Readers' Feedback

Astronomy

Page 2 of 3

Generated : 15th December 2019


012

Robert Cottrell

robert@earthpoetry.demon.co.uk

Hello,

I like your site particularly the We Are Stardust page. So I was wondering if you would mind if I put a link on my links page to your site. My site is at:-

http://www.earthpoetry.demon.co.uk

for your perusal.

It gets very hot indeed in suns, black holes and big bangs. :)

KryssTal Reply: Your site is excellent. I would be honoured with a link. I think you may need to change your background graphic as it really slows the loading and that might scare away impatient surfers!

I'll put a link to your site from my astronomy and science page.


011

HPM Adriaens

e.adriaens@dcc.disp.mindef.nl

Hello,

I found site while I was looking for an estimation of the total number of atoms in the universe. Do you know it ?

KryssTal Reply: We can only estimate:

The number of galaxies: 1012
The number of stars in each galaxy: 1011
The mass of an average star: 2 × 1030 kg
Number of atoms in 1kg: 6 × 1026

The number of atoms in the Universe will be the product of the above numbers:

approx 1080

Hope this is useful

jonge jonge wat hebben we het druk..... hoezo, hoeveel korrels er op het laatste vakje van het schaakbord liggen.....

KryssTal Thoughts: ?


010

Julia Lord

julial@michianatoday.com

Hi there,

My dad sent me some information from your website about what planets were currently visible, etc..... and your e-mail address was at the bottom. But, the website address wasn't listed on there and he can't seem to remember how he got there. Could you send me the address? The information is fantastic and I'd really like to read more! :-)

Julia

KryssTal Reply: Thank you for your kind comments. [Go to ] my main astronomy page. From there you can link to all the other pages including the monthly planets page (which I will be updating in a few days for next month).


009

Manuel Pereira

manuelpereira@sprint.ca

Hey, your another one that says the Sun has born. Give me a break. For your information the Sun does not sleep. the Sun is a 24 hours burning star.

We born ! after a very good Nigth Sleep, Not The Sun Star.

KryssTal Reply:

your => tuo
you're = you are => tu eres

I did mean "born" as in "began to shine 5 thousand million years ago" rather than born each day.

no nacaba cada dia, nacio una vez hace 5,000,000,000 anos.

We born = we are born / we were born.


008

Roger A. Romine

mary@msmisp.com

Is there some type of eclips suspose to happen some time in the next week or so? I've heard we are to experence a midnight sun of some sort?

KryssTal Reply: The next eclipse is in January [2000] - it will be an eclipse of the Moon. If you log in to my Monthly Sky site early next January, you will find details of all the month's activities as seen from the northern hemisphere.

The presence of the midnight sun depends on your latitude. If you are further north than 66 degrees (unlikely in Ohio) you would get the midnight sun each summer.

For more eclipse information try Fred Espenak's excellent site on

http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/eclipse.html


007

Roger Rehayem

roger.r@worldnet.att.net

Hello Kryss!

I just enjoyed reading your article on stars.

In my opinion it is very well written, but if I may offer a suggestion it would be to elaborate on how the elements above iron are created. Since the real "target" of the article is stardust, it seems appropriate to include and explanation of how the heavier elements are created.

Again, great article. It is a nice source for someone to obtain a concise yet lucid explanation of this amazing discovery about our existence.

KryssTal Reply: Thank you very much for your kind comments.

I am always looking to improve and add to my site. Recently I have been working on the language and football sections but I will eventually get round to the astronomical essays.


006

Darren M Flowers

herbert@pcpro.net.au

Excellent site! I enjoyed it immensely.

KryssTal Reply: Thank you


005

Aron

HOSTAACSciBorg@aol.com

Hi. I tutor middle school science students. During one tutoring session, I came across your very informative website. However, I wonder about one small piece of information.

You list the axial tilt of Venus as 177.4 degrees. Are you sure that is correct? It has always been my understanding that it had a tilt of about 2 degrees (1.774 degrees, perhaps?).

Many thanks.

KryssTal Reply: Correct. It has a tilt of just over 2 degrees but it rotates in a retrograde direction. So we write it as nearly 178 degrees to show this.

Thanks for visiting.


004

Lesly Lochard

lgl437@ync.net

Greetings Kryss. My question is: Is the current ASTRONOMICAL SYNETIC VERNAL POINT at 7 degrees (constellation) Pisces 19 ? or is it at 6 degrees (constellation)Pices 14 ? or is the current astronomical S.V.P at a totally different degree of the actual constellation pisces than the degrees mentioned above?

I'll be watching for your answer in my e mail. Thanks.

KryssTal Reply: Constellations are human creations like countries. The current position of the Vernal Equinox point (which I think is what you are talking about) is in Pisces.


003

Robert Franklin, Lakewood High School

Sleeperman@myvzw.com

Krysstal,

Today I was visiting your website and I was impressed. You have a plethora of information which made searching very simple. While browsing your website I came across the title "We Are Stardust".

I must ask you have to be careful how you state your information. When you make a statement like this you are violating many people's beliefs. You see there are many different ideas on how people came to be. You perception is obviously gravitated towards evolution. Now I am NOT saying things don't evolve. I am simply saying that you cannot state for a fact that people are stardust or that our earth is as aged as you say it is. Now you may come at me with Carbon dating and samples of the earth's structure which may hint to an older earth, but many believe in Creationism, which has many conflicts with theories of evolution.

I think it is very difficult to say that our world is what it is through an "all natural" process. There are so many complex details in life. Slight changes in the "beginning" could have drastically affected our outcome. There, quite possibly, might have been a "Divine Power" that had shaped this world.

Whether or not you believe this is not the question. There are many people who do, and the way you state our creation on your website COULD be false. So when you state your theories you might want to use words that show it to be your opinion, rather then defying others beliefs.

Thank you for you time.

KryssTal Reply: Dear Robert

Thank you for your comments.

I think we have a communication problem here.

Science does not state any absolute truths. Absolute truths are the realm of faith and religion. Science deals with observations, hypotheses and theories.

When enough observations are gathered, a number of guesses (called "hypotheses", singular "hypothesis") are made to explain these. These hypotheses should do two things: explain the observations and make predictions that can be tested by other observations (called "experiments"). Perhaps, none of the hypotheses will survive close scrutiny. Often many of the hypotheses will be discarded fairly quickly.

If a hypothesis passes the tests of observation, more experiments are designed to attempt to disprove the hypothesis. Indeed, a scientific statement is one that can be disproved. For example, the statement, "salt dissolves in water" is scientific because it is possible to design an experiment to disprove it; namely dissolve some salt in water and see what happens. However, a statement like "there is a green ball in this box that is blue when I look at it" is not a scientific statement. No experiment can be designed to disprove it!

Anyway, if a hypothesis passes many many tests it becomes a theory. A theory is a hypothesis that has passed many many tests. A theory is still not absolute truth. A hypothesis can pass 1000 tests and fail just one. If it does this it will have failed. All theories may fail tomorrow if a piece of evidence is found to disprove them.

The essay, We Are Stardust, is at this level. It is the accepted theory because a large body of evidence points to it and (so far) no evidence has been found against it. Creationism begins with the assumption that it is absolutely true because of the belief system of its proponents. This is not science. Science observes, hypothesises, tests and theorises. It does not assume an idea and declare it absolute truth.

To summarise, this essay is based on scientific principles and has nothing to do with faith or religion. Your beliefs are a matter for you and you alone. Science is subject to stringent testing. It is in the public domain; all results and experiments should be repeatable by any person.

There seems to be a movement in the USA to pass creationism off as a science, something that is uncommon outside of your country. In Europe, the battles between science and religion were fought 400 years ago and are over.

The age and origin of the Earth should not affect your beliefs or how you behave as an individual. If you base your morality codes on testable scientific ideas, they may turn out to be incorrect. Your morality should be separate from things like the age of the Earth or the nuclear reactions inside stars. If you believe in a deity, the mechanism by which the deity works (creation 5000 years ago or evolution over millions of years) should not affect the message of the deity about human behaviour.

It is wrong to steal, lie or kill regardless of how the Earth formed or how old it is. Why do you mix science with morals? The two are different things.

Again, thank you for your email. Keep questioning everything (even this reply!), it's much healthier than accepting without question.

Regards


© 2019, KryssTal

[Top]