Astronomy & Space - July 2006

WHEN IS THE NEXT FULLMOON THAT FALLS ON THE DATE JUNE 11

2006-07-10 18:20:27 · 4 answers · asked by JOE D 1

I just read an article in Scientific American about how a piece of a Blue White Dwarfs mass the size of a golf ball would have the density equaling 1,640 or more tons. Then they went on to say that this matter is not a solid or a liquid but in fact a gas. Then it went on to state that a Neutron Star is even millions of more times denser. My question is how would a solid of a much lesser density interact with this much heavier gas? Would a lesser solid be able to pass through it? Could a liquid pass through this gas? This throws way off my layman’s understanding of Physics. Help from you experts please. I do not major in this so try to keep it somewhat simple. Thank you

2006-07-10 17:57:09 · 3 answers · asked by Shellback 6

2006-07-10 17:56:42 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-07-10 17:52:39 · 6 answers · asked by Edward C 1

Hi yall (yup, he's from Texas).
(I thought of this when I was a freshman waking up in a graduate Astrophysics class at UT. But even the professor was having troubles.)

Stars have 3 ways to die. (Look it up.)

If all matter in the universe dispersed and bg radiation cooled except 2 atoms that re-combine in the 'center' (I know, no center in a raisin loaf or balloon surface), they constitute the core.

If all matter re-combines except 2 atoms that break free, they constitute the planatery nebula. So would it be safe to say, instead of the big crunch or big bang the uni will end as a "plantary" nebula death? part core, part nebula?

Just a thought while I eat my snickers bar... ;)

Can't wait to hear what Karman V has to say... he he.

2006-07-10 17:47:42 · 5 answers · asked by jimmybrucehiggins 2

im wondering why the ocean explorers like ferdenand magellan did not happen to cross to outer part of the earth (if really earth is floating in the outer space) but instead go rounding around earth (thats why i wonder is there a wall like eggshell covering the earth)

2006-07-10 17:46:31 · 7 answers · asked by reandel 1

This is something interesting I saw on the history channel. It's about UFO's, but at and under sea. There were reported sightings from multiple countries during exercises after WWII - especially surrounding the FDR (first carrier to have nukes on board).

Leave the comedy at the door - not interested in smart *** comments. Another BAD answer is "Well, it's secret because governments are afraid of chaos among societies if evidence of UFO or USO sightings surfaced and were confirmed"... too easy... try again.

2006-07-10 17:46:17 · 4 answers · asked by Genie 3

Is it an Apocolyptic sign? (kidding)

2006-07-10 16:36:18 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Some said there is no difference during day or night, but some others said during night the earth' Magnetosphere is taller. Does that appear more protection during the night?

Some said lead is not effective to shield cosmic radiation, use plastic (polythene?) instead. Any specific brand that is economical and trustworthy?

Some said radiation during flights is minimal, not to worry, but data showed the dosage is over 100 times stronger than on the ground. If I have to eat 100 times more food during a meal I'd suffer, why wouldn't the same health effect occur here? If you try to have a whole year's sun light on your skin during one day, see what happens. So I don't buy the yearly dosage theory.

2006-07-10 16:19:45 · 6 answers · asked by mind_river 1

2006-07-10 16:01:42 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

then can the space shuttle guys use the same deal to horn in on us here on earth? It seems like we don't walk on the surface of
Earth, but it seems like they walk on the surface of the moon?

2006-07-10 15:41:50 · 10 answers · asked by mailmetlc 3

How long will it take to grow enough earwax to amke a moderate size planet where i can spawn wax people and take over the moon which is a secret death star?

2006-07-10 15:31:44 · 5 answers · asked by xirekaj 3

If they were on the side you are looking at?

2006-07-10 15:31:07 · 7 answers · asked by mailmetlc 3

2006-07-10 15:18:52 · 9 answers · asked by ariskus0805 1

(Something fairly easy to understand)

2006-07-10 15:13:18 · 5 answers · asked by beutifulx2 1

2006-07-10 14:41:44 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

could a telescope around $200 even see any planets??

2006-07-10 14:37:00 · 5 answers · asked by *hi* 4

2006-07-10 14:36:51 · 6 answers · asked by MoriaDU 1

I guess mine is Titan around Saturn, with an atmosphere thicker than Earth's. Also Europa!

2006-07-10 14:34:31 · 7 answers · asked by fresh2 4

2006-07-10 14:27:14 · 8 answers · asked by dkingslayer 1

yes, i know about the treaties and rules created by us about polluting any object in space. but the moon is dead, will remain dead forever. it never rotates. the dark side of the moon is good for nothing. if we are going to spend so much money on exploration of outer space without receiving benefits for us yet, why don't we benefit ourselves by putting all waste, including toxic, into deep holes on the dark side of the moon?

2006-07-10 14:06:30 · 25 answers · asked by Louiegirl_Chicago 5

2006-07-10 14:00:28 · 17 answers · asked by George K 1

2006-07-10 13:57:40 · 10 answers · asked by jasonthomas5268 1

this is a question for stephen hawking

2006-07-10 13:56:27 · 4 answers · asked by steve o 2

Is it posible that all matter caries with it time that time and matter are linked. IE> If you were on a space ship going the speed of light and came back after 20 years of trave every thing would have aged thousands of years. It would apear to me that light is not the only thing that sets its own time peramiters ,but that all mater has is own time ,and that matter caries with it is own time. And when in motion no mater how slow that motion may be you are slowing time, ( see my previous question) Would this theory validate my theory that time travel like light, outward in all directions ate the same time and when you aproach the speed of light you actually aproach the speed of time( you aproach the speed of time outside the time which is linked to the matter the ship carried which would include you) so on board 20 years passes but when you return thousands of years have passed. Does anyone buy into my theory that time travels like light? Does it seem like a plausable theory?

2006-07-10 13:48:32 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

as there is no atmosphere in space,how can the man in the moon still be alive every night?

2006-07-10 13:23:00 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

Assuming that the big bang theory is correct, then everything must have originated from one central object. Does this mean that this object was just sitting there for trillions of years before the big bang actually happened? Or is it possible that everything in the universe is not expanding from a central point, but just moving in random directions?

2006-07-10 13:20:10 · 24 answers · asked by CB 3

How long does it take to reach this speed and wouldn't the astronauts be completely immobilised with the accelaration?

2006-07-10 13:09:54 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

ok have you ever stoped to think about why we view reality the way we do scientits these days think they can explain everything but the more the more questions the raise i wnat to tell the entire scientific community not to listen to the modern theories that they believe deep down inside not to be true not only does it demean character because it closes your mind to alot of potential the way that reality should be viewed should be based of the observer the best way to learn is to discover things for your self i only wish i could get the word out to the actual scientific community

2006-07-10 13:07:16 · 7 answers · asked by collegeb16 1

Acourding to Einsteins theory of relativity, as you aproch the speed of light time slows down and when you reach the speed of light time stops. So accourding to Einsteins theory it would seem that time travels at the speed of light traveling in all directions at the same time, and when you approach the speed of light you are accualy also aproaching hte speed of time. Sort of like three cars; lets say car A is light Car B is Time and car C is a ship. Car a and b are going 60 as we reach 60 miles per hour in car c it would seem as car a and b were at a stop, in essence it would apear that time was at a stand still. Is this correct?

2006-07-10 13:02:09 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous