Gamma-ray burst could kill off ocean life

On 7/25/10 3:59 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Jul 25, 11:58 am, wrote:
On Jul 25, 6:05 am, Sam wrote:

On 7/24/10 11:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

How much gamma did we get from Sirius(B)?

You do know that Sirius B is a white dwarf and not a black
hole, Right?

And, just to be clear, this means that Sirius B was never a
supernova...

\Paul A

The original mass of Sirius(B) was likely less than 10 Ms, and as a
result it didn't live very long before going postal.

~ BG

The fact that Sirius B is observed to be a white dwarf means
that it was less than eight solar masses as a main sequence star.

Ref: http://stars.astro.illinois.edu/sow/sirius.html

"Sirius B is the chief member of a trio of classic white dwarfs, the
others Procyon B and 40 Eridani B. Its high mass and tiny radius lead to
an amazing average density of 1.7 metric tons per cubic centimeter,
roughly a sugar cube. White dwarfs are the end products of ordinary
stars like the Sun, tiny remnants that were once nuclear-fusing cores
that have run out of fuel. Most are balls of carbon and oxygen whose
fates are merely to cool forever. To have evolved first, Sirius B must
once have been more massive and luminous than Sirius A. That its mass is
now lower is proof that stars lose considerable mass as they die. Given
the mass of the white dwarf and the 250 million year age of the system,
Sirius B may once have been a hot class B3-B5 star that could have
contained as much as 5 to 7 solar masses, the star perhaps losing over
80 percent of itself back into interstellar space through earlier winds".

On 7/25/10 3:56 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Jul 25, 6:05 am, Sam wrote:
On 7/24/10 11:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

How much gamma did we get from Sirius(B)?

You do know that Sirius B is a white dwarf and not a black
hole, Right?

It was nearby when its helium flashover took place.

Are you suggesting that a powerful nova is not gamma worthy?

~ BG


There is no evidence that Sirius B has ever gone Nova--For one thing
Sirius A and B are too far apart.

Background on Helium Flash for Brad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_flash

"Stars with greater than about 2.25 solar masses start to burn helium
without their core becoming degenerate and so do not exhibit this type
of helium flash".

"The helium flash is NOT directly observable on the surface by
electromagnetic radiation. The flash occurs in the core deep inside the
star, and the net effect will be that all released energy is absorbed by
the entire core leaving the degenerate state to become nondegenerate.
Earlier computations indicated that a nondisruptive mass loss would be
possible in some cases, but later star modeling taking neutrino energy
loss in account indicates no such mass loss".

On Jul 25, 2:22*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 7/25/10 3:56 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

On Jul 25, 6:05 am, Sam *wrote:
On 7/24/10 11:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

How much gamma did we get from Sirius(B)?

* * You do know that Sirius B is a white dwarf and not a black
* * hole, Right?

It was nearby when its helium flashover took place.

Are you suggesting that a powerful nova is not gamma worthy?

* ~ BG

There is no evidence that Sirius B has ever gone Nova--For one thing
Sirius A and B are too far apart.

* *Background on Helium Flash for Brad
* * *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_flash

"Stars with greater than about 2.25 solar masses start to burn helium
without their core becoming degenerate and so do not exhibit this type
of helium flash".

"The helium flash is NOT directly observable on the surface by
electromagnetic radiation. The flash occurs in the core deep inside the
star, and the net effect will be that all released energy is absorbed by
the entire core leaving the degenerate state to become nondegenerate.
Earlier computations indicated that a nondisruptive mass loss would be
possible in some cases, but later star modeling taking neutrino energy
loss in account indicates no such mass loss".

Your purely subjective interpretation is noted.

Sirius(B) started off as a 9 Ms. Go fish.

Sirius(B) may also have consumed Sirius(C). Go fish again.

You don't even know how close we were to those Sirius stars.

~ BG

On Jul 25, 2:13*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 7/25/10 3:59 PM, Brad Guth wrote:



On Jul 25, 11:58 am, *wrote:
On Jul 25, 6:05 am, Sam *wrote:

On 7/24/10 11:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

How much gamma did we get from Sirius(B)?

* * You do know that Sirius B is a white dwarf and not a black
* * hole, Right?

And, just to be clear, this means that Sirius B was never a
supernova...

\Paul A

The original mass of Sirius(B) was likely less than 10 Ms, and as a
result it didn't live very long before going postal.

* ~ BG

* *The fact that Sirius B is observed to be a white dwarf means
* *that it was less than eight solar masses as a main sequence star.

* *Ref:http://stars.astro.illinois.edu/sow/sirius.html

"Sirius B is the chief member of a trio of classic white dwarfs, the
others Procyon B and 40 Eridani B. Its high mass and tiny radius lead to
an amazing average density of 1.7 metric tons per cubic centimeter,
roughly a sugar cube. White dwarfs are the end products of ordinary
stars like the Sun, tiny remnants that were once nuclear-fusing cores
that have run out of fuel. Most are balls of carbon and oxygen whose
fates are merely to cool forever. To have evolved first, Sirius B must
once have been more massive and luminous than Sirius A. That its mass is
now lower is proof that stars lose considerable mass as they die. Given
the mass of the white dwarf and the 250 million year age of the system,
Sirius B may once have been a hot class B3-B5 star that could have
contained as much as 5 to 7 solar masses, the star perhaps losing over
80 percent of itself back into interstellar space through earlier winds".

Again, your purely subjective interpretation or acceptance of the
mainstream status quo is noted. Now like good parrot you should get
back in your cage and on your perch.

~ BG

On 7/25/10 6:06 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Jul 25, 2:13 pm, Sam wrote:
On 7/25/10 3:59 PM, Brad Guth wrote:



On Jul 25, 11:58 am, wrote:
On Jul 25, 6:05 am, Sam wrote:

On 7/24/10 11:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

How much gamma did we get from Sirius(B)?

You do know that Sirius B is a white dwarf and not a black
hole, Right?

And, just to be clear, this means that Sirius B was never a
supernova...

\Paul A

The original mass of Sirius(B) was likely less than 10 Ms, and as a
result it didn't live very long before going postal.

~ BG

The fact that Sirius B is observed to be a white dwarf means
that it was less than eight solar masses as a main sequence star.

Ref:http://stars.astro.illinois.edu/sow/sirius.html

"Sirius B is the chief member of a trio of classic white dwarfs, the
others Procyon B and 40 Eridani B. Its high mass and tiny radius lead to
an amazing average density of 1.7 metric tons per cubic centimeter,
roughly a sugar cube. White dwarfs are the end products of ordinary
stars like the Sun, tiny remnants that were once nuclear-fusing cores
that have run out of fuel. Most are balls of carbon and oxygen whose
fates are merely to cool forever. To have evolved first, Sirius B must
once have been more massive and luminous than Sirius A. That its mass is
now lower is proof that stars lose considerable mass as they die. Given
the mass of the white dwarf and the 250 million year age of the system,
Sirius B may once have been a hot class B3-B5 star that could have
contained as much as 5 to 7 solar masses, the star perhaps losing over
80 percent of itself back into interstellar space through earlier winds".

Again, your purely subjective interpretation or acceptance of the
mainstream status quo is noted. Now like good parrot you should get
back in your cage and on your perch.

~ BG

Awk--What evidence do you have? None!

On 7/25/10 6:03 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Jul 25, 2:22 pm, Sam wrote:
On 7/25/10 3:56 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

On Jul 25, 6:05 am, Sam wrote:
On 7/24/10 11:04 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

How much gamma did we get from Sirius(B)?

You do know that Sirius B is a white dwarf and not a black
hole, Right?

It was nearby when its helium flashover took place.

Are you suggesting that a powerful nova is not gamma worthy?

~ BG

There is no evidence that Sirius B has ever gone Nova--For one thing
Sirius A and B are too far apart.

Background on Helium Flash for Brad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium_flash

"Stars with greater than about 2.25 solar masses start to burn helium
without their core becoming degenerate and so do not exhibit this type
of helium flash".

"The helium flash is NOT directly observable on the surface by
electromagnetic radiation. The flash occurs in the core deep inside the
star, and the net effect will be that all released energy is absorbed by
the entire core leaving the degenerate state to become nondegenerate.
Earlier computations indicated that a nondisruptive mass loss would be
possible in some cases, but later star modeling taking neutrino energy
loss in account indicates no such mass loss".

Your purely subjective interpretation is noted.

Sirius(B) started off as a 9 Ms. Go fish.

Evidence suggests 5-7 Solar Masses.


Sirius(B) may also have consumed Sirius(C). Go fish again.

No Evidence of a Sirius C.


You don't even know how close we were to those Sirius stars.

No Evidence to suggest were were closer than today.


~ BG

On Jul 25, 4:03*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Your purely subjective interpretation is noted.

Nothing subjective about Sam's interpretation, it is simple Astronomy
101

Sirius(B) started off as a 9 Ms. *Go fish.

YOU go fish, there is no way Sirius B was ever that heavy...if it
were, it would NOT be a white dwarf today. Again, astronomy 101...
which you apparently either missed or slept through.

Sirius(B) may also have consumed Sirius(C). *Go fish again.

There is no evidence of a Sirius C... but even is there is/was... so
what? Meaningless...

You don't even know how close we were to those Sirius stars.

True enough, except that we know fer sure that the Sirius system was a
lot farther away than it is now.

You need to get over your obsession with the Sirius system, it is only
remarkable at all because of its proximity to the solar system. Other
than that, it is remarkably unremarkable, there are tens of thousands
of other systems just like it.

You like to reject facts as a matter of faith, having no real
knowledge as to whether or not they are true.

\Paul A

On Jul 25, 8:04*pm, palsing wrote:
On Jul 25, 4:03*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Your purely subjective interpretation is noted.

*Nothing subjective about Sam's interpretation, it is simple Astronomy
101

Sirius(B) started off as a 9 Ms. *Go fish.

YOU go fish, there is no way Sirius B was ever that heavy...if it
were, it would NOT be a white dwarf today. Again, astronomy 101...
which you apparently either missed or slept through.

Sirius(B) may also have consumed Sirius(C). *Go fish again.

There is no evidence of a Sirius C... but even is there is/was... so
what? Meaningless...

You don't even know how close we were to those Sirius stars.

True enough, except that we know fer sure that the Sirius system was a
lot farther away than it is now.

You need to get over your obsession with the Sirius system, it is only
remarkable at all because of its proximity to the solar system. Other
than that, it is remarkably unremarkable, there are tens of thousands
of other systems just like it.

You like to reject facts as a matter of faith, having no real
knowledge as to whether or not they are true.

\Paul A

Astrophysics in currently in the toilet. Far to much doesn't adds up
and new stuff keeps getting more weird with nearly every discovery.

The true history/evolution of Earth is still up for grabs.

~ BG

On 7/26/10 7:22 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
Astrophysics in currently in the toilet. Far to much doesn't adds up
and new stuff keeps getting more weird with nearly every discovery.

Translation: Brad doesn't understand a bit of astrophysics, as is
documented in his posting record.

On Jul 26, 5:59*pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 7/26/10 7:22 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Astrophysics in currently in the toilet. *Far to much doesn't adds up
and new stuff keeps getting more weird with nearly every discovery.

* *Translation: Brad doesn't understand a bit of astrophysics, as is
* *documented in his posting record.

And your infomercial parroting means what exactly?

Are you suggesting that a trained monkey couldn't do as well as
yourself?

~ BG