Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: Re: Re: Re: To Who Said Gravity Doesn't Exist, Rather Light...

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by John Reyes on January 28, 2001 03:44:17 UTC

Hi comet61

You give a good argument for gravity , however what will not go away is the mass problem , betelguex is actually more luminous than most red variables and it also contrasts with all other red variables because it is a young star recently evolved from a bright blue star , its mass still then remains at 20 times that of our sun .

I understand the scientific theory but our scientific understanding has been based on the research of our own sun in order to understand and calculate all other stars so if betelgeux is about to blow then that is fine with me , what I cannot accept is its mass of 20 times that of our sun , how did it acquire it prior to becoming a red super giant .

Our sun is so much smaller yet it ignited and had supposedly pushed away material that is assumed created the planets , our sun then having ignited at such a small stage compared to betelgeux means that gravity cannot have a varied ignition time for a greater accumulation of mass , somewhere along this mass accumulation gravity has to ignite the proto star hence preventing a further increase in mass.

I am aware that there are bigger main sequence stars but choose the smallest and the biggest and this mass accumulation would then still contradict why betelgeux still has such a huge mass irrespective to what science teaches .

There is a star called Eta Carinae , its a peculiar very bright star that science states that it is possibly the most heaviest and most luminous in our galaxy . From 1833 it began to fade its luminosity from 4 million times that of our sun to just below naked eye visibility where it remained, in 1968 though it was discovered that it really still shines as brightly as it did when it was discovered , the reason being that at the time of discovery the reason for almost disappearing was due to the star emitting a nebulous patch around it which is what absorbs the the radiation by the grains of dust .

The peculiar thing about it is that the exact nature of this star remains a mystery to science , its mass is 100 times that of the sun and seems to be the most massive star in our galaxy , it however seems to be moving away from the main sequence to become a yellow super giant that has reached an unstable state .


Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins