Added: 2 years ago
From: felixlighta
Views: 1,019
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (23)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • amazing!

    thanx for sharing!

  • That is So cool! and Tripy! XD

  • ermm how strong the wormhole will repulse you?

  • at 1:55 the imagry helped alittle of my understanding of a tesserect better

  • Another simple division tells you that to fuse even 1% of the hydrogen in the sun at that rate, would take 2.37x10^18 seconds. That's about 75,000,000,000 years.

    The rate isn't constant, but that gives you an idea of how retarded it is to think that losing even billions of tons per second is anything but a piss in the sea for the sun.

    So basically hush. Read a book and stop arguing about things that even those of us actually doing a degree in this stuff are barely qualified to talk about.

  • Did you say it take 75 billion years to burn just 1% of sun's mass?

    How long did it take to burn just 10% - 750 billion years.

    Are you on Ganja?

    :))

  • Redo your math, I am sure you goofed!

    This time try to get a fact sheet from NASA!

    :))

  • Bad news there. That math is *from* NASA.

    "Did you say it take 75 billion years to burn just 1% of sun's mass?

    How long did it take to burn just 10% - 750 billion years."

    I did not say the rate was constant, I was pointing out the fallacy of your reasoning that thousands of tons of hydrogen being fused per second requires the sun to be recieving more from an outside source. Of course it will not be a constant rate.

    The sun is ~5 billion years old, and half way through its life.

  • Haha, gotta love it how some "nerds" who have read Wikipedia are arguing here about Wormholes -.-

  • Well i know one of them and he is Majoring in astrophysics. See if you can guess which one...

  • Nah, I'd rather not, it's good tho if they know something about that stuff. I don't know for one.

    But I've seen many ppl arguing here and both of em didn't even know actually anything about it.

  • Aye utube is full of em :)

  • You don't have to see it to believe it... That is why we call it a science where we use logic to find answers and solutions to the problems.

    .

  • You don't demonstrate the existence of objects in reality through logic. That is nothing to do with the purpose of logic.

    Observation and evidence are the trump cards in science. There is a difference between not being able to see something, and not being able to detect it at all.

    How can you possibly claim to know about hydrogen in another dimension, and then in contradiction claim that it is delivered to stars in the dimensions we percieve?

    What you said is not scientific, not even close.

  • Not even close - you or me?

    Did you know that this universe is in existence for at least 13.7 billion years?

    Did you also know that sun is burning hydrogen gas for at least 5 billion years?

    Did you also know that sun still has 90% hydrogen in it despite converting thousands of tons of hydrogen per second into helium and other heavier matter?

    Do your math - And if it doesn't add up than tell me where does all that hydrogen comes from?

  • "Did you also know that sun still has 90% hydrogen in it despite converting thousands of tons of hydrogen per second..."

    *Sigh*. For a start, the sun is 74% hydrogen, not 90. The sun comprises 99.85% of the mass of the entire solar system. Its mass is 1.989 x 10^30 kg.

    And it actually fuses WAY more than thousands of tons of hydrogen per second. Try 6.2 × 10^11kg/s.

    Simple division tells you it burns 0.00000000000000000042% by mass of its hydrogen per second.

    [cont]

  • I don't have the fact sheet in front of me, you can get that from NASA. However, do the following

    6.2 x 10^11 Kgs/sec X 60 X 60 x 24 X 365 X 5 x 10^09 = how many trillion tons?

    By the way you forgot to mention % of Helium in sun

    Now add them up see if adds up - It doesn't!!!

    Well, either you are lying or other scientist who say that sun will die in next 5 billion years.

    I just realized you wrote above 75 Billion years to to convert 1% hydrogen

  • @MeX2004 9.77616 quadrillion trillion tons.

    or 9.77616 nonillion tons...

    or nine nonillion seven hundred seventy six octillion one hundred sixty septillion

    I think... ;-)

  • Final question - Why is it that sun is gaining mass instead of losing it?

  • It isn't gaining mass at all, it is losing it as it converts matter into energy via the process of nuclear fusion.

    But considering that the resulting helium atom has 0.7% less mass than the four hydrogen nuclei that fuse to create it, this loss of mass is tiny; even over the entire lifespan of the sun it will lose around 0.07% of its mass because:

    A) Fusion can only occur in the core.

    B) Not all of the Sun's mass is hydrogen to begin wth.

    Where on earth did you hear that it was gaining mass?

  • Going from point A to point C without going through point B is not only possible it is happening right now as we speak. Billions of tons of hydrogen gas is being transported to star systems throughout galaxy from black holes via this method every second. But you cant see the hydrogen gas nor can you feel it because it is happening in extra dimensions.

  • Where did you get that from Mex? Are you talking about polar jets? Hydrogen does not escape from, and is not emitted by black holes.

    Also, there is no 'invisible extra-dimensional hydrogen' hurtling through the galaxy. How would you even know if there was, as you yourself said it could not be detected? That's an unfalsifiable statement.

    Though your first sentence is correct at a sub-atomic level, if you count quantum tunnelling.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more