[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 33 KB, 500x384, 10003984762.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483109 No.3483109 [Reply] [Original]

can we have a Carl Sagan thread?

>> No.3483115

Fuck this gay Earth

>> No.3483123

No, I hate pop-scientists. Always ruining science by making it easier to understand retards, ruining whatever credibility or potential credibility people that actually understand the non-layman shit would have.

>> No.3483137

>>3483123

Michio Kaku is pretty cool and informative.

>> No.3483135
File: 64 KB, 646x536, carl_sagan.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483135

>>3483123
I detect a butthurt fag

>> No.3483141

>>3483137

No!

That chink bastard said humans don't evolve anymore. I stopped listening to anything he had to say after that.

>> No.3483152
File: 23 KB, 250x250, michio_kaku.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483152

>>3483141

u mad?

>> No.3483158

>>3483141
I think he's cool because he's interested in technology and the future.

I think he's a bit of a div though because he keeps dropping shit into the conversation like how he built a particle accelerator as a kid.

>> No.3483164

>>3483135
Trust me, science would be pretty much shit if all the people majoring it in college were some Caucasian blonde with big tits, or the head of the football team, etc. And would be much shit if these plebs actually got a degree and started working as scientists, the whole entire field will go down in about a year. Retards just ruin science, so there's no point in threatening such with pop-science.

>> No.3483176

>>3483164
lol sure is elitist in here

>> No.3483178

>>3483164
>>3483123

science hipsters detected

>> No.3483179

>>3483158
>he built a particle accelerator as a kid

Hasn't everyone?

>> No.3483182
File: 221 KB, 692x552, 1307289304064.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483182

>>3483164
it's important to make pleb understand science you quadruple nigger
because of your kind we now have people asking how can sun burn in vacuum

>> No.3483192

>>3483164
true but the type of people your talking about would even bother to watch a pop sci documentary, they are fucking idiots remember, pop sci is more directed to those who are either to young to understand the complex shit or only have a slight interest in science and would not consider going into a career in science

>> No.3483244

>>3483192
It's not important to try convert ignorant people
It should be a priority to prevent MORE preople from becoming ignorant.

what's the MAIN point of all religions ever?
Easy: people are lost. Not knowing something is sometimes terrifying. They invented gods and mighty forest spirits to create an ilusion of securtiy. Same shit as governments. Most people don't like to decide things. They want someone to guide them. To protect them. To give them ilusion of security. ALL HAIL TO OUR KING! Because he'll protect and rule our lands with his wisdom. Religion has same basics. To be part of something. To be sure there is something that protects you and guides you. Science could give people REAL meaning. To be united as humanity where every single man matters for the final success. But instead of that science has drifted away from people and is acting like independent entity telling everyone to fuck off because it's "too deep for them and they would start shit with God and stuff anyway."

Sagan wasn't a top-notch scientist but he was a man who tried to bridge science and everydays world. We need people like him

>> No.3483261

>>3483244
>Implying it's science's fault if people want to be delusional nuts

>> No.3483269

>>3483261
they were like that long before science emerged

>> No.3483273

>>3483244
what i never said anything about converting ignorant people maybe i wasn't clear with what i said , but you are completely right that science should be a bigger part of everyday life

>> No.3483275

>>3483182
Actually, I never though of that. How can sun burn in vacuum?

>> No.3483276

>>3483164
Guess who provides funding for science? I'll give you a clue. It's not people who know anything about science.

>> No.3483283

>>3483275
>sun
>burning
:DDDDDD

>> No.3483285

>>3483283
It's a giant ball of fire...

>> No.3483284

>>3483269
they *were* like that. far far less of them are like that now, including you and me...but for the grace of Carl Sagan and his kin, we would be arguing for the proposition that the sun does indeed revolve around the earth, etc..

>> No.3483292

>>3483285
>>3483275
please be a troll the sun is powered by nuclear fusion meaning that the hydrogen atoms in it are bumping into each other with so much energy the combine to make helium

>> No.3483297

>>3483275

Because it's not burning it's REACTING

>> No.3483298

>>3483292
Yes, I know that, but how is there a spark to set the helium on fire without oxygen? Actually, how can you set HELIUM, a noble gas, on fire?

>> No.3483301

>>3483285
Are you kidding? The sun is a giant ball of plasma, fueled by hydrogen and helium, powered by the immense gravity of it's central core

oh, never mind.

>> No.3483304

>>3483285
Nope.

The sun is a mass of incandescent gas.
Fire is rapid oxidation.

>> No.3483307

>>3483297
>>3483301
Yes, yes, blahblahblah, I know that. But how did the first spark appear to set it all on fire? And how can HELIUM, inert, burn?

>> No.3483312

>>3483304
I don't get it

>> No.3483313

>>3483307
It's not burning. it's being crushed together.

And why was it crushed together in the very forst incidence? I don't know I think it has something to do with gravity and particles naturally coalescing. Someone else explain.

>> No.3483316

>>3483312
What don't you get? The definition of "gas", or the definition of "oxidation"?

>> No.3483318

>>3483313
But there's fire on it, it's buring. I can go outside right now and see the flames with a telescope.

>> No.3483317

>>3483301
plasma is not "on fire." It is particles in a high state of excitation (energy) throwing off photons all caused by gravity etc...

are you srs?

>> No.3483320

>>3483298
fairly confident that you are a troll but it is not on fire as i said it is nuclear fusion look it up no spark no fire just two atoms combining to make one

>>3483261
yes but as a voice of reason in a world of idiots is it not a scientists job to at least attempt to reach out to them

>> No.3483321

>>3483318
dohohoho
no you can't
it's plasma

>> No.3483322

>>3483318
It's not burning!!! It' just looks bright and feels hot. I can see where this might be similar to fire

>> No.3483324

>>3483316
What's incandsecent?

>>3483317
What? State as in ice/water/gas? I thought plasma was blood.

>> No.3483328
File: 70 KB, 1256x1075, 1301039606943.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483328

>>3483318
Well let's take it from this end
If you don'tbelieve that Sun isn't burning then why do you believe there is vacuum around it?

there are people who can explain whole process in detail if you're willing to listen, but I know you're troll because I was in the ice comet thread.

give it up dude

>> No.3483329

>>3483320
Yes and then those atoms that combined are set on fire too, but how did the first bit of fire appear?

>>3483321
I can. I'll even go get you a picture off the Internet.

>>3483322
>bright
>hot
>not fire
?

>> No.3483334

>>3483292
>>3483297
>>3483301
>>3483304
>>3483313
>>3483316
>>3483317
>>3483320
>>3483321
>>3483322
PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF JESUS JUST STOP REPLYING TO HIM CLEARLY A TROLL SO JUST STOP

>> No.3483331

>>3483324
>What's incandsecent?


it means I produces a lot of light as a result of being very veyr hot.

>What's incandsecent?


Please use your dictionary to look up the word plasma. words can have more than one meaning. ionised gas and blood

>> No.3483335
File: 57 KB, 870x576, trolltea.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483335

>>3483304
Guys, don't answer to teacup, he's a troll.
Also, the sun isn't a mass of incandescent gas, forget that song, they've got it wrong. Their thesis has been rendered invalid. It's obviously a miasma of incandescent plasma.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLkGSV9WDMA

>> No.3483336

>>3483329
Yes things can be bright and hot without being fire.

>> No.3483337

>>3483328
If you were in the ice meteor thread, you'll know that I believe in vacuum. It is a FACT that the meteors are close to 0K though, because they are in VACUUM.

>>3483331
Then how is it not fire?
Isn't plasma just gas then?

>> No.3483338

>>3483335
Plasma is gas and I'm not sure what you mean by miasma. it's not wrong to say the sun has mass. So the original lyrics are not wrong.

>> No.3483342

>>3483318
OK, I'll assume you really want to know so here's the basic jr high explanation.

There was this random cloud of hydrogen particles (a gas cloud) floating around and something perterbed it - passing planet, galaxy, whatever) and it started falling in on itslef. This is a very large cloud of gas, remember. As it falls in the gravitational attraction increases, molecules accelerate until they collide and form a ball and molecules continue to pile in and on and the gravity increases and the weight becomes so great that there is a fusion reaction (molecules have been crushed so hard that individual atoms pop loose) and collide with other atoms and they join, causing fusion, and BIG FUCKING ENERGY packets are released). You call it "fire." It's not, it is a sustained release of all kinds of electromagnetic radiation from magnetic to radio to photons to infrared (heat) all in high energy states called a plasma. Visible light is a side effect.

that's the simple version. You clear yet?

>> No.3483343

>>3483335
NOT THE ORIGINAL, ORIGINAL IS THIS
You people just can't accept the truth, can you? But if my name was Carl Sagean, you'd be all over my damn theory.

>>3483336
No they can't.

>> No.3483351
File: 47 KB, 870x576, science2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483351

>>3483343

>> No.3483352

>>3483343
>No they can't.

my light bulb is hot and bright but isn't fire.

>> No.3483353

>>3483337
not every meteor is the same temperature and all of them will heat up in atmospheric entry.

your whole point was invalid becasue one kg of pure ice is heaten to 10,000 degrees when falling into atmosphere. 0K is just -273.5 degrees. So it will heat up to more than 9500 degrees
It would not freeze the water upon impact because of that and the kinetic energy.

>> No.3483354
File: 49 KB, 450x321, fagur.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483354

>>3483343

Stove tops.

Me: 1
You: 0

>> No.3483357

Teacup is an Master Troll

>> No.3483359

>>3483342
>falling in on itself
Stopped reading there, -1/10

>>3483352
It is on a sub-atomic level.

>> No.3483362

>>3483359
>Gravity
>Stopped brain activity there

Fix'd

>> No.3483363
File: 30 KB, 349x349, 1297951450417.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483363

>>3483338
>Plasma is gas

look it up or get out

>> No.3483364

>>3483353
Blahblahblah, I don't even know what you're saying. You're just using funny words to confuse me.

>>3483354
Sub-atomic fire.

>>3483357
I'm not a troll.

>> No.3483365

>>3483363
>Plasma - ionised gas
>ionised gas
>ionised
>gas
>gas
>gas
>gas

>> No.3483367

>>3483364

>Sub-atomic fire

No such thing. Link or bullshit

>> No.3483368

>>3483364
Fire requires oxygen to sustain itself. Nuclear fusion does not.

Excellent troll, 10/10

>> No.3483369
File: 22 KB, 870x576, science1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3483369

>>3483362
OH, YOU MEANT GRAVITY. Sorry. But gravity goes everywhere, so it's irrelevant. Pic related.

>> No.3483370

>>3483364
>You're just using funny words to confuse me.
using shit like
>Sub-atomic fire.

who is using funny words again?

>> No.3483372

>>3483367
When the electrons inside the atoms bond with each other and release each other there's fire. Sub-atomic fire. Basic physics.

>>3483368
>Fire requires oxygen to sustain itself.
EXACTLY, then how can the Sun burn in the vacuum?

>> No.3483373

>>3483365
>Ice
>frozen liquid
>frozen
>liquid
>liquid
>liquid

yes you sound like this

>> No.3483374

>>3483338
Plasma is the fourth state of matter, so not the same thing as gas. Although plasma is sometimes called ionized gas, so I'll admit you kind of have a point. Still, I think it's important to make the distinction to prevent morons and trolls like teacup from asking dumb questions.

Also I think the song is awesome!
And forget about the "miasma/mass" part, that one's just because miasma rhymes with plasma, really.

>> No.3483375

>>3483372
>EXACTLY, then how can the Sun burn in the vacuum?
because it's nuclear fusion which doesn't require oxygen

>> No.3483376

>>3483357
>>3483357
Yur rite.

I been p0wnd.

>> No.3483379

>>3483374
Okay but it wasn't the original lyrics of the song that created this confusion. the original description of the sun in that song isn't wrong. But the revised definition is much clearer

>> No.3483381

>>3483373
Well ice is a liquid in that sense.

>> No.3483383

>>3483370
Basic chemistry is fancy now?

>>3483374
I'm not a troll. I'm tired of this /sci/. I give and give. I share my infopics. I share my encouters with the other realm. And what do I get in return? Insults. Why? ):

>>3483375
But how did the first spark burn in space?

>> No.3483386

>>3483383
>But how did the first spark burn in space?
Well it didn't start to "burn". We'v already described how the fusion began . here: >>3483342

>> No.3483390

>>3483373
Ice isn't considered one of the primary states of matter, you idiot.

>> No.3483392

>>3483383
what "first spark'?
u are at the babble point now & you ain't giving, u taking

as the captcha say: night servees, I outta here

>> No.3483396

>>3483383
>I'm not a troll. I'm tired of this /sci/. I give and give. I share my infopics. I share my encouters with the other realm. And what do I get in return? Insults. Why? ):

You know what, Teacup? You're absolutely right. We don't deserve you. You should just leave us alone, so we may die stupid.

Also, can you draw a picture illustrating the concept of subatomic fire so I may draw a trollface on it and post it whenever I see you online?

Also, Carl Sagan is awesome. Discuss!

>> No.3483397

>>3483386
Yes, the packets were released, but how did they get set on fire?

>>3483392
?

>> No.3483404

>>3483390
It's solid
it's not liquid anymore
plasma is not gas anymore too

>> No.3483406

>>3483396
Some people on /sci/ make it worth it. I'm here for those.

I'd be more than happy to draw you a infopic about sub-atomic fire, but only after I finish the one about black holes that I was requested.

>> No.3483446

>>3483397
by definition plasma emits a (mostly) full-spectrum electromagnetic radiation

fire emits photons and infrared only

big difference

so "sparks" in your understanding here means fusion - the joining together of individual atoms that are normally kept apart by the strong forces are overwhelmed by the (formerly weak) force of gravity due to proximity (crushing of the electron shells) and energy is released as electrons are stripped off the previously separate atoms - energy leaves the fused pair in a multitude of excited states in various wavelengths called electromagnetism, as per above

>> No.3483474

>>3483406
>infopic about black holes that I was requested

Oh, this is going to be rich.

>> No.3483494

>>3483474
I'll post it when it's done. It probably won't have as many pics though.

>> No.3483689

>>3483494
So I see you wandered off.

But did you understand how fire differs from a plasma, or are you still in a state of confusion?

It is rude to start a quarrel and then run and hide before the climax., so fess up, fusion or campfires in the sky?