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.

 

Heat of the Sun?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


So lets say I was in space away from our Sun, what would the sensation be? What would my nerves feel? And why, if a Sun is sphere and there are billions of Suns wouldn't the vacuum be inundated with radiation? or is it because the half life of this radiation dissipates leaving only light. If the vacuum has the ability to remove heat where does it go? Is this the 2.7ºK base average which would be different if the number of Suns were different? Knowing that Suns come and go its an average total of Suns that make this base of 2.7ºK?




posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agarta
So lets say I was in space away from our Sun, what would the sensation be? What would my nerves feel?


In terms of temperature, you'd probably feel cold. Your warmth would be radiating away into infinite space at quite a clip.

edit to add: although it's not immediately obvious, what your skin feels as cold is not a sensation of absolute temperature, more of a direction and rate of heat energy flow. So if you're at body temperature and suspended in a dark space with an absolute zero background, your body will really quickly radiate that heat away. The space isn't conducting it away, it's just there. Instead, you're glowing like a beacon in IR, and all that energy just keeps on going. You'd feel cold (if you could feel in that circumstance) because the energy would be leaving you at a high rate, that's what "feels cold" really is to your skin.



And why, if a Sun is sphere and there are billions of Suns wouldn't the vacuum be inundated with radiation? or is it because the half life of this radiation dissipates leaving only light.


It's not the sort of radiation that has a half-life. It's unfortunate that the term radiation is used for many somewhat different things. However, the first part of your question was a famous scientific conundrum. If the universe is infinite, and there are an infinite number of suns, why isn't the sky blindingly white and hot? See also Olbers' Paradox.



If the vacuum has the ability to remove heat where does it go? Is this the 2.7ºK base average which would be different if the number of Suns were different? Knowing that Suns come and go its an average total of Suns that make this base of 2.7ºK?


The vacuum isn't doing anything, it's just there. The question you ask could also be stated - where does the light from a flashlight go? The answer of course is - thataway, but I'm not sure it's the one you want. It just keeps going. It's very red light, if you want to think of it that way.

The background temperature of space is thought to be the echo of the Big Bang. Sort of like what's left of a big fireball after it's cooled almost to zero.
edit on 14-7-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Agarta
 


So lets say I was in space away from our Sun, what would the sensation be? What would my nerves feel?
You would feel whatever temperature your life support system was set to. If you had no space suit you wouldn't feel anything. If you had a space suit with a non functioning life support system you would feel your own body temperature.


2nd why, if a Sun is sphere and there are billions of Suns wouldn't the vacuum be inundated with radiation?
It is. But the inverse square law reduces the amount of radiation to insignificant levels. You don't feel starshine on your skin.


If the vacuum has the ability to remove heat where does it go?
The vacuum does not remove heat. The vacuum actually is very good insulation for heat transfer. The heat is radiated away in the form of electromagnetic radiation (body temperature as infrared, colder temperatures at longer wavelengths). It goes on and on, off into the universe.


Is this the 2.7ºK base average which would be different if the number of Suns were different?
Nope. The 2.7º is the black body "temperature" of the cosmic background radiation, the "heat" left over from the big bang.

edit on 7/14/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   

The vacuum does not remove heat. The vacuum actually is very good insulation for heat transfer. The heat is radiated away in the form of electromagnetic radiation (body temperature as infrared, colder temperatures at longer wavelengths). It goes on and on, off into the universe.


If heat is energy, and if it's true that energy can only be transformed and is never truly burned away, with the billions and billions of suns pouring photons into the universe for billions of years, how come we aren't burned to a crisp?

I mean, with very few atoms in space to absorb the heat of these suns, then these photons have been traveling at full force through space and blasting away at the earth for 4.5 billion years. How come we aren't totally cooked?

I have a feeling you're going to say that distance makes the photons not as concentrated as the photons from our nearby sun. But isn't the universe totally flooded with photons?



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
I mean, with very few atoms in space to absorb the heat of these suns, then these photons have been traveling at full force through space and blasting away at the earth for 4.5 billion years. How come we aren't totally cooked?

I have a feeling you're going to say that distance makes the photons not as concentrated as the photons from our nearby sun. But isn't the universe totally flooded with photons?


Seriously, go look up Olbers' Paradox. It's your question to a "t". Two thumbs up too, most people wouldn't have considered that.



posted on Jul, 14 2012 @ 06:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 

Heat (temperature) is mechanical energy, the vibration of molecules. The energy carried by electromagnetic radiation (photons if you wish) is energy of a different form.

Photons actually carry a very tiny amount of energy and what becomes of that energy when it is transferred to matter depends on a number of factors (including the wavelength of the radiation). Often, only a very small amount of that energy is absorbed in the form of heat. Sometimes none of it is. A lot of the energy is re-emitted (reflected or scattered). You've actually sort of hit on the idea of the "greenhouse effect". The more energy the Earth holds rather than radiating back into space, the hotter it gets.


I have a feeling you're going to say that distance makes the photons not as concentrated as the photons from our nearby sun. But isn't the universe totally flooded with photons?

Yes, and yes. But where there are fewer photons there is less energy.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj
I googled 'Heat of the sun' and got a bunch of links to a TV show of the same name.

What I'm looking for is the answer to a few questions.

When I stand in sunlight I can feel the heat on my neck, arms...all over.

Am I actually feeling the heat of the sun reaching me?

If so, why is it so cold in outer space?

When a space shuttle travels between the sun and the earth, what is the temperature outside of the shuttle?

If it is cold outside of the shuttle, then why and how can the heat of the sun bypass the area of the shuttle and hit earth?

Also, if I can feel the heat of the sun burning my skin, why doesn't the shuttle literally bake to a crisp out there?

Or, am I just having a total brain fart on this?


edit on 7/14/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)


No, you are not feeling the heat of the sun. Heat requires matter to move through, like sound (sound and heat are often associated when dealing with nano sized materials, look up the term "phonon").

What you feel is the energy of the sun warming the matter it is touching. The atmosphere heats from this methodology. So, too, do your skin cells.

When you talk about the "heat of the sun", what you really mean is "energy of the sun", with that energy exciting molecules and creating heat.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
No, you are not feeling the heat of the sun. Heat requires matter to move through, like sound (sound and heat are often associated when dealing with nano sized materials, look up the term "phonon").

What you feel is the energy of the sun warming the matter it is touching. The atmosphere heats from this methodology. So, too, do your skin cells.

When you talk about the "heat of the sun", what you really mean is "energy of the sun", with that energy exciting molecules and creating heat.


I was just thinking something along these lines. When we say something is heating up, don't we really mean that the atoms are moving faster and faster? If we can take, say, a steak, and excite its atoms into a frenzy without the use of a heat source, wouldn't said steak still cook?
edit on 7/15/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
No, you are not feeling the heat of the sun. Heat requires matter to move through, like sound (sound and heat are often associated when dealing with nano sized materials, look up the term "phonon").

What you feel is the energy of the sun warming the matter it is touching. The atmosphere heats from this methodology. So, too, do your skin cells.

When you talk about the "heat of the sun", what you really mean is "energy of the sun", with that energy exciting molecules and creating heat.


I was just thinking something along these lines. When we say something is heating up, don't we really mean that the atoms are moving faster and faster? If we can take, say, a steak, and excite its atoms into a frenzy without the use of a heat source, wouldn't said steak still cook?
edit on 7/15/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)


Yup. Microwave a steak, and it will cook.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
No, you are not feeling the heat of the sun. Heat requires matter to move through, like sound (sound and heat are often associated when dealing with nano sized materials, look up the term "phonon").

What you feel is the energy of the sun warming the matter it is touching. The atmosphere heats from this methodology. So, too, do your skin cells.

When you talk about the "heat of the sun", what you really mean is "energy of the sun", with that energy exciting molecules and creating heat.


I was just thinking something along these lines. When we say something is heating up, don't we really mean that the atoms are moving faster and faster? If we can take, say, a steak, and excite its atoms into a frenzy without the use of a heat source, wouldn't said steak still cook?
edit on 7/15/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)


Yup. Microwave a steak, and it will cook.


Then heat, as most of us tend to think of it, isn't really a thing of substance. This would explain why the region of space with a minimum of atoms wouldn't heat up. Because heat is just another word for exciting atoms.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Heat is a by product of energy absorption in matter, r maybe it is more like energy movement in matter. It is a disturbance.

It is why a hot computer will start freezing. Heat destroys signal. I was serious when I recommended looking up the term "phonon" to understand a little more about heat.
edit on 15-7-2012 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
You are feeling the effects of electromagnetic radiation (mostly infrared) on your skin.

Space is not actually cold. Since it is actually close to being a vacuum it doesn't really have much of any temperature.

The skin of any space craft, like your skin, is heated by radiation from the Sun. Depending on how reflective the skin is and how long it is exposed to that radiation, it can get quite hot.

It is not cold outside the shuttle.

Space craft are well insulated to protect what is inside them from thermal effects.
edit on 7/14/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)


What is the R-factor of the lunar module?



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Heat is a by product of energy absorption in matter, r maybe it is more like energy movement in matter. It is a disturbance.

It is why a hot computer will start freezing. Heat destroys signal. I was serious when I recommended looking up the term "phonon" to understand a little more about heat.
edit on 15-7-2012 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)


No matter what I want to learn, I always reach a point where I just can't absorb anymore info. I get the idea of phonons, but I can't get any deeper than that (dammit!).

This is pretty cool though:



Normal modes of vibration progression through a crystal. The amplitude of the motion has been exaggerated for ease of viewing; in an actual crystal, it is typically much smaller than the lattice spacing.


en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 7/15/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)

edit on 7/15/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


you and me both. i have no real education to speak of. Everything I know I have either taught myself, or stumbled onto it. That whole compound ignorance thing keeps you from deciding to learn about things you are not yet even aware of.

I delved into the whole nanoscale energy thing a few years ago, and hit a point where my lack of education kept me from gaining further understanding without having to also learn mathematics that would take far too much bandwidth for a person also having to learn accounting and statistics for his job. It seems I keep finding jobs where i have the basic skills to do the job, but still have to put tremendous amounts of energy into learning complex systems.

Regardless, Phage is a far better mentor in this regard than me, that is for sure. It seems that you and I now have a similar understanding.

ETA: i have found, in my life, that when i hit that wall in my mind, it is best to leave it. But, if you come back to it later (months/years), you can push a little further in. The experience of life and learning will make you far more likely to have deeper understandings. I always recommend revisitng things. It is one of the reasons I made a blog. I don't care if anyone reads it or not. It is a storehouse for my thoughts, or things that gave me a something to think about. And it is a place for me to find my thoughts on things in an easy way, so when i review them in the future i don't have to spend hours hunting through Google.
edit on 15-7-2012 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
So the shuttle would continue to heat up in direct sunlight. How does the shuttle cool itself down in a vacuum environment? It's not like it can spread the heat to molecules surrounding it since it's in a vacuum. So does it need to be in a shaded area (like behind the Earth) in order to radiate heat fast enough for the temperature to drop?



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by epsilon69
So the shuttle would continue to heat up in direct sunlight. How does the shuttle cool itself down in a vacuum environment? It's not like it can spread the heat to molecules surrounding it since it's in a vacuum. So does it need to be in a shaded area (like behind the Earth) in order to radiate heat fast enough for the temperature to drop?


The side that faces the sun would heat up, while the side that is away from the sun would cool down. I would suspect that a combination of it being small enough to dissipate the heat internally, combined with how absolutely cold it would be on the dark side, combined with the use of novel materials and creative designed, would prevent total catastrophe.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by epsilon69
 

Yes. But also remember that not all parts of the shuttle are (were) in sunlight even when it was on the dayside of Earth.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

I was just thinking something along these lines. When we say something is heating up, don't we really mean that the atoms are moving faster and faster? If we can take, say, a steak, and excite its atoms into a frenzy without the use of a heat source, wouldn't said steak still cook?
edit on 7/15/2012 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)

Yep, it's called a microwave oven!



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Originally posted by epsilon69
So the shuttle would continue to heat up in direct sunlight. How does the shuttle cool itself down in a vacuum environment? It's not like it can spread the heat to molecules surrounding it since it's in a vacuum. So does it need to be in a shaded area (like behind the Earth) in order to radiate heat fast enough for the temperature to drop?


The side that faces the sun would heat up, while the side that is away from the sun would cool down. I would suspect that a combination of it being small enough to dissipate the heat internally, combined with how absolutely cold it would be on the dark side, combined with the use of novel materials and creative designed, would prevent total catastrophe.


Wait a minute, wait a minute! lol We just made clear that there aren't enough atoms in outer space to radiate heat. So, if the atoms of the shuttle heat up, that heat energy has to go SOMEWHERE. If not in the space surrounding the shuttle then where does it go before it literally boils the shuttle?



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I see no response to the R-Factor question...As far as I am aware, there are no disputes as to what materials comprised the LM's:

Apparently very flimsy materials. However, keep in mind that the Moon has no atmosphere so there is no air resistance like and landing is completely different than re-entering the Earth's atmosphere. The main goals of the lunar lander design was to keep it airtight and to make it as light as possible. "The LEM was a flimsy-looking spidery-type vehicle. The crew compartment had no amenities whatsoever, it didn't even have seats. And the construction was just as light as could possibly be. For example the skin of the crew compartment (i.e. hull) was about twelve-thousandths of an inch thick aluminum. That would be like about three layers of Reynolds wrap put together. You could easily if you were careless put your boot or your foot right through that wall." Tom Kelly, Grumman Engineer for Mr. LEM, from Apollo 13 documentary. "It turns out that the exterior portions of the Lunar Module are made up of mylar and cellophane put together with Scotch Tape and staples. We had to have pads on the floor because if you dropped a screw-driver it would go right through the floor. Holy Christmas and we are going to try to fly this thing?" Apollo 9 astronot Jim McDivitt from Discovery When We Left Earth.


So the statement about thermal insulation being present is where?



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join