Our star isn't going to implode, it's just going to burn out, like a coal on fire. It burns then leaves a smoldering white rock. A supernova only accurs if the star is big enough to become a red supergiant

This is what I've read most about, and really, I've read in several books that all stars (almost) will become red giants including our star.
It will become omega red, and it will implode, just no supernove, just a white dwarf.
Not enough energy will be made to make the energy "bounce".
Yes, the fuel will burn out, and then it happens, that is why it implodes, ya know,

PTS: But he did say that you could see gravity that way, :S

I'll comment more later because I'm in a bug hurry right now. cya

Every star, no matter how big or small it is, implodes. Because when the 'fuel' burns out there's no other force to resist the gravity, therefore the star implodes.

Hey! how bout 6 be about black holes. I dont think you mentioned this as big as i do. ok , Actually , going through a black hole Takes you to the other side of the universe , not time. You must - Have a gravity field strong enough to keepp the hole open .Go at the speed of light through it , so you dont get spahgettified! and then you'll pop out from another black hole far , far away Ps , this is a theory

Hey! how bout 6 be about black holes. I dont think you mentioned this as big as i do. ok , Actually , going through a black hole Takes you to the other side of the universe , not time. You must - Have a gravity field strong enough to keepp the hole open .Go at the speed of light through it , so you dont get spahgettified! and then you'll pop out from another black hole far , far away Ps , this is a theory how do you stop double posts?

Every star, no matter how big or small it is, implodes. Because when the 'fuel' burns out there's no other force to resist the gravity, therefore the star implodes.

Yes, they all go red giant and then implodes.
They don't have to be big, just massive enough to go fusion from the start.

That is why there are so many plans on going to mars.
We need a place to go to when our sun goes red giant and makes BBQ out of earth.
When it does, the ice on mars will melt and create pooring water over some places on the planet, and might also create some kind of an atmosphere.
So, oh yes, our sun will go giant.

Hey! how bout 6 be about black holes. I dont think you mentioned this as big as i do. ok , Actually , going through a black hole Takes you to the other side of the universe , not time. You must - Have a gravity field strong enough to keepp the hole open .Go at the speed of light through it , so you dont get spahgettified! and then you'll pop out from another black hole far , far away Ps , this is a theory

Very confusing post, don't stress whily typing man,
About black holes eh?
Well, that will include some serious shit about time, and it seems like I don't know that much about time as I though, so, I guess maybe if you guys can help me with it?
A WHOLE GIGANTIC CHAPTER by all the interested on TWHL, that would be pwnage.

Einstein didn't found a way to explain gravity fields, HE DISPROVED THEM. In his theories, gravity force was an imaginative force, created by human scientists because they had no other way to explain it. What really happens is mass curving the space-time, which causes objects to "slide" toward each other, like in your example. That's the theory behind gravity drives and faster-than-light travel. So antigravity energy inside galaxies is just another way for scientists to escuse their lack of actually accurate formulae.

PS: It's just a theory, just like anything else, so don't get offended by it.

The first thing that you said,, that's about what I said.
You could imagen that the rubber thing was space time, and mass "bends it" wich pulls stuff towards it.

What you said about dark energy..
I don't know if you can call that one busted because we don't know for sure.
But else, I agree with you, it is an excuse.

BUT
This could be the same shit as in maths.
A question was asked,
"What is the square root out of -1?"
Nothing we had back then could equal the square root out of -1, so they made an "excuse".
Imagenary numbers, or, how ever it is spelled. (i)
So the root out of -1 = i. ??
It's also an excuse, but it replaces something that really exists for maths is a closed system.

EH well I havn't studied star life that much, I'm just going by what my fucktard teacher said.

Your TEACHER told you that?!

Wow, he should know that.
Stars are my special, so I know for sure,

Oh, and chapter 6 will be about neutronstars and black holes, more detailed info.
I know some stuff about neutron stars, but I don't know as much about black holes.

I'll call the chapter "Supernovans avkommer" wich, in english means something like "The offspring of supernovas"

Ok, I'm now "done" with part 6, I just need to know what to write about black holes.

I put it up like this:

[Intro]
(introduces the two theories of what happens after a suppernova)
[facts about neutron stars]
[facts about black holes] <--- not done

SO what should I erite about black holes.
I've written some but i don't know if it is true, I just got it in my head, I think I read it in a book long time ago.

Would be great if you could help me.
Thanks

---

Edit:

What I've done so far:

---

Part 6 - The offspring of supernovas
[i]
I'll continue where I ended the last chapter, but more in detail.
What is a neutron star, and what is a black hole?
I'll try to answere that now.

Neutron stars
A neutron star is an extreamly compact star wich has extremly high density (around 1 billion grams / square centimeter )
The reason that it is called a neutron star is simple.
The gravity is so extream that the protons and neutrons is pushed together so hard that they become one and creates a neutron.
A neutron star isn't big, it's really small!
It's around 15 km in diameter.

Black holes ( Might be wrong on this one )

A "hole" in the dimensions.
Unlimited gravity (singularity) makes an infinite hole in the space.
You can't see how the hole goes deep, all that you can see is a black sphere.
You read about time traveling before, and I said some stuff about black holes.
Why do you not age in a black hole?
Well, remember, while exposed by gravity, time goes slower.
In a black hole, the gravity is UNLIMITED = unlimited slowdown = time stops totaly.
The gravity is so strong, not even light can escape from the black hole.
A ring of light is created around the hole as it sucks in light, and that is the only way to spot a black hole, exept that you will notice that you can't see any stars in a cirkle shaped area.

And you can't see the many black holes that orbit between the galaxies because of that. there not sucking in mass and hence arn't emiting any radiation.

and a neutron star is just when all the atoms in it are neutrons because the gravity is to strong for protons and electrons to exist independantly. they arn't one giant neutron

You can however notice black holes by x-rays, and disturbed paths/or sucking in of nearby objects. I havn't done alot of research on black holes, but I do know that it's not a hole, it's just a collapsed star that has so much gravity it blocks light. The gravity is so strong that it can compact even the largest stars into like a centimeter soo..
I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure.

ya, normal black holes are estimated to be tiny. super massive black holes are larger but still small.

the ones in between the galaxies have nothing to suck in and hence emit no x-rays.

And a neutron star is just when all the atoms in it are neutrons because the gravity is to strong for protons and electrons to exist independantly. they arn't one giant neutron

No, it isn't one giant neutron, it's just as many atoms as it would be but without electrons and protons.
I have in mind that my science teacher told me that the protons and electrons (only) melted together, not the neutrons.

What do you mean with "protons and electrons living independantly"? :S

ok mad that was good........ HELL what would it be like to go into a black hole. Why dont you be a test subject , SpaG! (heh)

You forgot to add that Black holes appear when a huge mass star runs out of fuel (>30 times the mass our Sun has). I wrote about the running out of hydrogen thingy above.

You forgot to add that Black holes appear when a huge mass star runs out of fuel (>30 times the mass our Sun has). I wrote about the running out of hydrogen thingy above.

That was in the previous chapter.
Part 5 - STARtale.
wich included the life of a star and the alternate end as a black hole depending on the mass.

ok mad that was good........ HELL what would it be like to go into a black hole. Why dont you be a test subject , SpaG! (heh)

Well, about what I wrote beneth this text, you might not even notice that you accedently went in to a black hole since you can still move as normal etc.
But, sure, you might notice it somehow.

---

Hey, sorry people I had my science teacher (who is very interested in physics, and he is REALLY good) correct my thingy about timetraveling into a black hole.
One statement was wrong, and that is.
YOU CAN MOVE EVEN THOUGH TIME STANDS STILL.
You don't even notice that time has stoped.
You keep on as always.
Later last night I re-read the chapter about time, (Einsteins Universe, that's the name of the book for those interested, by Niger Calder. )
and it said that, even in time runs slower for you, and a spectator notices it, you won't notice it.
That's what Einstein meaned with "Relativety"
Time runs as normal as always for you, but the relative speed for the spectator is much slower.
Sorry about that error, I'll fix it in the original text.

---

What we have gone through:

1.Space isn't empty.
2.The universe IS expanding
3.Dark matter
4.Dark energy
5.Gravity
6.Some random stuff about Time
7.Time travelling
8.Stars and how they age
9.Death of stars
10.Some facts about black holes
11.Some facts about neutron stars

So, what's next on the list?

Should I write some theories of "The birth of the universe"
I don't know a lot about it but sure, I could read about it.
Or maybe I could write about the true meaning of E=MC^2
I think I should write about the equation since it is very important.

No! i hate e=mc2!!! Energy!!! I am doing a gay song about E=mc2!! I FREAKIN HATE IT!! NOooooo..
Energy ,
Its E=MC2.
Its atoms in the air,
Theres Energy in the food that we all eat ,
Energy every time we stamp our feet!
ARRRRRRRRRRGGGGHHHHH

Oooo...k?

I stated the theory of relativity when I was describing space-time. I was going to post about why time doesn't stand still for you, but it seems you figured it out before I could post

Einstein's theory of relativity totally disproves everything you are taught until you learn it. There is no such thing as simultanity (is that the word?) everything has it's own inertial frame in which it moves through space-time. Anything viewed from another vantage point would be happening in "another time" although the distortion can be very miniscule. Like me talking to you from across the room.

I stated the theory of relativity when I was describing space-time. I was going to post about why time doesn't stand still for you, but it seems you figured it out before I could post

I still don't know WHY you can't see time going slower just for you, so, if you know I would gladly read!

No! i hate e=mc2!!! Energy!!! I am doing a gay song about E=mc2!! I FREAKIN HATE IT!! NOooooo..
Energy ,
Its E=MC2.
Its atoms in the air,
Theres Energy in the food that we all eat ,
Energy every time we stamp our feet!
ARRRRRRRRRRGGGGHHHHH

Wtf are you on about? lol.

E=mc^2 is a really easy equation.
You could in a minute or two figgure out how much energy an object could release if all of the mass turned in to energy.
For example.

I weight 60 KG. (this equation uses KG as mass unit, NOTHING else)

M = 60kg
C^2 = 300 000 000m/s x 300 000 000m/s (yeah, I know, it isn't exacly 300 000 000m/s, but, it's kinda hard else. )

M x C^2 = 60 x 300 000 000 x 300 000 000

5400 000 000 000 000 000 JOULE

So, if I just simply turns into energy, I'll create 5400 000 000 000 000 000 joule of energy.
Easy!

---

Next chapter: E=mc2 (started writing on it)
Chapter after that: The four forces (Not started)
Last chapter (I think): Enourmus distances, a tribute to Rune. (not started)

Here's my theory of relativity:
What i don't consider relative to myself, is not relevant at all. In other world's i wouldn't give a crap if the universe looks like a giant jelly-glazed donut, it still works don't it?

Here's my theory of relativity:
What i don't consider relative to myself, is not relevant at all. In other world's i wouldn't give a crap if the universe looks like a giant jelly-glazed donut, it still works don't it?

It is in the human nature to be curious, some of us more than others.
I am very curious.
And, while we learn, we also create.

Yeah, true that i am curious about the universe to some degree, but i also think there is no point worrying at this point in our life a) because half of it i can't understand and b) because we'll probably never get to experience it in our lifetimes. But yeah, we can learn great things from it, things that can better our way of life.

because we'll probably never get to experience it in our lifetimes. But yeah, we can learn great things from it, things that can better our way of life.

because we'll probably never get to experience it in our lifetimes. But yeah, we can learn great things from it, things that can better our way of life.

I love physics for some loads of reasons.
It runs in the family, and it's a great thought that you can teach your knoledge over to others ( I want to be a teacher in physics )
And also, if we discover something new, we win internal glory!
Not that I know fur sure that I will, but I don't?bet my ass on that I won't.
I want to be close to the answeres and questions, that's all.

Part 7 - E=mc^2
Energy = mass x the speed of light x the speed of light huh?
So, um, what exactly does that mean?
Many people say that they are familiar with the equation, but few seems to know what it really does.
It isn't hard, so I'll show you, but I have to explain first.

Einstein said that energy once was mass, and mass is mass waiting to turn in to energy.
Energy has mass.
But to turn mass into energy, you ether has to travel in the speed of light, or, (this is a theory) you can use annihilation, wich means that normal matter collides with anti-matter.
anti-matter is, for example, if you have an atom;
it has a proton wich has the charge "positive",
it has an electron wich has the charge "negative",
and is has a neutron wich is neutral.
Anti matter is the OPPOSITE.
The proton has the charge "negative"
And the electron has the charge "positive"
But the neutron is still neutral.

So, when antimatter and matter collides, it turns into energy!

...but how much?

I have a stone in my pocket, nothing special with it really, it's just a stone.
It weights about 2 kilos.
Now we'll use the equation.

M = 2 (mass in kilo grams)
C^2 ?? 900 000 000 000 000 00 (I used 300 000 000^2 here, wich isn't the exact speed. Now remember, in this equation you use m/s, not KM/s or something like that)

ok, here we go.
2 x 900 000 000 000 000 00 = 1800 000 000 000 000 00
The amount of energy released will be almost
1800 000 000 000 000 00 JOULES.

And that's pretty much what the equation says..

---

I'm very sure on this chapter, but still I might be wrong somewhere.
Please correct me if you notice anything

C^2 ?? 900 000 000 000 000 00 (I used 300 000 000^2 here, wich isn't the exact speed. Now remember, in this equation you use m/s, not KM/s or something like that)

3.00x10^8. It's pretty damn close to 3.

Please use standard form! Also, C^2 has units m^2/s^2, not m/s.

1800 000 000 000 000 00 JOULES = 1.8x10^17, if I counted right.

7th: You sure?
I asked my science-teacher and he said that you could do that.
But maybe he forgot something, as we all do sometimes,

Here is how I counted:

2 x 300 000 000 x 300 000 000

When I shower my science teacher, I used my weight as example.
I said:

60 x 300 000 000 x 300 000 000.

But, here's the shit once again.

2 x 3 x 3 = 6 x 3 = 18
Now, I simply add all of the zeros.
1800 000 000 000 000 00

So, I do take m^2/s^2, but I don't do it like you shower.
I simply take 300 000 000 x 300 000 000.
That should do the trick, right? :S

[/confusing]

I'm sure your right 7th, I just wrote bad or something.
Or is the way I counted wrong? :S

---

Btw, the next chapter will be about the true meaning of the theory of relativety.
What did Einstein mean by relativety?
FIND OUT TOMORROW!

Oh I can't wait! ;D

I wasn't criticising your mathematics, Madcow, just the way you're writing it. Nobody wants to see "1800 000 000 000 000 00", and besides, they must be groups of three! 180 000... etc.

MadcowWhen I shower my science teacher, I used my weight as example.

Sorry but that made me chuckle!

7th is just saying that its easier to read 1.8x10^17 than 1800 000 000 000 000 00.

Yes use scientific notation it makes you look smarter and it doesn't take hardly any work.

7th: sorry, hope you didn't take my post offencive.
So that's what you ment, oh. lol.
I'll try using it in the future.

I've finnished the chapter about relatiety, but I'm in school now so I can't post it.

Of course I didn't.

Argh, I forgot chapter 8 in school again!
Well, I kinda remember what I wrote so, here goes!

---

Part. 8 - Everything is relative, exept..

The theory of RELATIVERY
Einstein said that everything is relative depending on how she spectator/observer moves, or the enviroments of the target.
What does that mean?
Well, I'm going to bring up an example here, wich we've been talking about before, and that is Time.

Person-one stands in a field of powerful gravitation, and person two is far away from there, observing person-one through a telescope.
They both have clocks.
When person-two looks at person-one's clock, it seems as it goes slower than his own, wich it in fact does.
But when person-one looks at person-two's clock, it seems as it goes faster!
Wich it does.
Now here's the big point.
When person-one looks at his own clock, he can't tell the difference from when time goes slower, or when it goes normal.
Person-two can't see that his clock goes faster than normal, but, the true normal speed is while exposed by no gravity at all, so, his clock does go the exact speed.

The same effect happens if person-two runs past person-one.
Sure, it has to be in an incredeble speed to be noticeable, but it is true.
When person-one looks at person-two's clock, it seems to go slower because he is moving.
And person-two thinks that person-ones clock goes faster.
But none of them notices that time goes faster or slower just for them.

Everything in the universe is relative in a similar way, exept the speed of LIGHT!

If we have a static light source placed out in space, and person-one stands right next to the light source, and person-two flies away from the light source in half the speed of light. (about 150 000 000 m/s )
They both tests how fast the light goes against them, and they both gets the same result!
The light always goes in 300 000 000 m/s, it doesn't mater how you move or if you're exposed by gravity, or anything like that.

---

I might have missed something, I'll look it up.

That was the most confusing discussion of relativity I ever read.. sorry :

Hmm, good you said that.
I'll try to fix it, somehow.

Could you say where it gets confusing?
I can't tell myself

Hmm...Let's just say it took me like 3 chapters in a textbook to learn the theory of relativity and the knowledge behind it. You kind of crammed it all into 3 paragraphs.
Reading your example made me wonder if I am right or not in what I think it is. I'm going to have to re-research some things.

When person-one looks at his own clock, he can't tell the difference from when time goes slower, or when it goes normal.

That threw me off. I got confused because I thought person one and two could see eachother's clocks. Now I don't know if I am correct in thinking that gravity isn't the only cause of time-dilation, which is what you are talking about. Now I am considering that maybe acceleration causes time dilation, because you get increased gravity during acceleration, but not at a constant velocity. But I know that can't be right because there is time-dilation at high speeds without acceleration! Argh! I'm completely confused now!

Well, what I ment with that, wich is the big point of relativety is, that, well, here's an easier example:

If you go into a black hole, you won't even notice that time stops.
If you have a clock with you in to the black hole, and you look at it, it will seem as it runs in normal speed.
This is what you see from your relative point of view.

Yes, they can see eachothers clocks.

The one outside the gravity:
When he looks at the guy exposed by gravity, it seems as he goes slower.

The one exposed by gravity:
When he looks at the man outside, it seems as he goes faster.

When they both looks at their own clocks, they don't notice that they go faster/slower, they seem to run as normal.

Motion and gravity causes these effects, nothing else as far as I know.

I'm going to have to re-research some things.

Well, that's not the whole theory, it's just the meaning of relativety.

But, please tell me if I'm wrong if you find anything.

That was much better lol. Nice explanation.

Thanks, I'll replace the old one.

---

hey, just noticed that I've forgot to post a small chapter, wich, makes the latest chapter part 9, not 8.
Here it is, the REAL part 8:

Part 8 ? The four forces
There are four forces in the universe.
One of them we?ve already talked about, and that is gravity, which in fact is the WEAKEST force.
I mean, who could say, it stops us from falling of earth, and it keeps our galaxies together!

The other three forces are:
Strong interaction
Keeps the core particles in an atom together.
This is the strongest force.
A prove that it is more powerful than electro magnetism is that
if you put four protons together, they will stay together, and not burst away in all directions because they all has got the same charge.

Weak interaction
Special case.
Electro magnetism.
Ever wondered what holds an object together.
For example, an apple.
How come the atoms just falls apart?
That?s all because of electromagnetism.
It keeps atoms together.
It also keeps you from falling through the floor and in to the earth core.
Don?t mix stars up with electromagnetism.
They are racked up as they are because of the gravity as you could read about in Part. 5

One of them we?ve already talked about, and that is gravity, which in fact is the WEAKEST force.

A bit vague. At what distances?

Also, the electromagnetic and weak forces are sometimes believed by some to be a unified electroweak force.

The Standard Model

(click to enlarge by a factor of about a googol)

"What do you think?
Discuss and tell me your opinion, please.

Thanks!"

Before starting a large philosophical debate about the existence and purpose of the universe, perhaps you should work on your spelling/typing skills.

Humans know 1/∞ of the universe. We send out little metal toys jam packed with sensors in hopes of finding another species or another inhabitable planet. The universe is infinite. That's a fact. The size of the universe compared to the size of you and me is so large it would take billions upon billions of lifetimes to explore it all. It's practically impossible.

You want to know more about the universe? I suggest you purchase a large quantity of blotter tabs and give'r from there.

There is no universe it is just another means of control.

But seriously the world doesnt exist it is just our brain thinking that we have some kind of existance.

7th: good point, I should've wrote that.
The interaction forces only effects things in a range of a nuclear particle.
Electromagnetism, well, still smaller range than gravity.
gravity can have almost unlimited range (I think?)

Before starting a large philosophical debate about the existence and purpose of the universe, perhaps you should work on your spelling/typing skills.

Humans know 1/?? of the universe. We send out little metal toys jam packed with sensors in hopes of finding another species or another inhabitable planet. The universe is infinite. That's a fact. The size of the universe compared to the size of you and me is so large it would take billions upon billions of lifetimes to explore it all. It's practically impossible.

You want to know more about the universe? I suggest you purchase a large quantity of blotter tabs and give'r from there.

I know, my spelling isn't the best.
Before I print the pages I correct them using Word.
English isn't my primary language.

Hey, the facts in this thread is corrected if wrong.
1.If anyone in this thread notices something wich isn't correct, they post about it, it has happened a few times.
2.In some cases where I've been slightly unsure, I've asked my science teacher who has physics as primary subject.

What are you talking about, anyway?!

I'm saying take acid (LSD) and form your own opinion.

Be serious, thanks

I am being serious. What better way to understand the universe than to form your own drug based opinion on it?

Humans know 1/∞...

imposible, thats 0. we know of earth.

did you know .999.... repeating forever = 1. mathamatical proofs are availible for this.

I'm currently researching on the two last chapters.
They will be a bit different from the others...

Earth is but a speck. You can't even see earth on the map of the Milky Way, let alone the entire universe, which is unmappable.

It is mappable, but you would need quite a big paper.
End of discussion