so why try to solve this one and not some other that is just as probable
First of all the probabilities are not the same. Second, did I say we should not try to solve other potential problems?
so why try to solve this one and not some other that is just as probable
First of all the probabilities are not the same. Second, did I say we should not try to solve other potential problems?
why this one
a solar flare that is very large would remove our planet from the face of the solar system
You have seen one too many science fiction films, sir.
would it not turn our planet into an uninhabitable asteroid
it would destroy life on the planet permanently
No and no.
You can sleep sound at night, Schmidt, knowing the only harm solar flares do to Earth is cause a geomagnetic storm which can interrupt electricity and radio transmissions, pull low-orbiting satellites closer to Earth, harm astronauts and spacecraft and create really cool light show in the aurora borealis and aurora australis. :smug:
The strongest solar flare ever detected was in 2003, where it is estimated a X50 hit. Could be fatal for exposed astronauts, but not us Earth dwellers.![]()
The amount of energy released is the equivalent of millions of 100-megaton hydrogen bombs exploding at the same time! A solar flare contains high energy photons and particles, and is released from the Sun in a relatively short amount of time (a few minutes).
so you are wrong what if there is a larger one
Compared to Earth, the sun is enormous! It contains 99.86% of all of the mass of the entire solar system. The sun is 864,400 miles (1,391,000 kilometers) across. This is about 109 times the diameter of Earth. The sun weighs about 333,000 times as much as Earth. It is so large that about 1,300,000 planet Earths can fit inside of it. Earth is about the size of an average sunspot!
So now let’s talk about the validity of a solar flare
Additionally, solar scientists are concerned that this gravitational plane (that is the backbone to the Milky Way's dark rift) may send the sun on a rampage which sets off powerful x-class solar storms and CMEs. (coronal mass ejections) It's these x-class storms that have the ability to generate an EMP event (electromagnetic pulse) like the one that hit the Earth in 1859. Once that happens again with today's technological world of electronics, the United States will go dark in about three minutes or less, along with the rest of the world.
Oh by the way there would be a solar wind that would probably strip away our atmosphere. And your next rebuttal about earth’s magnetic field protecting us is bull because a solar flare that is big enough to reach and hit the earth would have a lot more power than the one at the top. Think about that
Not really. While electromagnetic fluctuations from solar flares can disrupt satellites, interrupt power grids, or jam communication equipment, "there simply isn't enough energy in the sun to send a killer fireball 93 million miles to destroy Earth," says NASA. The real danger is for pilots and astronauts who rely on satellite transmissions to carry out their operations — and it's why NASA issues warnings when a big solar storm (like the one expected in 2012) is coming.
Thirdly, and more to the point, such a solar flare would not destroy the Earth.
Yes, the sudden flux in charged particles would have an adverse effect on our electrical systems (including the entire grid system). And there will be some aurorae where there usually aren’t any. But ultimately, life will continue to flourish on the Earth.
If the world ends in 2012, the sun won't be to blame, NASA officials say.
Contrary to what some doomsayers would have you believe, our star isn't capable of blasting out a solar flare powerful enough to burn our planet to a crisp, according to the space agency.
"Most importantly, however, there simply isn't enough energy in the sun to send a killer fireball 93 million miles to destroy Earth," NASA officials wrote in a Nov. 10 statement.
Before I leave, I wanted to completely debunk Schmidt's knowledge and theories he has ascertained from Hollywood films and such. Since someone with two Ph.D's regarding the subject is apparently not good enough for him, I will leave some quotes and links, in case there is anyone left who actually believes the poppycock he has asserted.
Can a 'killer' solar flare really destroy Earth?
http://theweek.com/article/index/221464/can-a-killer-solar-flare-really-destroy-earthnbsp
Will A Massive Solar Flare Destroy the Earth?
http://space.about.com/od/sunsol/a/Solar_Flare_2012_Conspiracy.htm
Good news! Killer solar flare won't destroy Earth!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4525942...d-news-killer-solar-flare-wont-destroy-earth/
I could go on and on, but I will not bother. Apparently Schmidt knows more than NASA (whom I was employed with for seven years from 83-90) and those with Ph.D's because he saw the film '2012' and took the premise at face value.
Go ahead and Google "Can Earth Be Destroyed By A Solar Flare" for yourself and see.
I'm a newbie, but I love your posts, Comet. I hope that I didn't say anything to offend you. Sorry that I posted between your comments, and Schmidts. We all know that he is a jerk, even he knows that. I hope you don't give up.
In an effort to move on I have a question. Would Russia and maybe China try to block any system we would try to work with? I am sure they would oppose anything like a "force field" or " Photon Torpedeo" !:unsure:If a large enough asteroid were to hit the Earth it could potentially kill all human life on the planet, drastically change the environment/temperatures, etc. Do you think that governments should be investing more in technology to detect and viably get rid of such threats? If so, should it be a collaborative effort or burdened by the bigger nations?
In an effort to move on I have a question. Would Russia and maybe China try to block any system we would try to work with? I am sure they would oppose anything like a "force field" or " Photon Torpedeo" !:unsure:
Because they would claim it was a weapon to use against them. Ever notice how Russia always sees things differently than the rest of the world? They have been against our missile defense system from the start. And they usually try to protect the "bad guys".??? Why would they try to stop it- it would mean they would probably die out too.
Agreed. And we can't even go to the space station on our own anymore.et al,
I believe that science is one of the more important investments we can make, with respect to our nations future.
We should be pouring money into all the cornerstone disciplines with science; at both the theoretical and practical levels. Yes, even the investigation into asteroids. You never know where that might lead.
America should become the 21st Century version of the worlds center for scientific research. In the coming decades, it will be more important in knowing the science than will be in building a huge national defense system.
It will be our advancements in science and technology that will save our nation and its economy. We should be investing in scientific research of every kind.
Most Respectfully,
R
et al,
I believe that science is one of the more important investments we can make, with respect to our nations future.
We should be pouring money into all the cornerstone disciplines with science; at both the theoretical and practical levels. Yes, even the investigation into asteroids. You never know where that might lead.
America should become the 21st Century version of the worlds center for scientific research. In the coming decades, it will be more important in knowing the science than will be in building a huge national defense system.
It will be our advancements in science and technology that will save our nation and its economy. We should be investing in scientific research of every kind.
Most Respectfully,
R