/sci/ - Science & Math

this gave me aids

Heat is an expression of the average kinetic energy of a substance. The average kinetic energy cannot exceed the speed of light due to relativity.

>>6473849
nothing travels faster than light

>>6473866

>nothing travels faster than light

>>6473866
>tape flashlight to back of car
>turn it on
>drive forward

>>6473854
>Heat is an expression of the average kinetic energy of a substance
isn't that Temperature?

>>6473849
Light is one way energy can travel through pure vacuum. When the photons (particles "packets" of energy) come into contact with the electron shell of an atom, that electron reaches a higher energy state, destabilizing the normal nature of the atom.

Heat is a sensation we feel when we come into contact with an object (or air) which is above comfortable ambient temperature. When an object is 'heated' it is energized, i.e., the atoms that are parts of the object contain more energy in the form of higher energy electrons. These energized electrons can also give off photons (e.g. why heated metals glow red). The photons given off by electrons dropping to a lower energy state travel from one atom to the next energizing their constituent electrons. This however, slows down photons as they have to 'hop' from one atom to the next through billions of billions of atoms. This also happens in the sun when photons (energy) is released from the inner nucleus of the sun where the fusion process occurs. The photons actually take (albeit theorized) over one million years to reach the surface of the sun where they are then released ( or further interact with the super heated plasma gases at the suns surface). When objects are heated, the extra energy will eventually reach a state of equilibration. The time this takes depends on the material of the object. Objects of metal or metaloid substance will achieve this faster because their electrons are more freely dissociated allowing for faster propagation of energy.

>>6474014
>Proceed to learn a lesson on the invariance of the speed of light.

>>6474056
>the atoms that are parts of the object contain more energy in the form of higher energy electrons
When an object is heated in gains internal energy, that doesn't mean just promotion of electrons. Most of it goes into thermal energy.

>These energized electrons can also give off photons (e.g. why heated metals glow red)
Nope. Blackbody radiation does not come from atomic emission.

Wow sci....
So the actual stellar material comes with the explosion can transmit heat via conduction or convection.
The radiation however is light, so it travels at the speed of light.

>>6474014
basically your plane of existence is deformed to suit the speed limit, not the other way around

>>6473849

>>6474022
No, Temperature is related to the entropy of a system.

>>6474231
>tfw I don't care of the consequences

>>6473849
Radiant heat will hit us at the same time as the light. Kinetic heat and plasma winds will come after.

>>6473849
Also, our sun isn't heavy enough to supernova. It's just going to expand to a red giant swallowing the earth, then slowly cool off as a white dwarf.

>>6474296
Well you should. Because I'll come to your house and wash the floor clean with your fucking head, motherfucker.

>>6473849
>What would the first impact be?

Neutrinos. For a star of normal supernova-scale masses and of a certain supernova type, you'd have about 10^58 neutrinos emitted from the conversion of the core into a neutron star. Within about 2-3 AU, this neutrino flux alone is high enough to give anything a Human-level fatal radiation dose.

Shortly behind the neutrino flux (which carries away 90% of the event's energy), comes the glare of other radiation, largely just photons. Then a bit further behind, come the higher-mass radiation, like protons, positrons, and alpha particles. Then a few minutes behind those, come the waves of plasma.

>>6474440
>still thinking neutrinos travel faster than light
>2014

>>6474444
They travel the speed of light through virtually anything, therefore they would reach us before the vast majority of the other radiation. What part of that don't you understand?

>>6474449
Neutrinos don't travel at the speed of light. They have mass.

>>6474444
they do arrive first, because they come from the core through the outer layers of the star with almost no impediment. The rest of the radiation from the core shockwave has to blast through the matter of the outer star before reaching the surface, which causes up to minutes of delay.

>>6474474
except that neutrinos have been demonstrated to travel at the speed of light countless times, most recently in 2012

http://press.web.cern.ch/press-releases/2011/09/opera-experiment-reports-anomaly-flight-time-neutrinos-cern-gran-sasso

>>6474484
No. They have very little mass so at the energies of CNGS they travel at very, very close to the speed of light It is however less than the speed of light.

>>6474449
>neutrinos travel the speed of light
>therefore they would reach us through the vacuum of space before any other radiation

newsflash. radiative energy IS light, dipshit.

>>6474491
>most of a supernova's radiation comes from the outside of the star, not the core

Newsflash: there's a lot of shit for that radiation to pass through first, dipshit.

>>6474504
but there is radiation leaving the surface too

are you saying that the surface of the star would be completely unchanged and continue emitting radiation at its normal rate even though the core has gone supernova?

(I wouldn't be too surprised if that is actually the case)

>>6474514
It's a "core collapse" for a reason. A star is a giant nuclear furnace triggered by its own crushing gravity at its centre, which radiates energy out into the rest of its non-reacting mass, which glows, causing the radiation we can see and detect.

Supernova occur when the star runs out of fusion fuel and the rest of the star collapses in on itself without the outward pressure of the core reaction. So, before the core radiation of the supernova reaches us, the star would actually appear to dim briefly.

>>6474491
It takes that light on the scale of a thousand years to travel from the core to the surface for a standard star. It is accelerated in a supernova event to minutes, but this is a result of the shockwave shedding mass and not a result of the radiation itself.

>>6474524
>So, before the core radiation of the supernova reaches us, the star would actually appear to dim briefly.
I don't think so no. As soon as core collapse occurs the energy production in the star skyrockets as energy is liberated from the potential field.

>>6474547
I don't care how stupid or uninformed you are, friend. Maybe you should read a book once in a while :^)

>>6474576
Nice counter argument.