Editing Talk:1342: Ancient Stars

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 1: Line 1:
<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.-->
 
 
 
I knew this because Nick Cave's 2013 album *Push The Sky Away* includes the lyrics "Sirius is eight point six light years away / Arcturus is thirty seven / The past is the past and it's here to stay / Wikipedia is heaven". Obviously Randall has been listening to it! ;-) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.176|173.245.53.176]] 08:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 
I knew this because Nick Cave's 2013 album *Push The Sky Away* includes the lyrics "Sirius is eight point six light years away / Arcturus is thirty seven / The past is the past and it's here to stay / Wikipedia is heaven". Obviously Randall has been listening to it! ;-) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.176|173.245.53.176]] 08:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
  
Line 9: Line 7:
 
In the comic, the lifespan of stars is also vastly underestimated. A thousand years is nothing when their age is generally counted in millions or billions of years. What is the probability a near-visible star died in the last thousand years and wouldn't that be a major astronomical event? [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 14:21, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 
In the comic, the lifespan of stars is also vastly underestimated. A thousand years is nothing when their age is generally counted in millions or billions of years. What is the probability a near-visible star died in the last thousand years and wouldn't that be a major astronomical event? [[User:Ralfoide|Ralfoide]] ([[User talk:Ralfoide|talk]]) 14:21, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 
:In the comic, the lifespan of stars isn't even mentioned in passing.  The history of supernovae is pretty well documented and goes back nearly 2000 years, so the light from those supernovae is probably not more than 2200 years old...[[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.65|173.245.56.65]] 15:21, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 
:In the comic, the lifespan of stars isn't even mentioned in passing.  The history of supernovae is pretty well documented and goes back nearly 2000 years, so the light from those supernovae is probably not more than 2200 years old...[[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.65|173.245.56.65]] 15:21, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
:Actually, it is mentioned in passing, in the first panel. "The light from that star was emitted thousands of years ago. ''It could be long gone.''" (Emphasis mine.) While it is true that [http://xkcd.com/1475 technically] this is still true as it always "could" be long gone, it is in fact most likely still around. Even if the light were a few thousand years old, it's the blink of an eye to stars that live for billions of years. After all, it's roughly equivalent (given average lifespans) to "We haven't seen Steve in half an hour. For all we know he could be dead by now." Yes, possible. No, not likely. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.218|199.27.128.218]] 18:36, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 
  
 
Of course, one could also add the time it takes for the radiation to reach the surface of the star ;) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.162|173.245.53.162]] 15:41, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
 
Of course, one could also add the time it takes for the radiation to reach the surface of the star ;) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.53.162|173.245.53.162]] 15:41, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Line 15: Line 12:
 
It is true that the energy released at the centre of the star may take millions of years to reach the surface. But it will not be the light we see until it leaves the surface of the star, as light cannot propagate through the plasma of the stars interior. So - no - we could not add this time;-) [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 
It is true that the energy released at the centre of the star may take millions of years to reach the surface. But it will not be the light we see until it leaves the surface of the star, as light cannot propagate through the plasma of the stars interior. So - no - we could not add this time;-) [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
  
What will be different about the photons leaving the surface? They're the same, they've just been bouncing about for thousands, not millions with respect to G-type stars, of years. In that sense, it is the light we see and we must add the time. {{unsigned ip|199.27.128.114}}
+
What will be different about the photons leaving the surface? They're the same, they've just been bouncing about for thousands, not millions with respect to G-type stars, of years. In that sense, it is the light we see and we must add the time.
 
 
When you think about it, people are just underestimating the speed of light [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.28|172.70.110.28]] 17:36, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
 

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page: