• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Massive star two and a half MILLION times as bright as sun...vanishes

Status
Not open for further replies.

dad

Undefeated
Naturally, science is clueless as to why.

"From 2001 to 2011, the light from the galaxy consistently showed evidence that it hosted a 'luminous blue variable' star some 2.5 million times brighter than the Sun. Stars of this type are unstable, showing occasional dramatic shifts in their spectra and brightness. Even with those shifts, luminous blue variables leave specific traces scientists can identify, but they were absent from the data the team collected in 2019, leaving them to wonder what had happened to the star. "It would be highly unusual for such a massive star to disappear without producing a bright supernova explosion," says Allan."

A cosmic mystery: ESO telescope captures the disappearance of a massive star

Could it be their theories are wrong?

Ha
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
Naturally, science is clueless as to why.

"From 2001 to 2011, the light from the galaxy consistently showed evidence that it hosted a 'luminous blue variable' star some 2.5 million times brighter than the Sun. Stars of this type are unstable, showing occasional dramatic shifts in their spectra and brightness. Even with those shifts, luminous blue variables leave specific traces scientists can identify, but they were absent from the data the team collected in 2019, leaving them to wonder what had happened to the star. "It would be highly unusual for such a massive star to disappear without producing a bright supernova explosion," says Allan."

A cosmic mystery: ESO telescope captures the disappearance of a massive star

Could it be their theories are wrong?

Ha


Probably not wrong. As the article you mentions and neatly summarizes for me: "Scientists think this could indicate that the star became less bright and partially obscured by dust. An alternative explanation is that the star collapsed into a black hole without producing a supernova." Nothing here screams wrong, only unaccounted for.

That's the nature of science. It appears to me that you seem to have an issue with uncertainties perhaps?
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
Naturally, science is clueless as to why.

"From 2001 to 2011, the light from the galaxy consistently showed evidence that it hosted a 'luminous blue variable' star some 2.5 million times brighter than the Sun. Stars of this type are unstable, showing occasional dramatic shifts in their spectra and brightness. Even with those shifts, luminous blue variables leave specific traces scientists can identify, but they were absent from the data the team collected in 2019, leaving them to wonder what had happened to the star. "It would be highly unusual for such a massive star to disappear without producing a bright supernova explosion," says Allan."

A cosmic mystery: ESO telescope captures the disappearance of a massive star

Could it be their theories are wrong?

Ha

What specific theory are you suggesting is wrong? Or are you trying to claim that all scientific theories are wrong?
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
Probably not wrong. As the article you mentions and neatly summarizes for me: "Scientists think this could indicate that the star became less bright and partially obscured by dust. An alternative explanation is that the star collapsed into a black hole without producing a supernova." Nothing here screams wrong, only unaccounted for.

That's the nature of science. It appears to me that you seem to have an issue with uncertainties perhaps?
Uncertainties are the gaps that creationists live in.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
But that doesn't sound pithy.
Mr Box had the gift of gab.
Yeah, maybe I could have chosen gift of the gab...but I came down on the side of being as precise as I could. Makes me a nerd, but I can live with that.

Hey, maybe I'm the world's oldest gay nerd! I wonder if that's Guinessable? :p
 

dad

Undefeated
Probably not wrong. As the article you mentions and neatly summarizes for me: "Scientists think this could indicate that the star became less bright and partially obscured by dust. An alternative explanation is that the star collapsed into a black hole without producing a supernova." Nothing here screams wrong, only unaccounted for.

That's the nature of science. It appears to me that you seem to have an issue with uncertainties perhaps?
Right, I notice how they grab a few articles of faith from their little theory bag to use to possibly explain one of the most massive stars in the area up and disappearing! The choice they forgot to offer us was 'maybe our whole darn faith based, godless methods of modelling God's creation are wrong'.
 

dad

Undefeated
What specific theory are you suggesting is wrong? Or are you trying to claim that all scientific theories are wrong?
Rather than suggesting some aspect of their belief system were wrong, I asked if possibly it is basically a flawed method of interpreting creation, period. If the standard model and stellar evolution etc are fatally flawed concepts, we we expect predictions and expectations to routinely be in error. We do.
 

dad

Undefeated
This has nothing to do with creationism vs evolution except perhaps with the logical fallacy that if a scientific theory has a problem then they all do and therefore they're wrong and rigid creationism is right.
No. If God created the stars and everything, then the ideas science uses to explain it all would be wrong. He did. They are.
 

dad

Undefeated
"All models are wrong, but some are useful." - George Box
(Models = Theories)
Name anything that the predictions and claims about the distant universe and BB and stellar evolution gave us, or were of any use anywhere for anything at all?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Name anything that the predictions and claims about the distant universe and BB and stellar evolution gave us, or were of any use anywhere for anything at all?
"Useful" in the context of scientific theories means predictions verified by testing.
For example, Newons laws of gravitation turned out to be useful for space travel,
but not in plotting the precession of Mercury's orbit. General relativity did the job
for Mercury's orbit. It's also useful for GPS, which would suffer in accuacy without
adjusting for the different rate of passage of time between satellites & Earth bound
communication equipment (different gravity levels, ya know).
 

dad

Undefeated
Naturally, science uses anomalous observations to spur investigation and advance science. .
They use whatever they can to splatter their same old bag of beliefs onto. When they fail in a prediction or have something happen that doesn't fit at all, they simply create exotic scenarios where it possibly could be explained by the usual belief set. Since it takes many year to find out they again were wrong, they can sail along playing the wise man again till the next time.
 

dad

Undefeated
"Useful" in the context of scientific theories means predictions verified by testing.
For example, Newons laws of gravitation turned out to be useful for space travel,
but not in plotting the precession of Mercury's orbit. General relativity did the job
for Mercury's orbit. It's also useful for GPS, which would suffer in accuacy without
adjusting for the different rate of passage of time between satellites & Earth bound
communication equipment (different gravity levels, ya know).
That was not the question. The issue is not what goes on in the little Vegas of the area of this solar system. What happens in that Vegas stays in Vegas.

The question was what actual useful machine or invention or anything at all in the real world here on earth is only due to theories of the BB, or stellar evolution or the cosmological model, etc?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top