/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15822400]

How did they discover what the core of other planets is made of? Is this knowledge accurate?

[Anonymous No.15822402]

>>15822400
Mostly just by assumptions based on looking at the clouds forming other galaxies.

[Anonymous No.15822455]

>>15822400
>How did they discover what the core of other planets is made of?
They didn't, they know that they can make up whatever lies they want because the subject matter is inaccessible
Is this knowledge accurate?
No

[Anonymous No.15822485]

>>15822400
They know the size of the planet.
They know the gravity of a planet.
They use those numbers to determine how much dense material is needed inside the planet for it's volume and gravity.
Denser material falls into the center so you know the approximate size of the layers.
They know how how much force each layer is under and already know what happens to materials under those forces, like if it's magma or not.

[Anonymous No.15822489]

>>15822485
They also know the size and strength of magnetic fields so they know even more about the material inside the core needed to generate it.

[Anonymous No.15822549]

>>15822400
Astrophysics is not a real field. If you cannot perform experiments to test your hypotheses, it's not a science. Astrophysics might as well be a Fine Arts program.

[Anonymous No.15822799]

its just an assumption based on the earth core model

[Anonymous No.15822814]

>>15822400
given their densities and the most common elements in the universe you can get a pretty good idea of what they're made of.

[Anonymous No.15822840]

>>15822799
the geotard's model of whats inside the earth turns out to be wrong every time a new deep borehole is drilled. they can't even accurately predict whats 10 miles down, there is no way that they understand whats in the core of our planet.

[Anonymous No.15822885]

How do we know what the EARTH's core looks like?
Did we build a big-ass drill ship and go down there to see it?

[Anonymous No.15822893]

>>15822885
Ever heard of seismic waves?

[Anonymous No.15822919]

>>15822893
everything thats """"learned"""" from muh seismic waves is disproved when better observations from deep boreholes become available. seismic waves are worthless garbage

[Anonymous No.15822952]

>>15822400
they cut them up and had a peek inside

[Anonymous No.15823071]

>>15822885
>>15822814
No. We havent. It's all conjectures.
It's soience all the way up and down.

[Anonymous No.15823082]

>>15822549
>>15822455
>if I don't understand it it's made up bullshit
Schizos need to be turned in to fertilizer.

[Anonymous No.15823132]

>>15823082
>can't look inside planet
>make an untestable hypothesis based on a bunch of far-away exterior properties
>...s-schizo!

[Anonymous No.15823566]

>>15822400
We have a decent idea of how long it took the rocky planets to cool. Mars we put a goddamn seismograph on. Mercury I think we looked at the tilt. Venus we have noticed some really fucking weird stuff about its lack of plate tectonics. I think heat flow was measured too(how fast it is cooling). Geologists still want a seismograph on Venus. Jupiter we got some ideas of what's going on below with Juno. For the gas planets things get fun. We know their composition which allows us to make a good guess at structure if we know the phase diagram. This is fun and involves recreating the conditions inside. We can't always contain them, so this is done with bombs.

[Anonymous No.15823645]

>>15823566
>We can't always contain them, so this is done with bombs.
Could you expand on that?

[Anonymous No.15823646]

>>15823082
>muh out of control emotional violent revenge fantasies
>oh no someone has different opinions from me, that means they should be murdered
you are emotionally immature, grow up

[Anonymous No.15823693]

>>15822799
this, they don't even "know" what the Earths core is, they just hypothesize based on Earths gravitational force in relation to the gravitational force of other smaller objects

[Anonymous No.15823758]

>>15823082
go ahead and explain it then because obviously you understand it right?

[Anonymous No.15823763]

>>15823693
It's not even that, it's based on the passage of waves through the inner earth.

[Anonymous No.15823795]

>>15822549
>If you cannot perform experiments to test your hypotheses, it's not a science.
This. They deflect criticism by constantly attacking astrology, as if astrology were still being taught in every college. They, meanwhile, are astrology 2.0.

[Anonymous No.15823825]

The "science" of astronomy.