It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Something Is Wrong With Aurora Borealis

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 02:53 AM
This isn't a scientific explanation but when I was younger our dog was hit by a car and died. I was shattered and inconsolable until I had a dream in which God told me the Northern Lights were made by the souls of animals that have died. It somehow made me feel better. That was over 20 years ago and I still think about today.

posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 11:02 AM

Originally posted by ErosA433
Funny to suggest that I think we know it all... all i was suggesting is that, what makes all those pretty colours and the beautiful phenomenon that the OP asked about is very closely known.

That is quite different to fully understanding the dynamics of the atmosphere, and everything that is occurring within it. I never suggested that and my comment should not be taken that far out of context.

But I agree with the above posts... because there are unknowns it doesn't mean that we know nothing which seems to be a common theme on ATS sometimes, which is unfortunate because those comments more often than not contribute less, than those who try to help offer information and explanations of what physics knows.

To suggest that we have stopped thinking and stopped being curious about the world around us is quite wrong. Also, to suggest that myself, being a professional physicist is not interested in the advancement of knowledge is quite frankly absurd
edit on 6-1-2013 by ErosA433 because: (no reason given)

You, being a professional physicist, probably understand what I am saying. You see the future of your research as an unwritten book. What we already know is based on the limitations of technology that we had in the past, as the technology increases we see an expansion of the parameters of research. Someday we will be able to tell exactly what a sunspot eruption of a certain kind and position will have on the fields of the earth and will be able to detect incoming CMEs from outside this galaxy. We will be able to detect the magnetic ties of everything that holds things together on a Universal basis. This will take time and money and is not really a waste. Putting a man on the moon again or sending men to mars is not a good investment.

I see science, and the advancement of science, as essential. I would rather have money spent on studying and improving things necessary to the survival of this world. Cautiously developing technology to harness energy in a better way should be a priority as is using existing knowledge to stop energy waste instead of patenting products and keeping the reasons it works secret.

posted on Jan, 6 2013 @ 01:00 PM
I believe very strongly in blue skies research, though also i understand this basic principle;
If you want to improve technology by a factor of 2, an engineer can do that for you easily
If you want to improve technology by a factor of10 you need scientists and engineers.

Putting a man on the Mood pushed development of technology and there were many spin off products that make life all the better today. To say its not a good investment is not seeing the bigger picture. Similarly but not as grandiose was the experiment I did my PhD on, which pushed development of a novel type of photon detector that otherwise was just a device of curiosity that no company wanted to invest too heavily in. This device now that it was matured and 'proven' largely by our big batch order of them, can now be used to make medical imaging cheaper and more compact.

I would say we agree on the principle though, our understanding is an open book, and it needs us to slowly fill in each page and turn to the next one. Many of these things such as you say, looking at a flare and being able to predict what will happen on the Earth could probably be done very roughly with the technology today, however, by the time you have looked at the data, and performed analysis, it would be an event that occurred a week or two ago.

new topics
<< 1   >>

log in