Dude, I just don't care.

i guess it was a malformed question, people talk about stars disappearing behind black holes and astral bodies all the time, but you never hear "a small smattering of light from X star" was discovered for a fraction of a second, you'd think if this was a fairly common occurrence (which it would have to be if dispersion was the only thing interfering), it would be quite notable for mapping the universe.



have we conclusively proved the universe can expand faster than light? i was under the impression krauss was still arguing with...well, everyone about this.

See - I knew your were a tard, I copied that formula from google

I bet you're misreading the \ symbol as / symbol - don't know the difference and trying to blame me for your incorrectness.

It's like you've only read one book ever and think that that book is the only way to write something.



Deflection works , i totally believe you.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Mar 11 2016 04:08pm

oops yeah i guess i did mis-read the symbol, my mistake.

card_sultan, can you address the following:

the first statement , since you quoted the formula for determining the surface area of the sun , I assumed you were using its size to determine light intensity on Earth/Mars

I didn't use the size of the sun but its heat (as in avg midday equator temperature) as I'm pretty sure the Sun would be its only source of heat, I don't think Mars has much of any molten core or even much of an atmosphere to retain heat, so if you're considering the quality or intensity of light, heat is a fairly accurate way to correlate the two, size and distance away are another way - neither is wrong - their is more than one way to skin a cat.

Then what's with your post lol

No, πr2 literally means π*r*2 how can you even argue otherwise when you learn this notation of multiplication in like 6th grade

but you used an average temp from one object and an extremal for the other. Does that sound like a reasonable way to compare things to you?

yes but the Earth does. Does that sound like a reasonable way to compare things to you?

Furthermore you set up a porportion between temperatures in Farenheit. Consider the following senerio: Joe and Bob are going to see how can throw a ball the furthest. They go to a field where distances have numeric labels. The starting point is labeled -50. The middle of the field is labeled 0, and the far side is labeled 50. Joe throws his ball and it lands on the 1 marker (he threw it 51 units). Bob throws his ball and it lands on the 50 mark (he threw it 100 units). According to the logic you used with temperature, Bob threw his ball 50/1 = 50 times further. Before you complain, this is exactly how the Farenheit temperature scale is set up (with 0 being soewhere in the middle of the scale instead of at one end) which is why you shouldn't use it for this kind of arguement. Does that sound like a reasonable way to compare things to you?

π*r*2 means nothing, idk what that even is? πr2 is just a way to type pi r squared, try googling it before you make stupid assumptions.



I only used avg equator temperature at noon - you're the one who is think that's a representation of Avg temperature of the entire planet and trying to conflated your failed assumption of what I was talking about. Like your comment about the weather and that making it too complicated to figure it all out - thats why im using just the equator temperature at noon.

Pretty unreasonable assumption by yourself, do you have any other kind? Average equator temperature on earth compare to the same stat on mars would be a fairly decent way to figure out Light variance between the two.

I dont think it would work on Venus because the atmosphere there is so think - probably the same on Saturn.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Mar 11 2016 07:35pm