Moontanman

What causes a nuclear bomb to explode? I am under the impression that the explosion is the result of pressure. Is this impression correct?

 

No it is not, a critical mass can form with out the extreme pressures of a bomb. The pressure makes the bomb more efficient resulting in a more complete fission of the uranium or plutonium.

 

I ask because I am just starting to try and understand how a black hole forms. To this point my understanding is a star collapses the pressure causes an explosion.

 

What happens depends on the mass of the star, a sun like star just collapses into a white dwarf.

 

The star then collapses again, except this collapse is unable cause enough pressure to create another explosion.

 

No, not quite, the initial collapse both explodes the outer layers and and compresses the inner layers at the same time into a neutron star or black hole depending on the mass.

 

I have tried to think my way around the next questions. Why doesn't the first explosion blow away enough mass that the formation of a black hole can not occur? Why isn't there a continuous chain of explosions?

 

Sometimes the initial explosion does blow away enough mass to prevent a black hole. Sometimes you get a white dwarf or a neutron star or a quark star, a black hole can only form if the original star is above a certain mass when they process starts, IE it depends on how much mass you start out with. There is no continuous chain of explosions because there is no energy source for them, fusion is over by this time, all reactions past iron consume energy they do not produce it. Gravity overcomes any rebound type energy.

My fav JP song

If you think I'll sit around as the world goes by

You're thinkin' like a fool cause it's a case of do or die

Out there is a fortune waitin' to be had

You think I'll let it go you're mad

You've got another thing comin'

I have a few disjointed memories of 2 or 3 yo or so but no real continuous memories of more than 4 or 5

Some say a lot of what we have now come from reverse engineered alien technology and or that much of it was and still is beyond our keen. It's a very frustrating thing to discuss since by definition there is little or no real evidence to look at.

Ok, Captain, i am convinced it's an alien UFO opening up a FTL wormhole in the upper atmosphere, hell I don't think you could design a better one than that for sure. Then again could it be some weird aurora effect? Was it far enough north to be the Aurora?

Angry turtle, you just wanted to post a nekked girl pic didn't you? Nice one i admit and i do like the dimples..... Um yesssss, oh ok, um, symmetry, yes that's it, symmetry, that why I like them so much. On yeah, ummm, any chance we can inspect the other side for dimples, just a scientific check to make sure we are not missing any, you know, just to be sure

Oh, and I read that article you provided, it explains nothing, and merely goes on with the same gibber jabber I've heard a million times.

As is your gibber jabber and no it doesn't convince me that 2012 is a significant year.

Would nuclear fusion solve global warming?

Only if it was aneutronic and the unit was small enough to fit under my house or better yet in my car.

Two words, Three stooges!

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say he is talking about an act i once saw a film of that used a Van de Graaff generator and a woman with a body suit that had metal fibers or wires in it and allowed her to channel static electricity almost like a super hero or something! it was a wild act but not much margin for error.

The sperm cell only contains half the information, the female egg contains the other half.

Hmm, I guess Avatar gets a bye for them having USB plugs in their hair. "Don't play with that... you'll go blind!" Awesome. Exactly how did those things evolve again?

Yeah, a USB port, I thought the prehensile tail would have been a better place for it, lol. Evidently "Gaea" designed them to be user friendly.

Did no one else notice the hexapod theme in all the animals other than the humanoids?

I'm curious how many porn producers will be able to afford the expensive computing power required for this sort of CGI. Could be big business if it works.

Computing power always gets less expensive, when the movie was first conceived it was impossible, to day it is much easier and will only get easier. With in a few years you should be able to buy a program that will allow you to make your own version of Avatar! (or what ever, lol)

Which one?

the most powerful one of course! sorry inow, I couldn't resist!

Did anyone else notice the vertebrate animals on the planet had six limbs but the humanoids only had four? I loved much of the movie due to the description of a low gravity high air pressure world.

I'm not sure how accurate it was biologically but it was interesting. Much of the life seemed to be taken from ocean creatures. Tube worm type creatures, floating and bio-luminescent creatures were take offs of ocean life and the idea that high pressure atmosphere might support plankton, creatures that feed on plankton, and drifting creatures. The story line was indeed fern-gully/dances with wolves/Pocahontas as someone mentioned. Those white bastards must feel really guilty about what they did to my people!

I liked the movie a lot, it was easy to suspend disbelief and go with it. the technology will bring us many more movies that would normally be too expensive to make or time consuming or both.

I expect lots of porn to be forth coming wit this sort of CGI, Porn is a huge part of the INTERNET and I'm betting this will be the case with this sort of super realistic CGI.

Would it mean that god is corrupted absolutely?

It seems I remember a science fiction story where aliens brought us the technology to transmit a person light years instantly but only a copy was sent and the original had to be killed each time a person was transmitted. We agreed to the terms but couldn't abide by them, lol

The idea that nudity equals pornography is simply wrong, lots of none nude pictures are quite sexual but they are ok by law. I'm not sure what the answer is but current ideas seem wrong to me. Child beauty pageants are wrong to me but many people think dressing a 6 year old up like a hooker is ok.

For me it's a trilogy, John Varley's Titan, Wizard, and Demon.

And sharks would seem to indicate that it does not. They have existed nearly unchanged for 350 million years. Our form, homosapiens, accomplished everything in 300,000 years. Neanderthal ( if I am not mistaken ) existed in various forms for possibly 500,000 years. I don't think there is much evidence that they went beyond crude tools, and crude social structures.

Point of fact. we did not "invent" all our complex social structures until a few thousand years ago, we were not much ahead of Neanderthals until after they become extinct. in fact the last of the Neanderthals were displaying the same behavior as us in distinctly different ways. We had an advantage but intelligence wasn't necessarily it.

It is important to remember that we have not 'invented' physics, or chemistry. The laws existed prior to us. So any species could have accomplished exactly what we have ... had they the cognitive ability to do so. But they found their niche, and that is as far as they got. Their evolution stopped 'cold'. And we have possibly as many as 7 billion species who existed prior to us ... many with up to hundreds of millions of years to achieve cognitive function equal or superior to ours ... and they did not.

No, you are assuming intelligence is somehow a goal the goal is survival, many animals have evolved unique ways of survival, just because they did it with out large brains and opposable thumbs doesn't mean they were some how late in the game or losers.

I don't think that is an accurate statement. We have a plethora of evidence to 'tell' in ...

 

1. our own fossil records ...

 

2. our observations of our solar system ...

 

3. our ( somewhat limited ) observations of the universe ...

 

4. our knowledge of chemistry and failed attempts to create life ...

 

5. and most notably, the deafening silence from SETI for 50 years.

 

They fully expected ( unless they were lying - I was listening to their words with rapt attention 50 years ago ) to detect a signal in the first few years ... with their very primitive ( by today's standards ) technological abilities.

Today, it is not exactly well known, lots of things that were assumed to be true 50 years ago have been found to be misleading. The most important is that listening in on a civilization equal to ours even from 4.5 light years away might very well be impossible. unless we intentionally beam a signal (and even then in some cases) all our signals are absorbed by the upper atmosphere and or interstellar dust and gases. the old idea that in the radio spectrum the earth would outshine the sun is false and very misleading. SETI, for the most part is looking for signals intentionally being sent out on a specific wave length that is not absorbed by interstellar dust and gases.

Not too long ago Seth Shostak ( in defense of SETI's lack of success ) made a disingenuous and deliberately misleading statement. ( at least in my opinion )

 

He said that we have " ... carefully examined less than 1000 stars." Key word ... 'carefully'. We have examined far more than that. Millions more. By the way, that is under 20 per year. At his rate we could look for several hundred thousands of years without any expectation of stumbling across 'intelligent, radio-capable life'.

 

Additionally, he said that it was 'possible' that all those 'intelligent' species out there might be transmitting using much more sophisticated methods than we have the ability to detect. SUPER PHYSICS! Amusing that everyone else in the universe leaped from 'fire' to FTL technology .... I guess we are the stupid ones.

 

The only half-way intelligent thing he said in the article was that "Maybe we have it wrong. Maybe we need to re-think our assumptions. Maybe in another 40-50 years if we still haven't recieved a signal ...."

 

I'm thinking .... maybe the time is now, Seth.

Possibly you need to look a little deeper into the problems of detecting radio signals form space. If indeed EM is the only way to communicate then we need to examine the ways we are doing it and yes detailed examinations are far more difficult than just listening in with a radio. If there are 1000 advanced civilization in our galaxy spaced more or less equally apart most would not be detectable unless they had existed for many thousands of years. Yes the light speed limit limits both us and them. If there was a civilization on the other side of the milky way that was 50,000 years ahead of us we would still not be able to detect them nor they us. Light speed is much like tracer fire, it works both ways.

I have a very difficult time in seeing anything humans do as "different" that sets us apart from any other animals. Yes there are differences but only in degree. There is nothing humans do that an animal doesn't do in some way to a lesser extent. Humans are obviously more complex in many ways than most animals and at this time that complexity is unique, but I see no reason our level of complexity could not be evolved by other species, Neanderthals would seem to indicate it can happen.

Good post zolar, I'd rep you if I could

I'm not upset pywakit, I just asked for more than grandiose claims and subtle insinuations. i doubt very much we have the technology to move the earth via the methods you suggested much less with the power sources you suggested. And yes I know the Earth could be moved in tiny increments with asteroids but thats not part of what were talking about now is it?.

I would ask would a 20' great white allow it's self to be bit in that manner. Great whites are ambush predators. If the salty was swimming in the ocean he would never see the shark coming, the shark would bite a huge chunk out of him and go off and wait for the croc to die as the great white does to other large prey items. If the salty caught the great white in an inshore bay the croc might be able to kill the shark.

They showed a battle between a black bear and a alligator on that show as well, it was bullshite.

I wanted to see a fight between a Siberian Tiger and a Kodiak Bear, that should be a close match up.

You have said this a lot, care to elaborate on this?

This just requires existing technology and a lot of hard work ...

I know of no existing technology that is capable of moving the planet or even coming close to moving the planet. Your idea about geo thermal is flawed as was pointed out by Sisyphus but having the energy required doesn't mean you have the ability to direct it the way you want.

Please let us know what current technology can be used to move the earth, hard work or not.