|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
4 gamma ray bursts so far today
|
Doominator
User ID: 162364
3/20/2008 7:40 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
 You have read Dr. Violette's book ??? |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 225509
3/20/2008 7:44 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
MAJOR EARTHQUAKE (Richter greater than 8) coming in 10 days or less.
Good call -- using the 4 GRB to predict Richter 7.2 -- but you said Richter 8? |
|
Doominator
User ID: 162364
3/20/2008 7:45 PM | |
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 384999
3/20/2008 10:00 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
I called the 7+ mag from work yesterday on thid thread.
See?
The GRB/quake thing is real. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 384999
3/20/2008 10:05 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
Page 3, second post. I posted this from work yesterday..
'Signs in the heavens and in the earth. That's what the bible says. Shouldn't this be pinned?
I'll bet we see at least a 7 mag quake in the next week. This is a strange occurrence for GRB's.
Imagine sitting in a pool and someone drops a car into the water not far from you. This is the power of the wave depending on the distance from the object. There will be some type of fallout, bank on it.'
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com] |
|
Geogal
User ID: 373387
3/20/2008 10:07 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
So, the fact that that spot in China is a volcanic area, so likely geothermal, and full of faults, has nothing to do with it? And let's just ignore plate tectonics completely. Or even the geological history of this area of China. But, they can get bigger ones there. Let's just hope the locals aren't hurt badly.
"A major earthquake, magnitude 7.2, hit Kunlun volcano region in Tibet this morning at 0633 hr local time. The epicentre was located 100 km east of Kunlun volcano, which produced China's most recent eruption in 1951. Earthquakes of this magnitude are able to disrupt nearby volcanoes. The Kunlun Fault system produced a magnitude 8.1 earthquake in November 2001.
I called the 7+ mag from work yesterday on thid thread.
See?
The GRB/quake thing is real. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 384999 |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 384999
3/20/2008 10:10 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
So, the fact that that spot in China is a volcanic area, so likely geothermal, and full of faults, has nothing to do with it? And let's just ignore plate tectonics completely. Or even the geological history of this area of China. But, they can get bigger ones there. Let's just hope the locals aren't hurt badly.
"A major earthquake, magnitude 7.2, hit Kunlun volcano region in Tibet this morning at 0633 hr local time. The epicentre was located 100 km east of Kunlun volcano, which produced China's most recent eruption in 1951. Earthquakes of this magnitude are able to disrupt nearby volcanoes. The Kunlun Fault system produced a magnitude 8.1 earthquake in November 2001.
I called the 7+ mag from work yesterday on thid thread.
See?
The GRB/quake thing is real. Quoting: Geogal 373387
I agree, but the point was that GRB's like the ones we witnessed this week create giant galactic shock waves. Some of watch these quite closely and record the the resulting seismic after effects here on earth. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 395885
3/20/2008 10:15 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
...and if correct, what's the average amount of time from visible burst to impact?
Billions of years.
That is not exactly true because the grb travels at the speed of light so when we can see it then we are getting impact.
This is the post of the month!!! LOL ... (has been submitted to Stumble!) :-) Quoting: Anonymous Coward 367753
embrace the contradiction |
|
Geogal
User ID: 373387
3/20/2008 10:25 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
Yes, and the "gravity waves", according to the theory, reach earth before the light from the GRB can be seen. So, it's more likely if a GRB or any kind of galactic explosion caused the large EQ in China, we'll see the GRB evidence in a day or 2 from now. I don't discount the theory. It's plausible, but not the light before and the gravity wave later.
The GRB/quake thing is real.
I agree, but the point was that GRB's like the ones we witnessed this week create giant galactic shock waves. Some of watch these quite closely and record the the resulting seismic after effects here on earth. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 384999 |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 384999
3/20/2008 10:30 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
It's real enough to put in da bank right now, bro. |
|
Geogal
User ID: 373387
3/21/2008 12:14 AM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
remains to be seen. I've been checking out LaViolette's theories and what others in his field think of them. Seems there's more skeptics about his ideas than believers. How he reaches across from his field into mine, I don't know. As far as I know, he's not a geologist and from bits of what I've read, he's got a few things a bit off from reality in regards to geology and geological time lines. He makes pretty sweeping statements and doesn't appear to back them up very well. An event or 2, sure. Just by statistics, that's possible. I've a lot more reading and research before I make up my mind on what I think. But, if he's a genius or crackpot, depends largely upon how his math works out and how his colleagues view him, correct?
It's real enough to put in da bank right now, bro. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 384999 |
|
meras
User ID: 396759
3/21/2008 5:09 AM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
remains to be seen. I've been checking out LaViolette's theories and what others in his field think of them. Seems there's more skeptics about his ideas than believers. How he reaches across from his field into mine, I don't know. As far as I know, he's not a geologist and from bits of what I've read, he's got a few things a bit off from reality in regards to geology and geological time lines. He makes pretty sweeping statements and doesn't appear to back them up very well. An event or 2, sure. Just by statistics, that's possible. I've a lot more reading and research before I make up my mind on what I think. But, if he's a genius or crackpot, depends largely upon how his math works out and how his colleagues view him, correct?
It's real enough to put in da bank right now, bro. Quoting: Geogal 373387
I have not yet read the above book but I will say that science is based and moves forward on observation. Now scientists like everyone else can get very comfortable with the status quo so a new idea is not well received.
The crunch is - is what he puts forward supported by repeated observation if we can get enough data on this then the answer should be either yes or no. |
|
hey
User ID: 395685
3/21/2008 6:11 AM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
Surfs up! |
|
hey
User ID: 395685
3/21/2008 6:20 AM | |
watcher
User ID: 285673
3/21/2008 6:44 AM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
there was a huge GRB three or four days before the 9.2 EQ that caused the Indonesia tsunami
"caused the Indonesia tsunami" ? Bullshit, you don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 129376
I concur, it's been thoroughly disproven that the sun causes earth changes. Just look back to the November 2007 Netherlands prediction by 'sun scientists'. |
|
hey
User ID: 395685
3/21/2008 6:51 AM | |
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 395885
3/21/2008 7:48 AM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
What are the two things on teh left of the page? Streaks of some sort. |
|
hey
User ID: 395685
3/21/2008 7:58 PM | |
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 275504
3/21/2008 11:24 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
wow
the colors in this one (on the right)
[link to www.nasa.gov]
and it looks like a + through it, too.
almost like the test pattern thing ee |
|
ambiguity unlimited
User ID: 396611
3/21/2008 11:32 PM
 | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
the gamma burst was caused by an exploding star7.5 billion light years away....it was actually visible to the naked eye for an hour on wednesday night....my question is, if light and gamma propagate at the same speed, why did the gamma burst beat the visible light by several hours?.... |
|
Doominator
User ID: 162364
3/21/2008 11:35 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
I have noticed a correlation between off-the-chart magnetometer readings and huge events, but the tsunami was possibly man-made. Hence the "dead sea" as would be expected from scalar waves. Google search "tsunami legacy a dead sea" and click on the first link and be amazed. |
|
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 275504
3/22/2008 11:33 PM | |
hey
User ID: 397821
3/22/2008 11:51 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
 |
|
MFWIC
User ID: 387868
3/23/2008 1:39 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
Wiki article About Gamma Rays and Earth Extinction:
"Research has been conducted to investigate the consequences of Earth being hit by a beam of gamma rays from a nearby (about 500 light years) gamma ray burst. This is motivated by the efforts to explain mass extinctions on Earth and estimate the probability of extraterrestrial life. A gamma ray burst at 6000 light years would result in mass extinction; a 1000 light year distant burst would be equivalent to a 100,000 megaton nuclear explosion. A burst 100 light years away would blow away the atmosphere, create tidal waves, and start to melt the surface of the earth. There is a one in a million chance that there could be a gamma ray burst as near as the earth's closest star, Alpha Centauri, in the lifetime of the earth. Such a burst, at 4.3 lightyears distant, would effectively incinerate the earth[32].
A consensus seems to have been arrived at the fact that damage by a gamma ray burst would be very limited because of its very short duration, and the fact that it would only cover half the Earth, the other half being in its shadow. A sufficiently close gamma ray burst would however, result in serious damage to the atmosphere, shutting down communications (due to electro-magnetic disturbances), perhaps instantly wiping out half the ozone layer, and causing nitrogen-oxygen recombination, thereby generating acidic nitrogen oxides. These effects could diffuse across to the other side of the Earth, severely diminish the global food supply, and result in long-term climate and atmospheric changes and a mass extinction, reducing the global population to perhaps 10% of what it can now support. However, the damage from a gamma ray burst would probably be significantly greater than a supernova at the same distance." Quoting: Anonymous Coward 390748
 You got anymore good news? |
|
Ebidah
User ID: 361183
3/23/2008 3:05 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
You have read Dr. Violette's book ???
I think you were talking to me there, as i know i said i read it, not seen anyone else on this thread who says they have so i assume you be talking me little ole me. :)
very good book too :) so if you not read it and for all those that have not yet read it.
Heres a treat for you all and its free hehehe
the full book online to read, it will load up at page 317 i think just pull it back to page one and your away.
[link to books.google.com] |
|
Ebidah
User ID: 361183
3/31/2008 12:20 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
there was a huge GRB three or four days before the 9.2 EQ that caused the Indonesia tsunami
"caused the Indonesia tsunami" ? Bullshit, you don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about.
I concur, it's been thoroughly disproven that the sun causes earth changes. Just look back to the November 2007 Netherlands prediction by 'sun scientists'. Quoting: watcher 285673
Thats the stupidest thing ive heard anyone say to date!
You will find the sun at the top of the freaking list when it comes to earth changes... The sun stresses the atmosphere which in turn stresses the crust.
Infact any stream of particals hitting the planet will go down the lines. |
|
meras
User ID: 404382
3/31/2008 12:25 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
there was a huge GRB three or four days before the 9.2 EQ that caused the Indonesia tsunami
"caused the Indonesia tsunami" ? Bullshit, you don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about.
I concur, it's been thoroughly disproven that the sun causes earth changes. Just look back to the November 2007 Netherlands prediction by 'sun scientists'.
Thats the stupidest thing ive heard anyone say to date!
You will find the sun at the top of the freaking list when it comes to earth changes... The sun stresses the atmosphere which in turn stresses the crust.
Infact any stream of particals hitting the planet will go down the lines. Quoting: Ebidah 361183
The sun also drives the water cycle so rain, flooding, fog and snow are all due to the action of the sun:- [link to en.wikipedia.org]
[link to www.godlikeproductions.com] |
|
Ebidah
User ID: 361183
3/31/2008 12:39 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
there was a huge GRB three or four days before the 9.2 EQ that caused the Indonesia tsunami
"caused the Indonesia tsunami" ? Bullshit, you don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about.
I concur, it's been thoroughly disproven that the sun causes earth changes. Just look back to the November 2007 Netherlands prediction by 'sun scientists'.
Thats the stupidest thing ive heard anyone say to date!
You will find the sun at the top of the freaking list when it comes to earth changes... The sun stresses the atmosphere which in turn stresses the crust.
Infact any stream of particals hitting the planet will go down the lines.
The sun also drives the water cycle so rain, flooding, fog and snow are all due to the action of the sun:- [ link to en.wikipedia.org]
[ link to www.godlikeproductions.com]
Yes i forgot that part too thankyou :)
cant beleive i missed that half out. |
|
hey
User ID: 414583
4/13/2008 7:31 PM | | Re: 4 gamma ray bursts so far today | Quote |
Wow, the massive burst that occurred the day this thread originated is still visible, read this:
[link to space.newscientist.com]
Why is the universe's brightest blast still blazing?
19:43 11 April 2008
NewScientist.com news service
David Shiga
The most powerful explosion ever observed may have been even more powerful than first thought. Nearly three weeks after the bright 'gamma-ray burst' occurred, it is still outshining its host galaxy, dumbfounding astronomers with its amazing longevity.
The cataclysmic event appears to have been caused by the collapse of an extremely massive star, perhaps as massive as 50 Suns, lying about 7.5 billion light years from Earth.
For a brief period on 19 March, it was easily the most distant object visible to the naked eye, lying thousands of times farther than the nearby Triangulum Galaxy, which normally holds that title. It was intrinsically 2.5 million times brighter than the next brightest explosion, a supernova that occurred in 2005.
Astronomers had hoped to image the star's host galaxy with the Hubble Space Telescope, but a Hubble image taken on 7 April revealed that the host galaxy was still hidden in the glare of the explosion that had occurred nearly three weeks earlier.
These bursts are thought to be observed when jets of matter moving at nearly the speed of light shoot out of the star in the direction of Earth. These send gamma rays our way, along with visible light produced where the jets heat up surrounding gas.
Tightly focused
Some astronomers have suggested that brighter gamma-ray bursts owe their brilliance to more tightly focused jets. These initially focus more of their energy towards Earth, but the effect rapidly wears off as the jets slow down.
As a result, brighter gamma-ray bursts are expected to fade more quickly, a trend that has been observed in previous bursts. But this gamma-ray burst is bucking the trend, casting doubt on whether this burst's unusual brilliance can be explained by especially tight jets.
On the other hand, if the burst did not have very tight jets, then its energy would have to be "really huge" to explain its brightness from such a distance, says Nial Tanvir of the University of Leicester in the UK, who is leading the Hubble observations.
"It's looking like a serious problem," he told New Scientist.
This could be a sign that – for unknown reasons – the explosion converted a much larger fraction of its energy into radiation than gamma-ray bursts normally do, Tanvir says, although he says it is too early to make firm conclusions.
Hubble will make another attempt to view the host galaxy in May. |
|
| Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
|
