Slashdot Mirror
Sun Research Yields Unexpected Results
Syberghost writes "There are two major theories about the composition of the Sun. One says that it has similar composition to the planets. The other, that it has enriched levels of oxygen-16. NASA has been doing research on the soil samples Neil Armstrong brought back from the moon, to determine which of those theories is correct. Today, we have the results; they're both wrong. It looks like we're going to have to look more closely at the composition of everything in the solar system to figure this one out."
I know the Sun is constantly tossing out charged particles in the form of solar winds and solar flares, but isn't most of that material from the corona? What about material deeper inside the Sun itself?
Obviously there's got to be a lot of helium in there . .
It's common knowledge that the moon is made of cheese, and we all know that the sun is yellow.
What color is cheese?
There's your connection, right there.
The Moon has no significant protection from an atmosphere or electromagnetic field as does the Earth. As result, it gets hammered by everything from space junk to charged particles kicked out in solar flares. Or, instead of listening to me, you could just go read the article.
"Our Sun is not the Sun that we thought it was."
Your children are never who you think they are until you've seen them out in the wild (or in Cabo).
I thought it was full of a bunch of unsold SPARCs?
Oh THAT sun. Nevermind.
There is truth in humor.
...it has lower levels of oxygen-16 than expected.
Not enough oxygen?
Better plant some tree before it starts smouldering!
Repeat after me: We are all individuals
Sounds like something my parents said...
Experience teaches only the teachable. -AH
Getting information about the Sun by looking at the moon? How stupid. I propose we send a mission to the Sun to find out first hand what the Sun is like. I can hear the scoffers whine "But it is to hauuuuuuuut to land on the Suuuuuuun". This is what you pay geniuses like me for. We land at night. Problem solved.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
They mean a similar composition in terms of the ratios of different isotopes (in this case, oxygen, which has 3 stable isotopes), not that it has a similar composition in terms of which elements make it up.
To all of you who say science is faith-based as much as any religion, this article is an example of why you're wrong.
1. Scientist has an idea.
2. Scientist checks out that idea with experiments.
3. Experiment refutes scientist's idea.
4. Scientist scratches head and says, "I guess I was wrong."
This pattern happens over and over and over again, and that's what people mean when they say science is not faith-based.
I read the topic and I thought "What? They're turning a profit?"
*blinking cursor*
...maybe the sun is made out of milk, which would explain why the moon is made of cheese.. :P
DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
The Sun turns out to have more global warming particles than expected!
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
All sciences evolve like this. How many revolutions have occured in biology in our lifetimes alone? The thing with astronomy is that in many areas we're only at the present epoch getting good looks at the objects we study. You're surpised that there are new discoveries?
Also, you need to understand what a science is. It's not just a "lab science". Not all science rests on laboratory experients. Many require observations. Often, the observations are not exactly repeatable. (How often will you observe a species of bird do exactly the same thing in the wild?) These sciences include geology, meteorology, astronomy, and a lot of biology and are referred to as "historical sciences". In these fields, you can't control the experiment, so you rely on similar observations and the ability to test theories with other, related observations. The key isn't the laboratory or the controls; it's being able to somehow falsify the theory. As long as you can do that, it's a science.
Your comment about conjecture and astronomy reminds me of what pretends to be a joke...
An astronomer, a physicist and a mathematician are going to a conference in Edinburgh. None of them have been to Scotland before. As their train crosses the border into Scotland, the astronomer pots a black sheep on a hillside. "Look!" exclaims the astronomer, "the sheep in Scotland are black".
The physicist looks up and declares "No, not at all. At least ONE of the sheep in Scotland is black".
The mathematician looks up and says "No, at least half of one of the sheep in Scotland is black."
yeah, it's not so funny really but its +1 Insightful
Travelling forward in time at a rate of 1 second per second.
The sun is a mass of incandescent gas A gigantic nuclear furnace Where hydrogen is built into helium At a temperature of millions of degrees
I just saw a TV program last night or this morning about analyzing what the Sun is made of.
A satellite was sent out and put into L-1 (I think) for 3 years or so. It had an area of shiny hexagonal materials, of quite a few different kinds like I think maybe gold covered sapphire was one of them. So bits of the Sun were carried out by solar wind and collided with the collectors at something like 200 miles per second... fast enough to bury little particles into the hard collectors.
Then it folded itself up and headed back to Earth... unfortunately the parachute didn't open on re-entry. So it came tumbling into Earth and crashed somewhere in Utah I think. They managed to rescue a few good pieces though of the shattered collectors. And supposedly they didn't get too contaminated since the speed of the crash was much less than the speed that the solar particles were traveling at when they hit the collectors. So Utah dirt didn't get down as deep as the solar particles... and they're analyzing it.
I don't know how long ago this happened though... but I would think they would have as good or better data than studying moon samples.
Scinetists often re-examine new material in light of new theories, or new developments in analytical techniques which Trevor Ireland happens tp work on. BTW, Ross Taylor of the ANU was invloved in early moon sample analysis.
Slashdot: Where nerds gather to pool their ignorance
"In our world," said Eustace, "a star is a huge ball of flaming gas."
"Even in your world, my son, that is not what a star is but only what it is made of."
-- Voyage of the Dawn Treader (C.S. Lewis)
It's worth noting that differing isotope ratios are quite difficult to explain. Nuclear reactions must be involved, because no* chemical or physical process can distinguish between the different isotopes of an element. That is, there is no way the isotope ratio in lunar soil can be different from Earth soil unless the material that makes them up has undergone different types of nuclear reactions.
-----------
* OK, almost no. I don't want to hear from any isotope-effects people. Anyway, you folks look for results in the 3rd or 4th decimal place and you know it.
When did there become an "overwhelming consensus" that man is causing global warming?
The temperature of the Earth is increasing. Big deal. It has happened before, and it can and will happen again.
Slashdot had an article about temperatures on Mar increasing as well... must be those damn rovers eh?
Even when the science is impartial, the interpretation is not. I am not a fan of the current administration's policies towards the release of papers and research on climate change.
We need all sides on an issue. The truth is often somewhere in the middle.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling