|
Quote: >I thought you were so smart. I would think the great Ed “The Great Ed”; has a solid, deferential quality to it; think I’ll acknowledge you as my first subject: “…bow ye, and kiss my ring”. Quote: would've figured it out on his own. your references are so oblique as to be meaningless. Say what you mean. Quote: You haven't ever tried sending solid nuclear waste to a sun I’m flattered you think I some day might.
Back to reality: and try, this time, to keep up:
1. The “Sun” is a “nuclear reactor”; tell me you knew that. You did know that: “right”?
2. All the fissionable material here on Earth, all of it, is consumed by the Sun every parsec or so.
3. Of what consequence would a Shuttlecraft load of expended nuclear fuel crashing into the sun every other microsecond be, in the context of 1 & 2? Quote: to see what the introduction of a different element would do. Again: one Shuttlecraft load of spent waste, doing something to “upset” the Sun? Quote: Yet you claim "not a problem" because it makes sense to you that it wouldn't be a problem, not that you know it actually wouldn't be a problem. Get back to me when you’ve done the calculus on The Earth itself, crashing into the Sun.
**That would be like a .22 Long Rifle Hollow point hitting an M1 Abrams main Battle tank.
***Or like an ant, crawling up an Elephant's leg, whispering in its ear: "You'll tell me if I hurt you"? Tell me what you discover:
1. does the Sun easily absorb the Earth, but maybe with a “burp” or two?
2. does the Sun “flicker” as we are absorbed, giving off maybe a “spark” or two?
3. Or does the Sun, assailed by teeny-tiny Earth-explode?
Get back to me on that. Quote: Too many actual scientists are like you and they are willing to experiement (sic) with things that can end all life. This has gone quite far enough. You insert your superstitions and personal foibles into an argument when you have no answers, as here: Quote: Then they get their fad followers in people like you to help them shout down anyone who stands up to question what would happen. That is not even a coherent question. This “fad follower” had, at the beginning of this exchange, an idea of what the conversation was about. You apparently do not know anything about the Sun or it’s relative size vis-à-vis the Earth (How many “Earths” could fit inside the Sun?).
Nor do you seem to have any grasp, not even a rudimentary hint of the possibility that NOTHING would happen even if Earth itself, carrying all its nuclear material, refined and unrefined, crashed into the Sun. Yet you persist on saying immature, religiously inspired doomsday claptrap like:
“they are willing to experiement with things that can end all life”.
Let me give a you a clue as to what will “end all life (on this Earth)”:
Time: the beginning and the end, all the moments there ever have been and ever will be, the condition upon which all other conditions depend and without which, other conditions could not be.
Got it? The fate of the Sun or the Earth is of no consequence to the “Universe” (Cosmos): read that book yet?), only to humans.
In some far distant future, the Sun will begin to die. As it goes through the process, our Sun will become a Red Giant, expanding outward as it consumes itself. Again in that future, the expanding Red Giant will spread beyond the orbits of the very innermost planets, consuming them like so much popcorn, then come after us: we are, after all, an “inner planet”.
As the Sun expands, the Earth’s surface water will boil off. Coming closer, the Sun will melt the mountains, including Everest.
After some time, the Earth will be entirely molten again, before the Sun, vaporizing the very rocks themselves, blows us, like so much hot gasses and cosmic dust, back out into the Universe.
Soon enough, the dying Sun will reach out beyond the furthest orbit of the furthest planet and that will end our “Solar system” as we know it.
Got that? Time, like “Old Man River”, just …”keeps on rolling along”-damn what you or me think.
|
, etc.
