Gravity is Not a Strong Enough Force to Confine the Nuclear Fusion Reactions of the Sun

a reply to: Markovian2

Yes our sun could become a black hole this is how they start as far as we know and there could be one inside now but we wouldn't call it that due to mass/energy output but once that stops it's a black hole

Our star does not have sufficient mass to become a black hole and will end her days most likely as a red giant in about 5 billion years.

The formation of a black hole is directly related to the mass of a star.

For a star to become a black hole, it needs to have a mass several times greater than that of our Sun.

The exact minimum mass required for a star to undergo black hole formation is believed to be around 20 times the mass of the Sun.

originally posted by: Hibburt
I know I read an article talking about the possibility of there being a black hole in the center too. I think in the long run we will discover many unknown forces in play.

Our sun does not have a black hole at its center. If it did the black hole would eat it up. Our sun is too small to ever be a black hole too.

originally posted by: purplemer

If you cant see the level of censorship going on around you in so many apsects including sciencne.. You are asleep.. A gerbil happy in its gerbil cage. No one is going to make you come out. If you are happy in there then you will only know gerbil life..

The level of emotion that drips in your posts about the electric universe seems to be more of a religion to those who believe it than science.

We could easily replace the electric universe as your point with your statement above but say it is about Middle Earth, Bigfoot, ghosts, etc, or anything to explain why we can't see it or have any real data.

a reply to: Xtrozero

The level of emotion that drips in your posts about the electric universe seems to be more of a religion to those who believe it than science

Guess people read what they want in something.. Not a subject that really tugs my emotional strings.. instead of making imaginary assumption. Try asking next time.

All being said.. No difference.. religion and science they are both believe systems based on ritual..Have nothing against science.. trained as an env scientists.. Difference between me and most here. I was taught the limitations of the tools being used.

Replace all you want.. you are out of remit..

a reply to: Xtrozero

We could easily replace the electric universe as your point with your statement above but say it is about Middle Earth, Bigfoot, ghosts, etc, or anything to explain why we can't see it or have any real data

Yes of course you can replace a subject with another. Its very easy to do if you dont have an understanding of what you are talking about..

Note how I did bring some glaring issues up on the subject.. Note how mr Physics by passed them..

Sun tornados should not form on a gasous plasma body.. yet they do Why in solar maximum, are coronal holes formed around the Sun's equator, while during solar minimum they are formed around the Polar Regions.... cant be explained with current model,,

Thats why only gave a limited response.. its not worth the time..

originally posted by: andy06shake

The exact minimum mass required for a star to undergo black hole formation is believed to be around 20 times the mass of the Sun.

We will have fun times from Betelgeuse when it goes or has already...

Betelgeuse is only about 700 light years away, so is a lot closer. If it did “pop” today, the speed of light dictates that it would take another 700 years before we see the supernova.

Even though it is only 8 to 8.5 million years old, Betelgeuse is a massive star that has evolved quickly and is already approaching the end of its life cycle.

Given Betelgeuse's huge size — it's 1,000 times wider than our sun, or 860 million miles (1.4 billion kilometers) across — it should be spinning much more slowly, astronomers suggest.

originally posted by: crayzeed
I'll ask the most important question again:- What keeps the planets in their place orbiting around the Sun? What keep the Galaxies apart and revolving around one another? HINT, it aint a piece of string. I'll repeat again, gravity is not a weak force.

It's the weakest of the four natural forces.
That's what they mean when they say gravity is a weak force.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: andy06shake

The exact minimum mass required for a star to undergo black hole formation is believed to be around 20 times the mass of the Sun.

We will have fun times from Betelgeuse when it goes or has already...

Betelgeuse is only about 700 light years away, so is a lot closer. If it did “pop” today, the speed of light dictates that it would take another 700 years before we see the supernova.

Even though it is only 8 to 8.5 million years old, Betelgeuse is a massive star that has evolved quickly and is already approaching the end of its life cycle.

Given Betelgeuse's huge size — it's 1,000 times wider than our sun, or 860 million miles (1.4 billion kilometers) across — it should be spinning much more slowly, astronomers suggest.

The more massive a star is the shorter its lifespan.
8 to 8.5 million years of age it's nothing in terms of the cosmic and stellar timescales considering our star is around 4.5 billion years old and expected to live for another 4.5 billion years.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Well Betelgeuse is one of those things where if it has happened and sent a burst in our direction when it went pop it's in the post i suppose and not much of a darn thing we can do about it given our current level of technology.

It would make the Carrington event look like a Chinese light show that's for sure.

It's expected to release an enormous amount of energy across the electromagnetic spectrum, including gamma rays.

originally posted by: purplemer

Sun tornados should not form on a gasous plasma body.. yet they do ...

How hard is it to think that the magnetic fields of the sun sturs up the plasmas, but you suggest it is impossible without other mechanisms, rather a strong statement as we can detect much of what is going on to cause it.

originally posted by: Farboso

The more massive a star is the shorter its lifespan.
8 to 8.5 million years of age it's nothing in terms of the cosmic and stellar timescales considering our star is around 4.5 billion years old and expected to live for another 4.5 billion years.

I read that stars were so massive in the beginning they could not make it a million years without going supernova, and it's burning helium to carbon and oxygen in its core, which our sun is billions of years from that point.

Here are the 10 stars most likely to go supernova next:

RS Ophiuchi
119 Tauri
Pi Puppis
Rigel
Gamma Velorum
Betelgeuse
Antares
Alpha Lupi
Spica
IK Pegasi

originally posted by: Farboso

It's the weakest of the four natural forces.
That's what they mean when they say gravity is a weak force.

Its also the strongest....

originally posted by: zaderamsesholloway
One of the fundamental aspects of our understanding of gravity comes from its role in maintaining Earth's atmosphere. However, when you closely examine gravitational strength on moving particles you will encounter an intriguing paradox. Gravity, although responsible for keeping Earth's atmosphere intact, appears to be such a weak force that it cannot even hold a stationary helium balloon to the Earth's surface. The helium, being lighter than the surrounding air, tends to rise upward, seemingly escaping the force of gravity. If gravity cannot prevent helium from rising at the surface of the Earth where gravity is the strongest, how is gravity strong enough to keep the outer atmosphere from escaping into space, in an area where gravity is the weakest?

A more perplexing concern arises when we examine the sun, a celestial body sustained by continuous nuclear fusion reactions. In nuclear fusion, particles are propelled outward at speeds of up to 223,693 mph due to immense energy release. The question emerges: how can gravity, a force seemingly insufficient to confine a helium balloon, exert the strength necessary to withstand and confine all the gases within the sun undergoing such powerful nuclear fusion reactions?

Lastly is the question of gravity's influence on the sun's shape. On Earth, gravity has had billions of years to act, resulting in a spherical form. It makes since that gravity could cause the Earth to be spherical over time because the atoms of the Earth are tightly interlinked and do not move much.

However, the sun, powered by continuous nuclear fusion reactions, should theoretically exhibit an ever-changing, non-spherical shape due to the outward thrust of particles at incredible speeds. I see no way the weak force of gravity could maintain the sun in a spherical shape, much less prevent particles that are propelled by nuclear fusion from escaping into space immediately.

Let's see the math. Show all work

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Farboso

It's the weakest of the four natural forces.
That's what they mean when they say gravity is a weak force.

Its also the strongest....

In comparison to.the other three natural forces it's the weakest from all.

originally posted by: Farboso

In comparison to.the other three natural forces it's the weakest from all.

But then that little weak force can build into a black hole, so it has a compounding factor with it.

a reply to: zaderamsesholloway

One of the fundamental aspects of our understanding of gravity comes from its role in maintaining Earth's atmosphere.

That's not correct. Our fundamental understanding of gravity comes from observing our solar system.

The sun is a massive, hot ball of plasma, inflated and heated by energy produced by nuclear fusion reactions at its core. The surface gravity of the sun is 28 times that of the earth, with an escape velocity of 615 km/s, or about 1.4 million mph, about 50 times the velocity of hydrogen observed on the surface of the sun. For comparison, the escape velocity of the earth is about 100,000 mph.

While gravity is often called a "weak force," it's what binds the universe and everything together.

a reply to: purplemer

religion and science they are both believe systems based on ritual

Incorrect.

Religion requires faith and belief in unprovable notions.

Science relies on accumulated knowledge, acquired through observation and testing.

The notion that science is a belief system is why we have ridiculousness such as "flat earth" proliferating on social media.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Farboso

In comparison to.the other three natural forces it's the weakest from all.

But then that little weak force can build into a black hole, so it has a compounding factor with it.

The more mass you add the greater the gravitational force.

www.space.com...#:~:text=It%20didn't%20take%20a,strongest%20of%20all%20the%20forces.&text=Here's%20another%20way%20to%20im agine,of%20the%20weakness%20of%20gravity.

It didn't take a lot of effort because gravity is, by far, the weakest of the four fundamental forces of nature. By one measure, gravity is a thousand billion billion times weaker than the strong nuclear force, the strongest of all the forces.

originally posted by: TheSkepticGuy23
a reply to: purplemer

religion and science they are both believe systems based on ritual

Incorrect.

Religion requires faith and belief in unprovable notions.

Science relies on accumulated knowledge, acquired through observation and testing.

The notion that science is a belief system is why we have ridiculousness such as "flat earth" proliferating on social media.

I admire the attempts to equate religion and science.

originally posted by: Farboso

The more mass you add the greater the gravitational force.

Yes of course that is my point. It is the weakest force with unlimited growth, so it is also the strongest in the end.