURSE WITH EARTH, WITH IMPACT IN DECEMBER.

Would there be any way possible to make a young star start processing iron and become a black hole faster than it does naturally? I know this is a random question but I am wanting to put something like this in my book and I want it to be scientifically accurate.

Does anyone know what the faintest recorded magnitude of a given star happens to be - that is, in terms of absolute magnitude (as opposed to apparent magnitude)? I understand that Jupiter's absolute magnitude is +26. This being so, have there been stars observed that are intrinsically fainter than this planet? On a semi-unrelated point, do dwarf stars (of whatever hue) exhibit fierce gravitational tides near their surface? I ask this because I vaguely recall reading an old SF short story that had a spaceship performing a low altitude flyby past a red dwarf, during which the astronauts experienced no adverse effects from any such notional tidal pull. They wouldn't hav…

A probe sent to the event horizon would supposedly stop just before it entered because time slows down right? Well if that is true, then why aren't black holes covered in compressed hydrogen, stars, plasma, and anything you fin din space that gets sucked in? It seems to me that black holes should be completely concealed by all the stuff and yet, despite the idea that time slows around it, suns get completely sucked in at a fairly normal pace. At least that's the way I see it. So why is that?

I'd love to hear what everyone has to say about this.....please post. Even though this is still in the "dreaming" stage, I think that enterprises with a focus on mining asteroids have great potential; using mined materials to facilitate further space travel, developing new technologies as we learn how to mine asteroids, creating whole new industries, etc. For me the best part of all of this just getting our collective butts out there more and more. When I was young I envisioned grand explorations of the solar system (which we do pretty well, but could be more) and establishing outposts near other planets, etc. Now I would be excited about roughnecks mining asteroi…

Hello you all! Weakly Interacting Sub-eV Particles (WISP) are proposed as a dark mass candidate - similar to WIMP but lighter, from the very little I've read. Though, I don't see how they could concentrate at galaxies to explain the missing galactic mass. Even if they're 3K cold (6e-23 J) and 1eV massive (2e-36 kg), their mean speed is ~8000km/s, much more than a galactic escape speed. Would you know more? Like: - Candidate as dark mass elsewhere, not concentrated at galaxies ? - Subject to forces other than gravitation that confine them in galaxies ? - Colder than the electromagnetic background ? - Other ideas ? Thanks!

According to measurements we know that the influence of the tide is about 100 µGal. This is for example illustrated by the example (image) below (this shows relative and absolute measurement during 24 hours) But how can such measurements be compared to calculations ? For example , the influence of Jupiter should be less that 1µGal, but when calculated based on the Newtonian equation (MG/r^2), I get 10 times so large values Also when I calculate the influence of the Moon and the Sun, I get very high values. For example the Moon.... Based on MG/r^2 M = Mass (of the moon) 7,35E22 G = Gravitational constant 6,67E-11 r = radius 384000000 meter^2 3840…

The problem: let us suppose we have some laboratory frame K, and frame K_rot which is rotating with the angular rate depending on R - distatnce to the 0. Question: where I could find the way, how to get the expression for the inertia forces (like Centrifugal force and Coriolis one for the case of constant angulat rate).

What I know: Nothing. What I suspect: The Sun is busy making helium by fusing hydrogen. Question 1: Is the hydrogen in the Sun mostly protium? Question 2: Which isotope of helium is most often created by the Sun? Q2A: Are neutrons being created? The mass of the produced helium is less than the mass of the hydrogen that went into its creation. Therefore, the Sun's total mass decreases over time as hydrogen is fused into helium. The average diameter of the Sun is a reflection of the balance between the gravitational attraction and the explosive force of the energy released from fusion. In absence of fusion, gravity would compress the Sun into a mu…

if space-time "grips" photons, such that the cosmologically expanding fabric of space-time stretches photons propagating through said space-time => red-shift ... then would a contracting fabric of space-time compress photons => blue-shift ? Further, what about astronomical red-shifts / blue-shifts, brought about by the time-varying expansion / contraction of the fabric of space-time, near to super-massive / super-dense compact objects ? As they "dance" around each other, in intense interactions, would the fabric of space-time stretch as they sped past, and then contract as they moved on... and would photons flying through said space-time fabric be …

I am currently writing an SF novel whose primary setting is a neutron star (this is essentially a projected sequel of the two novels 'Dragon's Egg' and 'Starquake' by Robert L Forward). The question that's bothering me at present concerns the likely effects a serious of asteroids would have were they to be directed down on to the neutron star itself. I am aware that the effects any such impacts might have could be extremely minimal, or else restricted to the star's magnetic poles. Nevertheless, I would welcome any views or opinions this question might raise.

Would it be possible for any/all of the universal constants to change while still allowing the universe to continue to exist?

SPECULATION: As stars die, they go through major fluctuations in their gravitational strength. This would enable planets in orbit around those stars to escape - particularly the outermost planets. Escaping their parent stars, they would eventually become undetectable through reflected light. QUESTION: Would it be possible to detect these planets from infrared signals if they had internal heating?

Hello, It seem to me that there is a way to measure absolute coordinates of any events in the univers, using the cosmic background. First, you have to correct the relativist effect of speed, using the measurement of the Doppler effect affecting background (it give you the absolute speed).. Then, you can measure the size of the observable univers at this moment : it give you an absolute age for the event. From a event, you can define the trajectory where background relative speed stays null (the time trajectory), and the spatial surface where the background age stays the same (the spatial (3d) plane component). You can now simply measure coordinates of any…

I watched an old episode on History Channel called "Alien Moons." There was a comment that was made that lead to some confusion. They went on explaining how it is theorized how a moon got to close to Saturn, and Saturn's gravity "tore it apart" and became the rings of Saturn. They went on to describe the theory of how earth's moon was formed, with earth hitting another planet. Why wouldn't earth's gravity "tear the rouge planet apart"? On that same line, why doesn't the sun have rings around it? Wouldn't the sun's gravity be strong enough to tear everything apart and turn it into a ring system? Oh...and Shoemaker-Levi 9, why didn't that get "torn apart"...

The Mass Distribution of stellar (star) populations is described by the Initial Mass Function (IMF), denoted N(M) dM, which describes the number of stars between masses M & M+dM, in some specified volume of space. The IMF is typically modeled as a Power Law, with exponent [math]\alpha[/math] around -7/3: [math]N(m) dm \propto M^{-\alpha}[/math] Now, Stellar Luminosities scale as L* ~ M*4(Bowers & Deeming. Astrophysics I: Stars, pg. 28). So, from the IMF, we can calculate the expected overall Mass-to-Light Ratio of that population of stars: [math]\Upsilon \equiv \frac{M_{tot}}{L_{tot}} = \frac{\int M \times N(M) dM}{\int L(M) \times N(M) dM} \approx \f…