It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Two Suns by 2012(maybe)

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCardigan
This is quite interesting, I have read a lot about Betelgeuse, and if this supernova does occur in 2012 or in our lifetime, I would love to see it shine in the night sky. I have never seen a supernova shine in sky before, with the naked eye. It could be the same as the 1054 Crab supernova explosion - that was, apparently, visible to the naked eye for around 2 years

Well, apart from this, lets just see what will happen.


If this supernova does occur in 2012, the light from it won't be visible from Earth until approximately 2655, as Betelgeuse is 643 +/ - 146 light-years from Earth.

When it does, it will be a little brighter than the moon.
It will not be like having two suns, it will be like having two moons.




posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by alchemist2012
 





Though it is a derivation of the Arabic phrase “yad Al Jauza” meaning the “hand of Al-Jauza” referring to a mysterious woman that controls the order of the universe



I bet the Secret Orders and pagans just love this. I will dress in my apron bring out the tracing boards and do what is forbidden and face the North of the Temple and shout the PW


KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAN



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


Actually a bit wrong. It could have exploded already around 650 years ago. We just don't know it yet until the light reaches us.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   


“They will flood through the Earth and bizarrely enough, even though the supernova we see visually will light up the night sky, 99 per cent of the energy in the supernova is released in these particles that will come through our bodies and through the Earth with absolutely no harm whatsoever.”


How can they say that? They have no idea! Guess they'll be down in the cog facilities anyhow...



www.news.com.au... 09247#ixzz1BSb5Or2w



edit on 19-1-2011 by GirlGenius because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kailassa

Originally posted by TheCardigan
This is quite interesting, I have read a lot about Betelgeuse, and if this supernova does occur in 2012 or in our lifetime, I would love to see it shine in the night sky. I have never seen a supernova shine in sky before, with the naked eye. It could be the same as the 1054 Crab supernova explosion - that was, apparently, visible to the naked eye for around 2 years

Well, apart from this, lets just see what will happen.


If this supernova does occur in 2012, the light from it won't be visible from Earth until approximately 2655, as Betelgeuse is 643 +/ - 146 light-years from Earth.

When it does, it will be a little brighter than the moon.
It will not be like having two suns, it will be like having two moons.



Originally posted by Stargate2012
reply to post by Kailassa
 


Actually a bit wrong. It could have exploded already around 650 years ago. We just don't know it yet until the light reaches us.


No, I'm not wrong. I was replying to a post in which a poster referred to a supernova happening in 2012.
I never said the supernova could not have already exploded, or that it would be impossible to see it next year if it exploded ~650 years ago.

I was just pointing out it won't be visible from Earth next year if it explodes next year.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
Getting ahead of ourselves on this one, yes they are watching this star, yes it's eventually going to supernova, can we say 2012? Sure, we can also say 2054684564564567457678456 at around 4pm

It's going to take almost a thousand years for the light to hit us, so when we do see it we can safely say around 650 years ago star went boom. black hole? Maybe, but we do have a super massive one at the center of our galaxy so I wouldn't be worried.

Jupiter does not have the mass to sustain nuclear fission, sure, it could some how blow up or what not, but for it to become a star, it's needs sufficient mass to create critical mass and actually start the fusion. Once the star starts to run out of fuel it succumbs to the force of gravity. Inside this reaction is where the elements we know and love are born. the reaction converts carbon to oxygen, neon, silicon, sulfur and finally to iron and once it's run out of material to burn it starts to cool and the iron core collapses. As material hits this inner core it bounces out and ejects energetic neutrinos, and creates the super nova.

I'm not a scientist, but if jupiter had the mass needed, it would be altering orbits because of the increased gravity well around it. It could burn but not become a star, it couldn't sustain the reaction.

We're quite lucky to have gotten the sun we did. The more massive (not big, mass weight) the star the faster it burns through it's fuel.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Kailassa
 


It would be safe to say they are more than likely talking about the visible explosion in this regard, not the actual event... otherwise why even bother to write about it, oh look a star has possibly blown up from calculations but we wont know for sure for centuries. Half the night sky could be gone already if you did the maths required to work it all out.

I would say theyve worked it out roughly that its already gone super nova, and we'll catch up to the event visually around 2012, if it has in fact gone super nova.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigfootNZ
reply to post by Kailassa
 

I would say theyve worked it out roughly that its already gone super nova, and we'll catch up to the event visually around 2012, if it has in fact gone super nova.

And I'd say we don't have a clue whether Betelgeuse has already gone supernova less than 650 years ago or whether it will wait another million years or so.

The suggestion that we might see it before or during 2012 was just an extremely remote possiility being used as a headline grabber.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


They don't interact OFTEN. That's not the same thing as never.

Considering what they do when they hit water, I've wondered what would happen if one did interact inside of a living being.



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by phishybongwaters
 


While Jupiter couldn't sustain a reaction, I've never seen anyone give an idea about how long that reaction could last for. A sun for a day? A star for an hour? Or is this a smoldering nuclear inferno for a thousand years of "non-sustainability?"



posted on Jan, 19 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   
does this have anything to do with nibiru?



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join