131–140 of 185 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That seems kind of extreme. While I wouldn't take this paper as proof that the sun is causing pandemics, the correlation is an interesting bit of trivia.
In what way is it interesting? And how is it trivia?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the point is that it's pretty darn close to the very fuzzy limit of when something can be a star vs. when it can't. If it were off in space on its own, rather than orbiting our star, it might be a contentious classification
No - the definition of a star isn't fuzzy at all. It's defined by hydrogen fusion - if it's doing that (or did in the past), it's a star, or if it isn't then it's not. Jupiter fails this by a factor of 75. Brown dwarfs (which fuse deuterium but not regular hydrogen, starting at about 13x Jupiter's mass) were thought to be in a fuzzy area, but then their own category was created for them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am no expert, but I am skeptical because the paper results looks way too perfect to be true. Then instead of doing statistical analysis with things like p-values or probabilities, they make wildly out of scope assertions like this: > "Considering all pandemics with obtained extremum points, we can conclude that sunspot extrema coincide with the pandemics’ first appearance probably because of mutation on virus DNA o…
Would be interesting if resulting bursts of gamma radiation increase the entropy of global DNA causing higher population of new virus candidates.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recall back a few years reading some articles speaking about the sun entering in a Grand Solar Minimum cycle similar to the Maunder minimum, and that the result could be global cooling, etc. Not sure if there's been additional research or conjecture since then.
The theory is that we're due for another ice age and that there's going to be a pole shift. Pumping CO2 into the atmosphere would then be the best thing to do to stave off this scenario.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The theory is that we're due for another ice age and that there's going to be a pole shift. Pumping CO2 into the atmosphere would then be the best thing to do to stave off this scenario.
Well if that were true it would be the opposite of inconvenient. It would be like a truth that’s, I dunno, what’s a good word for something that isn’t inconvenient?
The earth too it seem, but on a longer timeframe. Does someone here know more about this?
We can see alternating bands of polarity in the rock that show what the orientation was over geological time. The bands that spread outward from the ridges are separated by millions of years and provide a clear picture of sea floor spreading, and continental drift.
If you're open to exiting an novel theories on why this happens, check out Dr. Robitaille liquid sun: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUZ0Obpihbc
Very interesting hypothesis. Anyone here with more expertise want to comment? The summary is that the sun is actually metallic hydrogen, which forms a lattice similar to layers of graphite. This both explains the black-body radiation of the sun and provides a mechanism to explain sunspots and the solar maximum and pole flip: sunspots are non-hydrogen elements that are excluded from the metallic hydrogen lattice and p…
Metal hydrogen is a liquid though, it doesn’t form a crystalline structure like an actual metal.