Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,816 Year: 3,073/9,624 Month: 918/1,588 Week: 101/223 Day: 12/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A young sun - a response
Eta_Carinae
Member (Idle past 4374 days)
Posts: 547
From: US
Joined: 11-15-2003


Message 301 of 308 (74067)
12-18-2003 10:04 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by Buzsaw
12-18-2003 9:52 AM


Re:
To repeat - there is no way of knowing the collapse time based upon observation of the Sun itself.
That information is lost in the collapse process. No present day observation of the Sun can give you that information.
What part of this can you not fathom.
No observation of any quantity maintains information of that time. The star in the collapse passes through a fully convective phase. As such it is homogeneous and rotates as a solid body. Thus no differentiation of the internal structure occurs so no light elemental abundances we can measure now allow us to probe this time period during the stars formation. Since it rotates as a solid body (due to convection) we cannot extrapolate backwards in time. We don't know the initial Sun's total angular momentum.
Thus when referring to a star's age the zero point is usually taken as the time it arrives on the main sequence (or first forms a radiative core - these are close to the same time.)
Now from that point on we can set a clock so to speak.
But the collapse itself HAS NO EFFECT on the subsequent evolution.
The estimates for a collapse time are based upon basic physics plus observations of young stellar objects (in various stages) in star forming regions. You can then estimate the collapse time.
BUT TO REPEAT, the collapse time is not something we can gather from observations of the Sun taken at the present day.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by Buzsaw, posted 12-18-2003 9:52 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Eta_Carinae
Member (Idle past 4374 days)
Posts: 547
From: US
Joined: 11-15-2003


Message 302 of 308 (74069)
12-18-2003 10:07 AM
Reply to: Message 298 by Buzsaw
12-18-2003 9:36 AM


Re: Sun Age again
Eta's bogus idea that it's protostar stage doesn't count in calculating age is BOGUS BUNK TO DENY THE SCIENTIFIC FACTS SO AS NOT TO ADMIT BUZ IS RIGHT.
Will you please tell me why this is BOGUS.
It is not bogus, it is unfortunately a physical fact.
Tell me the scientific facts that allow us to measure the collapse time based upon solar observation.
We shall write the journal paper together. You can be the first creationist with an ApJ paper and I can further my career or destroy it with creationist collaboration.
[This message has been edited by Eta_Carinae, 12-18-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 298 by Buzsaw, posted 12-18-2003 9:36 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by Coragyps, posted 12-18-2003 10:12 AM Eta_Carinae has not replied
 Message 305 by Buzsaw, posted 12-18-2003 10:21 AM Eta_Carinae has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 303 of 308 (74071)
12-18-2003 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by Adminnemooseus
12-18-2003 1:14 AM


Re: Sun Age again
As for my part of this loooooooong senseless debacle, my intent from the gitgo was to simply establish that it must appear old to be fully formed and functional, not to make a determination of what age it should look like. According to my literal reading of Genesis one, there could possibly be any amount of time between the age of the earth and that of the sun, the earth being created on day one, which nobody can measure, the sun not being created yet to measure it.
I need to be outa town today and won't be able to respond to any further remarks if the thread is closed, but that's ok.
Admin has been veeeeery patient here in allowing us to duke it out through all these pages without interference. Thanks!
buz
------------------
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past. buz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by Adminnemooseus, posted 12-18-2003 1:14 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 304 of 308 (74072)
12-18-2003 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 302 by Eta_Carinae
12-18-2003 10:07 AM


Re: Sun Age again
You can be the first creationist with an ApJ paper and I can further my career or destroy it with creationist collaboration.
Watch it, Eta! We'll have to kick your sorry butt out of the Evil Atheist Evolutionary Conspiracy if you do that!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 302 by Eta_Carinae, posted 12-18-2003 10:07 AM Eta_Carinae has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 305 of 308 (74075)
12-18-2003 10:21 AM
Reply to: Message 302 by Eta_Carinae
12-18-2003 10:07 AM


Re: Sun Age again
Eta, my understanding is that, not counting the collapse of the nebula, etc, the protostar phase itself would be about 30myo. How can you eliminate the protostar phase in it's apparant age? That's as bogus as saying a corn stalk's age is only determined from the time it's first ear appears.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 302 by Eta_Carinae, posted 12-18-2003 10:07 AM Eta_Carinae has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 306 of 308 (74079)
12-18-2003 10:29 AM


SCIENTIFIC FACT!!!
The sun COULD NOT EXIST scientifically speaking IF YOU CLAIM TO ELIMINATE ALL PHASES OF IT'S FORMATION AND IT'S LONG PHOTOSTAR PHASE IN DETERMINATION OF IT'S AGE!
REFUTE THAT FACT!! Have a good day. buz

Replies to this message:
 Message 307 by Coragyps, posted 12-18-2003 10:53 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 307 of 308 (74087)
12-18-2003 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 306 by Buzsaw
12-18-2003 10:29 AM


Buz......
What Eta is saying is that the protostar phase erases the indicators of its own age, not that the protostar phase doesn't exist! Why don't you look at a cornstalk that's growing its first ear and tell me what day Burpee put the seed in the envelope?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by Buzsaw, posted 12-18-2003 10:29 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 308 of 308 (74090)
12-18-2003 10:59 AM


300+ messages - time to lay this one to rest.
Adminnemooseus
------------------
Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to
Change in Moderation?
or
too fast closure of threads

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024