So did some argue that 5000 years was consistent with the Bible? [I did search, but DDG found nada.]
Almost - 6,000 years is the common figure in young earth creationism although I see Wikipedia mention 10,000 also.
Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
21–30 of 244 posts
Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#22(1863)
I added it. In a way it's dodgy though, because SA isn't providing the original article or even a photo of it. This is just a single-paragraph quote, and they've milked that cow before: https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1jym5d/in_the_s..., which I ran across while failing to track down the original article.
Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#23My personal favorite "old science" theory: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether > Luminiferous aether or ether[1] ("luminiferous", meaning "light-bearing") was the postulated medium for the propagation of light.[2] It was invoked to explain the ability of the apparently wave-based light to propagate through empty space, something that waves should not be able to do. The assumption of a spatial plenum o…
It’s not all that far off from the electromagnetic field.
Not only that, cosmic plasma filaments carrying charged dust around is the most likely explanation for the "missing" matter and energy that two Nobels were handed out for the, continued, non-discovery.
I do not understand why the Aether was ridiculed, but Dark (Matter|Energy) are not. They both depend on something we can't see or detect in any way, and Occam's Razor dictates that, without further evidence, I have to consider the least complex explanation the probably correct one: Plasma physics is a well understood field that involves the Electromagnetic force, and Cosmology has simply neglected to understand how large plasma currents can scale to.
The irony is, Hannes Alfvén (1970 Nobel Prize winner for his work on Magnetohydrodynamics, also had significant contributions to space science) basically stated that this is the most likely cause of coronal heating, based on the earlier work of Kristian Birkeland (nominated for the Nobel 7 times)... gigantic plasma currents slamming into the Sun at it's polar regions, much like how the Solar magnetic field slams into us at our poles and causes high energy plasma events known as the Aurora.
Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#24Interesting that Sun burning coal age is well under billion years, while white dwarfs - which don't have corresponding reactions supporting the light emission - can live a trillion years.
White dwarfs are quite small, making their heat loss to radiation fairly low.
Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#25Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#26My personal favorite "old science" theory: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether > Luminiferous aether or ether[1] ("luminiferous", meaning "light-bearing") was the postulated medium for the propagation of light.[2] It was invoked to explain the ability of the apparently wave-based light to propagate through empty space, something that waves should not be able to do. The assumption of a spatial plenum o…
My favourite factoid about the aether theory is that Faraday found it implausible, on the basis that he couldn't conceive of a fluid medium that could propagate transverse waves evenly in all directions, but not longitudinal waves in any direction.
Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#27My personal favorite "old science" theory: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether > Luminiferous aether or ether[1] ("luminiferous", meaning "light-bearing") was the postulated medium for the propagation of light.[2] It was invoked to explain the ability of the apparently wave-based light to propagate through empty space, something that waves should not be able to do. The assumption of a spatial plenum o…
It’s also the namesake of ethernet.
Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#28My personal favorite "old science" theory: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether > Luminiferous aether or ether[1] ("luminiferous", meaning "light-bearing") was the postulated medium for the propagation of light.[2] It was invoked to explain the ability of the apparently wave-based light to propagate through empty space, something that waves should not be able to do. The assumption of a spatial plenum o…
It’s not all that far off from the electromagnetic field.
It really is. Fields don't exist until something waves in them. Aether was something to be waved.
Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#29[deleted]
Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)
#30Well, I'm glad that's settled.
Teach the controversy.