New star soon?

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Mar, 20 2004 @ 09:02 AM
link   
The Hopi predicted a Blue star or "Blue Kachina" would exist in the future, Cayce spoke of a second Sun visible in the sky, Sister Lucia (who was one of the witness' of the Miracles of Fatima in 1917) told David Booth a new star will begin to shine, and Jupiter has just developed a new blue band around its Southern hemisphere (where the Gallileo probe descended a few months ago).

Maybe the density of the Jovian atmosphere caused the plutonium on board Gallileo to trigger a fusion reaction, causing Jupiter to fire up into our second Sun?

www.abc.net.au...

[Edited on 20-3-2004 by JamesinOz]

[Edited on 23-3-2004 by JamesinOz]




posted on Mar, 20 2004 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Or it is possible that our solar system is actually a twin star system.. and one of the stars is simply a Dark Star... composed of dark matter.. a star that had already burned out. The reason we don't detect it anywhere is because it simply does not emit light, and is relatively far - orbit may be further than Pluto's. The thing is, the orbit may be every few thousand years around our Sun, and when this other Sun-twin comes CLOSE (maybe within the next few years) it will be illuminated by the sun, and seen from Earth. Of course, you can imagine the panic this would create...



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 02:51 AM
link   
Some researchers have suggested that the Sun may be part of a binary system with a dead Brown Dwarf star; perhaps a fusion reaction is triggered as it moves closer to our Sun, causing it to emit light? Other researchers have said that Jupiter may one day reach critical mass and fire up into a sun - it already emits unusual x-rays. Either way, two suns rising and setting at different times each day will sure take some getting used to!



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 05:08 AM
link   
even if jupiter did ignite into a star, if it burned at the rate of the sun it would only last

5497685185185.1851851851851851852 days
15062151192.288178589548452562151 years
1506215.1192288178589548452562151 milleniums

(about 15 billions years)

(my own calculation: very approximate)

thats still some time though, it is a failed star, but im not too sure if it will be able to ignite into a star as it is far off from a critical mass.(because it is quite large for how much mass it contains)

[Edited on 21-3-2004 by quiksilver]



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 05:10 AM
link   
From everything I've read about Jupiter, astronomers claim its 8 times too small to ignite into a star. Now who knows? They could be lying just to keep the public from suspecting that it would ignite into a star as in these predictions, but I doubt it. I do think astronomers lie on some other things, but not about Jupiter igniting into a star.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Why on Earth do some people think that a probe with some plutonium onboard would cause Jupiter to ignite into a second sun? It sure as hell didn't ignite when fragments of the Shoemaker-Levy comet impacted the planet. One nuke is is nothing compared to that event.


From July 16 through July 22, 1994, fragments of Comet P/Shoemaker-Levy 9 collided with Jupiter, with dramatic effect. This was the first collision of two solar system bodies ever to be observed. Shoemaker-Levy 9 consists of 20 discernable fragments with diameters estimated at up to 2 kilometers, which impacted the planet at 60 km/s. The impacts resulted in plumes many thousands of kilometers high, hot "bubbles" of gas in the atmosphere, and large dark "scars" on the atmosphere which have lifetimes at least on the order of weeks. Smaller bits and dust continue to impact the planet. Shoemaker-Levy 9 is gone, but as the Earth- and space-based images show, it did not go quietly.


nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 05:28 AM
link   
Jupiter just does not have the mass to become a star. There is also no scientific method of it gaining that mass.

Arthur C Clarke managed to turn it into a star in his book 2010 by having the black monoliths multiply on it's surface and thereby providing it with the mass needed.

Spooky thing is - I wouldn't discount Arthur. His books 2001 and 2010 have been somewhat prophetic. He was able to write about things that science hadn't provided answers for at the time and got them eerily correct. For example, he got the composition of Europa almost spot on, long before anyone else knew a thing about Jupiter's moon. He and Kubrick were even mentioned by Apollo astronauts when they saw the Sun rising around the moon and the Earth exactly as it did in the opening sequence of 2001.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 08:09 AM
link   
hey, i'm with JamesinOz & lilblam on the 'binary'
model of our solar system.

some scientists think that the newly discovered Sedna
is a product of a unseen(at this moment) brown-dwarf binary star with Sol.

Kubrick & Clarke, i'm sure were aware of the exploded
planet hypothesis, and may have logically deduced
that the moon of Saturn & Jupiter are reconstituted
materials from that exploded planet....also that the
abundant water in this solar system (Europa, Mars, Earth) occurred on these moons & planets as debris
& deluge from the EP.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Another Cosmic Explaination ....



It seems somewhere around 2 million years ago, this
area of the galaxy had a mega-super-nova
therefore the 'void/ chimney effect' in our surrounding
area of space, on this arm of the galaxy...as lottsa
matter and gasses & stuff were blown away.

which gives one speculation that yet another nearby
Super-Nova may happen...in turn blasting the earth &
solar system with gamma ray & x-ray & exotic particles
leading to another 'mass extinction' event, burning off
the ionosphere & ozone layers, which will create the
exaggerated mutations &/or the Prophetic woes that
mens flesh will be consumed as they stand there!!

anyhow, just a few breadcrumbs to throw around...

enjoy your journey



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Maybe if the Solar System moved into the photon belt of a huge super-nova, the light reaching the Earth could appear as a dim second Sun? Some have suggested that this is what may happen. As for Kubrick, he's a visionary, not unlike Jules Verne - with work written as science fiction turning out to be science fact.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by quiksilver
even if jupiter did ignite into a star, if it burned at the rate of the sun it would only last

5497685185185.1851851851851851852 days
15062151192.288178589548452562151 years
1506215.1192288178589548452562151 milleniums

(about 15 billions years)

(my own calculation: very approximate)

thats still some time though, it is a failed star, but im not too sure if it will be able to ignite into a star as it is far off from a critical mass.(because it is quite large for how much mass it contains)

[Edited on 21-3-2004 by quiksilver]


okay, so considering the sun isn't even going to burn for 15 billion years (it will only burn for around a total of 10)... how did you get to that conclusion? i'd like to know.


also, jupiter isn't anywhere close to a failed star. red dwarf stars, which are about half the mass of the sun, burn quite well. also, A LOT longer than anything else out there in the universe (around 200 billion years). jupiter is around 1/100th of the mass of the sun, or about 1/50th the mass of a red dwarf. also, keep in mind that we've discovered several gas giant planets orbiting other stars that are several times larger than jupiter.




Originally posted by JamesinOz
Some researchers have suggested that the Sun may be part of a binary system with a dead Brown Dwarf star; perhaps a fusion reaction is triggered as it moves closer to our Sun, causing it to emit light?


yeah, i wouldn't be surprised by this at all. in fact, i would believe this as the most reasonable explanation, especially since most of the stars in our galaxy are binaries.

as for your question, you're close. when a smaller, denser burnt out star moves close enough to a larger, less dense star it pulls the material off the surface. then, under the pressure it it fuses on the surface of this star, and causes what's called a dwarf nova.




Originally posted by lilblam
Or it is possible that our solar system is actually a twin star system.. and one of the stars is simply a Dark Star... composed of dark matter..


dark matter is different than a cooled down star. no one can explain what the dark matter in the universe is yet, only speculate.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 10:13 PM
link   
yea it will brun for 15 billion years if i am correct, but that is if it stays constantly at the suns current burning rate(but the suns core is heating up so it will burn out quicker, but jupiter has a solid core?). But i mean, jupiters magnetic fields are bloody hot

Jupiter is a heat source; it radiates 1.6 times a much energy as it receives from the Sun. This energy is produced by Jupiter's shrinking due to gravity, and this produces heat. Also, it is still cooling down, losing its initial energy, the energy it received as the Solar System formed.

Jupiter is too small to produce a core temperature that is hot enough to undergo fusion (you need about 3 million degrees to start the fusion of hydrogen). You'd need a body that was many times the mass of Jupiter to get nuclear fusion (the theoretical limit is about 8 percent of the mass of the Sun).

i heard that Jupiter's magnetosphere in some parts is hotter than the suns core.(i think it was 15 million K)



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by quiksilver
yea it will brun for 15 billion years if i am correct, but that is if it stays constantly at the suns current burning rate(but the suns core is heating up so it will burn out quicker, but jupiter has a solid core?).


my point in saying all that is that i think you're incorrect. can you type out how you did the math, please? yes, jupiter does have a solid core. also, the sun is heating up because it is slowly running out of hydrogen to convert to helium. then, it needs higher temperatures to convert that helium to carbon, and so on.



Jupiter is a heat source; it radiates 1.6 times a much energy as it receives from the Sun. This energy is produced by Jupiter's shrinking due to gravity, and this produces heat. Also, it is still cooling down, losing its initial energy, the energy it received as the Solar System formed.


all the gas giants radiate more heat than they take in. jupiter isn't shrinking though, last time i checked. the heat is just from the density of the gasses inside the planet.



i heard that Jupiter's magnetosphere in some parts is hotter than the suns core.(i think it was 15 million K)


i'd like to see some evidence for that one, please.


Q

posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Hmmmm...let's say, just for (c) and giggles that Jupiter does flare up.

What do you think the effects on Mars would be? Same gravitation would impart no orbital change, but I would think the proximity of the heat source could provide enough to melt those caps down and start a positive (for us) greenhouse effect. Granted, it would not be exposed for its full orbital 'year' at the same rate, but it's interesting nonetheless. Only problem would be if it got too hot and toasted the place...

Same question for Europa and the other Jovian/Saturn system moons. If not too hot, the effects could be most interesting. Imagine Europa not as an iceball, but as a true 'water world'! Or perhaps other moons turning into rich hydrocarbon 'soups', similar to Earth's initial conditions?

The possibilities are indeed intriguing.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 11:32 PM
link   
err, probably very inaccurate but i simply got jupiters mass and divided it by the amount of hydrogen the sun is burning every second, and then converted into appropriate units. I have no reference for the Magnetosphere, the info i gave just came into my head from sumwhere.



Jupiter's magnetosphere is not only big but enormously powerful as well. Enough power is generated within the magnetosphere to manage 10 major cities on Earth. This power is dissipated in the atmosphere via the Jovian aurora.


all i no or sure is that it is very powerful also.







Internal Heat: Jupiter is a heat source; it radiates 1.6 times a much energy as it receives from the Sun. This energy is produced by Jupiter's shrinking due to gravity, and this produces heat. Also, it is still cooling down, losing its initial energy (the energy it received as the Solar System formed).


here

not sure how accurate it is though.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by quiksilver
err, probably very inaccurate


you said it yourself, i don't have to say anything further.


and that site seems pretty legit. the info is all correct.

Q... that would be neat to see happen, but i still do not think that jupiter and mars are close enough that it would make too much of a difference. the two planets are about 326,600,000 miles away from each other. as for jupiter's moons? i would think that any atmosphere they have would get blown off in the solar wind. as would jupiter's ring system proably.



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 11:45 PM
link   
It was years ago but I remember hearing Jupiter needed about 75 times more mass than it has now to have become a star. That was not twice as big or 3 Jupiters put together but 75 Jupiters put together to be a star. I consider that to be alot.

What if our solar system did have a dark star and it collided with Jupiter? Would the star suddenly shine and keep shining for years while the gas from Jupiter got sucked in?



posted on Mar, 21 2004 @ 11:52 PM
link   
At the rate that Jupiter is going, does anyone know how long it would take to turn into a star?





top topics
 
0

log in

join