Transient Events in the Plasma Universe | |
BROKEN User ID: 893303 United States 07/14/2010 08:22 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward (OP) User ID: 865798 United States 07/14/2010 08:23 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Enlilson User ID: 1034759 United States 07/14/2010 08:34 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | bump.. Quoting: SickscentThanks Broken...there is some very cool information in this small excerpt... I wonder if gegenschein will b the sign that LaViolette's Prediction No. 10 is happenin Thread: A strange coincidence....(26000 years) Super wave theory and all Dr LaViolette predictions that have been verified is this the warning we need !! IMHO while small in package density is not a issue in the OP It doesn't matter who I m it's who U R so ChoOse |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1036297 India 07/14/2010 04:48 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | bump.. Quoting: EnlilsonThanks Broken...there is some very cool information in this small excerpt... I wonder if gegenschein will b the sign that LaViolette's Prediction No. 10 is happenin Thread: A strange coincidence....(26000 years) Super wave theory and all Dr LaViolette predictions that have been verified is this the warning we need !! IMHO while small in package density is not a issue in the OP I think LaViolette's track record will show highly accurate...with just a few minor adjustments... |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1036308 United States 07/14/2010 04:53 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
aether User ID: 1028612 United Kingdom 07/14/2010 05:04 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem stems from the fact that Newton, Brahe, Kepler, Galilei and Copernicus were all men steeped in religious dogma and at the same time mathematicians who believed in the perfect symmetry of numbers. They all believed in a perfect universe created by God and that maths could define this perfect world. In the case of Kepler he believed that his elipse had to be perfect elipses and Brahe's tables allowed him to realise his dream. Newton believed that all motion in the universe was created by God and that He came back occasionally to keep things in the universe in motion. In this way motion became a historical force that required no explanation. In the 18th century the rationalist Laplace merely replaced Newton's God with the swirling Accretion Disc with no explanation how this chimera actually gained its momentum. All motion in the universe ( at the macro and micro level) has been reduced to an Inherent Property which NO ONE questions especially if you want to get a degree in Physics. Quoting: HistoryThe story goes like this. Robert Hooke, Christopher Wren and Edmund Halley who were all members of the Royal Society in London were discussing the work of Kepler and were wondering if the inverse square component encoded in Kepler's Law could be linked to Galilei's discovery that all thing fall also by the inverse square law. Hooke who believed they may be connected proposed they offer a financial reward for anyone who could link the two. Halley, who was a life long friend of Newton made him aware of the challenge when he visited Newton in Cambridge. Newton said he could link the two but took 10 years to release his now famous equation for G. Newton assumed from Kepler's law that the Moon was falling towards the Earth but missing but in order to prove this mathematically he had to show what the Moon was doing before it fell. He assumed that it was travelling in a STRAIGHT LINE (the basis of his first and second laws). As NOTHING in the three dimensional universe travels in a straight line his assumption was wrong. He also assumed that the Earth and the Moon were made of the same uniform particle which enabled him to calculate the orbit of the Moon. The only problem was that his calculations didn't work in the real world. The Moon had too much mass to be in the orbit in occupied. This led Newton to proposes that the back of the Moon was concave or that the craters on the moon were holes into giant caves (this is where the old tale of the Moon being made of Swiss Cheese came from). Newton pestered Halley for his whole life to get better observation of the Moon's orbit to bring it into line with his calculations, but he never could. His perfect equation was wrong it didn't match reality and nor did his first and second law. When it was subsequently used to predict the motion of the Earth and the other planets it was wildly out of sync. By this time Newton had spent 30 years as the head of the Royal Society after Hooke had died. He was also Master of the Mint one of the most powerful positions in England. He literally held the power of life and death in his hands. And as a consequence his detractors were effectively silenced. Newton was a nasty piece of work and his presence as the head of the Royal Society ensured his laws were accepted without question. By the 18th century it was realised that none of the planet's orbits would conform to Newton's celestial mechanics which was becoming an embarrassment. So the Royal Society in a classic piece of sophistry decided to change the goal posts. If Newton's volume (now called mass) equation couldn't predict the orbit of planets then obviously there was something wrong with the planets. We know Newton is right so we'll use the orbit of planets to predict their mass. They reversed Newton's equation to proved the unprovable. That is how comets became ice and Saturn has a mass less then water. It is also the basic underlying flaw that required the invention of Dark Matter. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1036297 India 07/14/2010 05:07 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1036297 India 07/14/2010 05:08 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem stems from the fact that Newton, Brahe, Kepler, Galilei and Copernicus were all men steeped in religious dogma and at the same time mathematicians who believed in the perfect symmetry of numbers. They all believed in a perfect universe created by God and that maths could define this perfect world. In the case of Kepler he believed that his elipse had to be perfect elipses and Brahe's tables allowed him to realise his dream. Newton believed that all motion in the universe was created by God and that He came back occasionally to keep things in the universe in motion. In this way motion became a historical force that required no explanation. In the 18th century the rationalist Laplace merely replaced Newton's God with the swirling Accretion Disc with no explanation how this chimera actually gained its momentum. All motion in the universe ( at the macro and micro level) has been reduced to an Inherent Property which NO ONE questions especially if you want to get a degree in Physics. Quoting: aether 1028612The story goes like this. Robert Hooke, Christopher Wren and Edmund Halley who were all members of the Royal Society in London were discussing the work of Kepler and were wondering if the inverse square component encoded in Kepler's Law could be linked to Galilei's discovery that all thing fall also by the inverse square law. Hooke who believed they may be connected proposed they offer a financial reward for anyone who could link the two. Halley, who was a life long friend of Newton made him aware of the challenge when he visited Newton in Cambridge. Newton said he could link the two but took 10 years to release his now famous equation for G. Newton assumed from Kepler's law that the Moon was falling towards the Earth but missing but in order to prove this mathematically he had to show what the Moon was doing before it fell. He assumed that it was travelling in a STRAIGHT LINE (the basis of his first and second laws). As NOTHING in the three dimensional universe travels in a straight line his assumption was wrong. He also assumed that the Earth and the Moon were made of the same uniform particle which enabled him to calculate the orbit of the Moon. The only problem was that his calculations didn't work in the real world. The Moon had too much mass to be in the orbit in occupied. This led Newton to proposes that the back of the Moon was concave or that the craters on the moon were holes into giant caves (this is where the old tale of the Moon being made of Swiss Cheese came from). Newton pestered Halley for his whole life to get better observation of the Moon's orbit to bring it into line with his calculations, but he never could. His perfect equation was wrong it didn't match reality and nor did his first and second law. When it was subsequently used to predict the motion of the Earth and the other planets it was wildly out of sync. By this time Newton had spent 30 years as the head of the Royal Society after Hooke had died. He was also Master of the Mint one of the most powerful positions in England. He literally held the power of life and death in his hands. And as a consequence his detractors were effectively silenced. Newton was a nasty piece of work and his presence as the head of the Royal Society ensured his laws were accepted without question. By the 18th century it was realised that none of the planet's orbits would conform to Newton's celestial mechanics which was becoming an embarrassment. So the Royal Society in a classic piece of sophistry decided to change the goal posts. If Newton's volume (now called mass) equation couldn't predict the orbit of planets then obviously there was something wrong with the planets. We know Newton is right so we'll use the orbit of planets to predict their mass. They reversed Newton's equation to proved the unprovable. That is how comets became ice and Saturn has a mass less then water. It is also the basic underlying flaw that required the invention of Dark Matter. Aether, I thought you wold pop in with something to that effect! |
Blueacres User ID: 894464 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 12:11 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | SS, you forgot swampgas! By the way, please debunk the "Jupiter is Flat" thread... "Two roads diverged in a wood and I, I took the one less traveled by." The Road Not Taken — Robert Frost, 1916 [link to www.bartleby.com] |
aether User ID: 1028612 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 11:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The problem stems from the fact that Newton, Brahe, Kepler, Galilei and Copernicus were all men steeped in religious dogma and at the same time mathematicians who believed in the perfect symmetry of numbers. They all believed in a perfect universe created by God and that maths could define this perfect world. In the case of Kepler he believed that his elipse had to be perfect elipses and Brahe's tables allowed him to realise his dream. Newton believed that all motion in the universe was created by God and that He came back occasionally to keep things in the universe in motion. In this way motion became a historical force that required no explanation. In the 18th century the rationalist Laplace merely replaced Newton's God with the swirling Accretion Disc with no explanation how this chimera actually gained its momentum. All motion in the universe ( at the macro and micro level) has been reduced to an Inherent Property which NO ONE questions especially if you want to get a degree in Physics. Quoting: HistoryThe story goes like this. Robert Hooke, Christopher Wren and Edmund Halley who were all members of the Royal Society in London were discussing the work of Kepler and were wondering if the inverse square component encoded in Kepler's Law could be linked to Galilei's discovery that all thing fall also by the inverse square law. Hooke who believed they may be connected proposed they offer a financial reward for anyone who could link the two. Halley, who was a life long friend of Newton made him aware of the challenge when he visited Newton in Cambridge. Newton said he could link the two but took 10 years to release his now famous equation for G. Newton assumed from Kepler's law that the Moon was falling towards the Earth but missing but in order to prove this mathematically he had to show what the Moon was doing before it fell. He assumed that it was travelling in a STRAIGHT LINE (the basis of his first and second laws). As NOTHING in the three dimensional universe travels in a straight line his assumption was wrong. He also assumed that the Earth and the Moon were made of the same uniform particle which enabled him to calculate the orbit of the Moon. The only problem was that his calculations didn't work in the real world. The Moon had too much mass to be in the orbit in occupied. This led Newton to proposes that the back of the Moon was concave or that the craters on the moon were holes into giant caves (this is where the old tale of the Moon being made of Swiss Cheese came from). Newton pestered Halley for his whole life to get better observation of the Moon's orbit to bring it into line with his calculations, but he never could. His perfect equation was wrong it didn't match reality and nor did his first and second law. When it was subsequently used to predict the motion of the Earth and the other planets it was wildly out of sync. By this time Newton had spent 30 years as the head of the Royal Society after Hooke had died. He was also Master of the Mint one of the most powerful positions in England. He literally held the power of life and death in his hands. And as a consequence his detractors were effectively silenced. Newton was a nasty piece of work and his presence as the head of the Royal Society ensured his laws were accepted without question. By the 18th century it was realised that none of the planet's orbits would conform to Newton's celestial mechanics which was becoming an embarrassment. So the Royal Society in a classic piece of sophistry decided to change the goal posts. If Newton's volume (now called mass) equation couldn't predict the orbit of planets then obviously there was something wrong with the planets. We know Newton is right so we'll use the orbit of planets to predict their mass. They reversed Newton's equation to proved the unprovable. That is how comets became ice and Saturn has a mass less then water. It is also the basic underlying flaw that required the invention of Dark Matter. Concerning cosmological evolution, the Church has infallibly defined that the universe was specially created out of nothing [link to www.catholic.com] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037271 United States 07/15/2010 04:35 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 916957 Netherlands 07/15/2010 04:41 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037274 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 04:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037274 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 04:47 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm not very educated on this matter, so bear with me... If space is not empty, why is there no sound in space? Plasma is made up out of molecules right? So shouldn't soundwaves be able to travel in space? Quoting: Indy2517Much distance between molecules in space, so, no sound waves. Still a plasma, though. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1028612 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 04:55 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Sound can travel through space, because space is not the total vacuum it's often made out to be. Atoms of gas give the universe a ubiquitous atmosphere of sorts, albeit a very thin one. Sound, unlike light, travels by compressing a medium. On Earth, the atmosphere works well as a sound-carrying medium, as does water. The planet itself is very adept at transmitting an earthquake's seismic waves, a form of sound. Space, though not as efficient, can also serve as a medium. If a brave and clever astronaut could safely remove her helmet and shout into the cosmos, her voice would carry. "We wouldn't be able to hear the sound because our ears aren't sensitive enough," explains Lynn Carter, a graduate student in astronomy at Cornell University. Not enough atoms -- if any -- would strike our eardrums. "Maybe if we had an amazingly large and sensitive microphone we could detect these sounds, but to our human ear it would be silent." [link to www.space.com] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 916957 Netherlands 07/15/2010 04:56 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm not very educated on this matter, so bear with me... If space is not empty, why is there no sound in space? Plasma is made up out of molecules right? So shouldn't soundwaves be able to travel in space? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1037274Much distance between molecules in space, so, no sound waves. Still a plasma, though. Ahh k, thanks. Sounds in Space: Silencing Misconceptions Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1028612Sound can travel through space, because space is not the total vacuum it's often made out to be. Atoms of gas give the universe a ubiquitous atmosphere of sorts, albeit a very thin one. Sound, unlike light, travels by compressing a medium. On Earth, the atmosphere works well as a sound-carrying medium, as does water. The planet itself is very adept at transmitting an earthquake's seismic waves, a form of sound. Space, though not as efficient, can also serve as a medium. If a brave and clever astronaut could safely remove her helmet and shout into the cosmos, her voice would carry. "We wouldn't be able to hear the sound because our ears aren't sensitive enough," explains Lynn Carter, a graduate student in astronomy at Cornell University. Not enough atoms -- if any -- would strike our eardrums. "Maybe if we had an amazingly large and sensitive microphone we could detect these sounds, but to our human ear it would be silent." [link to www.space.com] Even better, thanks Aether. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037274 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 05:03 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Sounds in Space: Silencing Misconceptions Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1028612Sound can travel through space, because space is not the total vacuum it's often made out to be. Atoms of gas give the universe a ubiquitous atmosphere of sorts, albeit a very thin one. Sound, unlike light, travels by compressing a medium. On Earth, the atmosphere works well as a sound-carrying medium, as does water. The planet itself is very adept at transmitting an earthquake's seismic waves, a form of sound. Space, though not as efficient, can also serve as a medium. If a brave and clever astronaut could safely remove her helmet and shout into the cosmos, her voice would carry. "We wouldn't be able to hear the sound because our ears aren't sensitive enough," explains Lynn Carter, a graduate student in astronomy at Cornell University. Not enough atoms -- if any -- would strike our eardrums. "Maybe if we had an amazingly large and sensitive microphone we could detect these sounds, but to our human ear it would be silent." [link to www.space.com] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 739058 United States 07/15/2010 05:06 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I'm not very educated on this matter, so bear with me... If space is not empty, why is there no sound in space? Plasma is made up out of molecules right? So shouldn't soundwaves be able to travel in space? Quoting: Indy2517The Sounds Of Space In the late 1970s, NASA launched two small spacecraft, Voyager I and Voyager II, and sent them through our solar system, past the planets, and then far out into interstellar space. Voyager 1, now the most distant human-made object in the universe, and Voyager 2, close on its heels, continue their ground-breaking journey, studying the region in space where the Sun's influence ends and the dark recesses of interstellar space begin. The entire Voyager program is considered by many to be the most productive, and certainly the most cost-effective, space program ever. Outer space is filled with all sorts of electronic waves. The two Voyager spacecraft detect these electronic signals and then, with radio transmitters as powerful as a small lightbulb, transmit the signals back to earth, where they are converted to audible sounds. Yes, I know: electronic waves and energy are not "sound." These sounds were derived and created from the transmitted signals by converting the electronic waves to audible frequency. The resulting sounds are fascinating and haunting. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037274 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 05:09 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037271 United States 07/15/2010 05:29 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037274 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 05:31 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Transmission of sound requires a medium millions and billions of times denser than that in space. Quoting: Sickscentfor human hearing maybe...vibrations and frequency = sound... Well, "sound" IS about human hearing, isn't it? The point is that anyone who maintains that sound waves (from about 200 Hz to 35,000 Hz) can be transmitted in space, is pulling your plonker! |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 916957 Netherlands 07/15/2010 05:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The Sounds Of Space Quoting: Anonymous Coward 739058In the late 1970s, NASA launched two small spacecraft, Voyager I and Voyager II, and sent them through our solar system, past the planets, and then far out into interstellar space. Voyager 1, now the most distant human-made object in the universe, and Voyager 2, close on its heels, continue their ground-breaking journey, studying the region in space where the Sun's influence ends and the dark recesses of interstellar space begin. The entire Voyager program is considered by many to be the most productive, and certainly the most cost-effective, space program ever. Outer space is filled with all sorts of electronic waves. The two Voyager spacecraft detect these electronic signals and then, with radio transmitters as powerful as a small lightbulb, transmit the signals back to earth, where they are converted to audible sounds. Yes, I know: electronic waves and energy are not "sound." These sounds were derived and created from the transmitted signals by converting the electronic waves to audible frequency. The resulting sounds are fascinating and haunting. [link to www.youtube.com] Great vid...liked Earth's Song best...could almost hear the life... Didn't mean to hijack this thread...so apologies... |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037271 United States 07/15/2010 05:40 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Transmission of sound requires a medium millions and billions of times denser than that in space. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1037274for human hearing maybe...vibrations and frequency = sound... Well, "sound" IS about human hearing, isn't it? The point is that anyone who maintains that sound waves (from about 200 Hz to 35,000 Hz) can be transmitted in space, is pulling your plonker! That is like saying light only exists when our eyeballs can discern it...not so...light exists as spectrum...as with sound |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 860304 United States 07/15/2010 05:43 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | This stuff is incompatible with Einstein's theories and is therefore summarily dismissed. Quoting: SickscentI truly, truly laughed my ass off! Yes, theories...that is the crux of humankind's joke... Glad you got a kick out of it, Sickscent. Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" and Roger Penrose's "The Road to Reality" go thru a hell of a lot of Einstein kiss-ass before they get around to their own ideas, the former being string theory, and the latter being twister theory. I couldn't believe the way Penrose seemed to go off the deep end there...) |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037274 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 05:44 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Transmission of sound requires a medium millions and billions of times denser than that in space. Quoting: Sickscentfor human hearing maybe...vibrations and frequency = sound... Well, "sound" IS about human hearing, isn't it? The point is that anyone who maintains that sound waves (from about 200 Hz to 35,000 Hz) can be transmitted in space, is pulling your plonker! That is like saying light only exists when our eyeballs can discern it...not so...light exists as spectrum...as with sound Well, let's do an experiment. The best vacuum chambers on Earth can just about approximate the vacuum of space. Let's get a volunteer to enter the chamber when fully evacuated, remove helmet, and scream as loud as possible. What do you think the result would be? |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037271 United States 07/15/2010 05:47 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | This stuff is incompatible with Einstein's theories and is therefore summarily dismissed. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 860304I truly, truly laughed my ass off! Yes, theories...that is the crux of humankind's joke... Glad you got a kick out of it, Sickscent. Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" and Roger Penrose's "The Road to Reality" go thru a hell of a lot of Einstein kiss-ass before they get around to their own ideas, the former being string theory, and the latter being twister theory. I couldn't believe the way Penrose seemed to go off the deep end there...) I've read Greene's Elegant Universe...it is funny how things mentioned in his work could be so extremely simplified if he rejected certain 'dogmas' of science...his string theory is beautiful...it is when he convolutes the entire theory with mathematical fantasies of muons and quirks, etc...It is a shame that someone with that type of vision doesn't suppose other 'theories' that make much more sense than merely the academic fallacies... |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037271 United States 07/15/2010 05:51 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Transmission of sound requires a medium millions and billions of times denser than that in space. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1037274for human hearing maybe...vibrations and frequency = sound... Well, "sound" IS about human hearing, isn't it? The point is that anyone who maintains that sound waves (from about 200 Hz to 35,000 Hz) can be transmitted in space, is pulling your plonker! That is like saying light only exists when our eyeballs can discern it...not so...light exists as spectrum...as with sound Well, let's do an experiment. The best vacuum chambers on Earth can just about approximate the vacuum of space. Let's get a volunteer to enter the chamber when fully evacuated, remove helmet, and scream as loud as possible. What do you think the result would be? OK...you sir, are an idiot...either that, or you did not read my response... If I got a dog whistle and blew it as loud as I could, would you hear it? Since you did not hear it, then you say it is not sound...? Fucking idiot...sorry, but your argument is crap... |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037274 United Kingdom 07/15/2010 05:52 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Transmission of sound requires a medium millions and billions of times denser than that in space. Quoting: Sickscentfor human hearing maybe...vibrations and frequency = sound... Well, "sound" IS about human hearing, isn't it? The point is that anyone who maintains that sound waves (from about 200 Hz to 35,000 Hz) can be transmitted in space, is pulling your plonker! That is like saying light only exists when our eyeballs can discern it...not so...light exists as spectrum...as with sound Well, let's do an experiment. The best vacuum chambers on Earth can just about approximate the vacuum of space. Let's get a volunteer to enter the chamber when fully evacuated, remove helmet, and scream as loud as possible. What do you think the result would be? OK...you sir, are an idiot...either that, or you did not read my response... If I got a dog whistle and blew it as loud as I could, would you hear it? Since you did not hear it, then you say it is not sound...? Fucking idiot...sorry, but your argument is crap... I thought you were an intelligent and rational person. I was wrong. Fuck you, and the horse you rode in on. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037271 United States 07/15/2010 05:53 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Transmission of sound requires a medium millions and billions of times denser than that in space. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1037274for human hearing maybe...vibrations and frequency = sound... Well, "sound" IS about human hearing, isn't it? The point is that anyone who maintains that sound waves (from about 200 Hz to 35,000 Hz) can be transmitted in space, is pulling your plonker! That is like saying light only exists when our eyeballs can discern it...not so...light exists as spectrum...as with sound Well, let's do an experiment. The best vacuum chambers on Earth can just about approximate the vacuum of space. Let's get a volunteer to enter the chamber when fully evacuated, remove helmet, and scream as loud as possible. What do you think the result would be? OK...you sir, are an idiot...either that, or you did not read my response... If I got a dog whistle and blew it as loud as I could, would you hear it? Since you did not hear it, then you say it is not sound...? Fucking idiot...sorry, but your argument is crap... I thought you were an intelligent and rational person. I was wrong. Fuck you, and the horse you rode in on. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1037271 United States 07/15/2010 05:57 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Transmission of sound requires a medium millions and billions of times denser than that in space. Quoting: Sickscentfor human hearing maybe...vibrations and frequency = sound... Well, "sound" IS about human hearing, isn't it? The point is that anyone who maintains that sound waves (from about 200 Hz to 35,000 Hz) can be transmitted in space, is pulling your plonker! That is like saying light only exists when our eyeballs can discern it...not so...light exists as spectrum...as with sound Well, let's do an experiment. The best vacuum chambers on Earth can just about approximate the vacuum of space. Let's get a volunteer to enter the chamber when fully evacuated, remove helmet, and scream as loud as possible. What do you think the result would be? OK...you sir, are an idiot...either that, or you did not read my response... If I got a dog whistle and blew it as loud as I could, would you hear it? Since you did not hear it, then you say it is not sound...? Fucking idiot...sorry, but your argument is crap... I thought you were an intelligent and rational person. I was wrong. Fuck you, and the horse you rode in on. That was fun! Come on! |