[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Offworld is without doubt the most ignorant fool when it comes to supernovae. I'm astounded that I had to bother to announce this -- what the hell are the rest of you folks thinking to let Offworld spew absolute nonsense at you like that and not one of you had the idea to, like, what?, maybe Google the word supernova? This group doesn't deserve me setting it straight about Offworld's misinformation. Look it up yourselves and stop being so uninformed, and do something about the spouting of pure crappola from creeps like Offworld -- an amazingly dense block of ignorance. There's some good thought posted here, but sometimes, it just isn't worth the scrolling past all the posts of the idiots to find them. I feel a loss of personal integrity to see these dangerous pricks running amuck in our culture and just sit here like the rest of you and do nothing about it -- like, never come back here again and be exposed to such low mentalities. I wish the good writers here would pack up and leave -- then I could stop coming here. Astronomerforidiots This has got to be a spoof right?, so much hate. You are good with words like: ignorant fool, creeps, dense block of ignorance, low mentalities, dangerous pricks You label me a Dangerous because I make a hypothesis. You must be a nutjob in an asylum. Do they have internet in the insane asylums? EIther that or you sholdn't be posting after you have been drinking again. Off World's Prediction #2: Within one year of this date, Supernovae will be confirmed or postulated in science journals to have the possible characteristics of sudden flare-up, and diminishment, lasting only seconds. Then, at that moment, Duveyoung, when those studies are trumpeted, you will remember my name. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cool experience no matter what you combine with it. The universe is an awesome place. If it inspired awe then it was the spirit of Doug. Good enough. Sometimes, the soul energy can appear this way; for me anyway, sometimes I think of someone, and I get a flash of light, like a shooting star, that fades away... So, it could have been, a sort of inner experience- or a perception of the soul's energy?... r.g. http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0703/feature3/multimedia.html March 2007 National Geographic magazine: Once a second somewhere in the universe a star explodes with the brilliance of an entire galaxy I saw one. No-one will believe this but, I saw one the day Doug Henning died. (I should point out I had, and have, no sense of interest or connection to Doug Henning or anything he did whatsoever...totally uninteresting to me). On the day Doug Henning died, I walked out of the dome in the evening, happened to look straight up, and I saw a bright point of light come alive and then fade slowly over about 2-3 seconds. I thought: Wow, I just saw a supernova - amazing. I had studied astronomy in-depth as a teenager, and I could think of nothing else that would do that, so deep in the evening sky. It was like a silent beacon from deep deep in the warmth of space, there was a warmth and bliss to everything in those moments. And I thought, maybe I imagined it, but I'll just check its position and see if there are any reports in astronomy magazines. So I noted its position between Orion and Casseoppeia. A few weeks later I was in a bookstore browsing, and decided to look the position up, to see where it was. I was amazed to find that the constellation it was in was Auriga (which I had forgotten since my teenage studies), and further that Auriga meant The Charioteer, so I thought that was neat, because Maharishi had always been going on about Brahman being the Charioteer. But further I looked and then I discovered that within Auriga, right around the region where I saw the supernova (or whatever it was) was a tiny constellation I had never heard of called the Magicians. How funny, since it was the day Doug Henning died who was so close to Maharishi's heart. I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Not even one? In the whole wide entire universe? Supernovae are *stars*, remember...too much Stuff involved to be done with that fast. Could've been something even more exotic, but not a supernova.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Not even one? In the whole wide entire universe? Supernovae are *stars*, remember...too much Stuff involved to be done with that fast. Could've been something even more exotic, but not a supernova. Also, of course, if it *had* been a supernova, the distances are so great it would take the light from the explosion a LONG time to reach us, so it would have actually blown up many years in the past. Distances between stars are measured in light-years, the distance light travels in a year. The nearest star to us is about 4 light-years away. (If the sun were to blow up, we wouldn't know about it for 9 minutes.) Supernovae are typically tens of thousands, even millions, of light-years distant. Whatever it was, though, it was a neat experience.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of off_world_beings Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 9:23 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0703/feature3/multimedia.html March 2007 National Geographic magazine: Once a second somewhere in the universe a star explodes with the brilliance of an entire galaxy I saw one. No-one will believe this but, I saw one the day Doug Henning died. (I should point out I had, and have, no sense of interest or connection to Doug Henning or anything he did whatsoever...totally uninteresting to me). On the day Doug Henning died, I walked out of the dome in the evening, happened to look straight up, and I saw a bright point of light come alive and then fade slowly over about 2-3 seconds. I thought: Wow, I just saw a supernova - amazing. I had studied astronomy in-depth as a teenager, and I could think of nothing else that would do that, so deep in the evening sky. It was like a silent beacon from deep deep in the warmth of space, there was a warmth and bliss to everything in those moments. And I thought, maybe I imagined it, but I'll just check its position and see if there are any reports in astronomy magazines. So I noted its position between Orion and Casseoppeia. A few weeks later I was in a bookstore browsing, and decided to look the position up, to see where it was. I was amazed to find that the constellation it was in was Auriga (which I had forgotten since my teenage studies), and further that Auriga meant The Charioteer, so I thought that was neat, because Maharishi had always been going on about Brahman being the Charioteer. But further I looked and then I discovered that within Auriga, right around the region where I saw the supernova (or whatever it was) was a tiny constellation I had never heard of called the Magicians. How funny, since it was the day Doug Henning died who was so close to Maharishi's heart. I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae Some of them certainly can appear and fizz out in seconds. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of off_world_beings Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 9:23 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0703/feature3/multimedia.html March 2007 National Geographic magazine: Once a second somewhere in the universe a star explodes with the brilliance of an entire galaxy I saw one. No-one will believe this but, I saw one the day Doug Henning died. (I should point out I had, and have, no sense of interest or connection to Doug Henning or anything he did whatsoever...totally uninteresting to me). On the day Doug Henning died, I walked out of the dome in the evening, happened to look straight up, and I saw a bright point of light come alive and then fade slowly over about 2-3 seconds. I thought: Wow, I just saw a supernova - amazing. I had studied astronomy in-depth as a teenager, and I could think of nothing else that would do that, so deep in the evening sky. It was like a silent beacon from deep deep in the warmth of space, there was a warmth and bliss to everything in those moments. And I thought, maybe I imagined it, but I'll just check its position and see if there are any reports in astronomy magazines. So I noted its position between Orion and Casseoppeia. A few weeks later I was in a bookstore browsing, and decided to look the position up, to see where it was. I was amazed to find that the constellation it was in was Auriga (which I had forgotten since my teenage studies), and further that Auriga meant The Charioteer, so I thought that was neat, because Maharishi had always been going on about Brahman being the Charioteer. But further I looked and then I discovered that within Auriga, right around the region where I saw the supernova (or whatever it was) was a tiny constellation I had never heard of called the Magicians. How funny, since it was the day Doug Henning died who was so close to Maharishi's heart. I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Not even one? In the whole wide entire universe? Not and be a supernova in the definition used by astronomers. Yes they can. It is well known by astronomers that these can also happen. It is a different type of start and different energy of explosion. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Cool experience no matter what you combine with it. The universe is an awesome place. If it inspired awe then it was the spirit of Doug. Good enough. Sometimes, the soul energy can appear this way; for me anyway, sometimes I think of someone, and I get a flash of light, like a shooting star, that fades away... So, it could have been, a sort of inner experience- or a perception of the soul's energy?... r.g. Maybe, except I had absolutely no interest in Doug, never thought about him, (and even found him off-putting a bit), and I didn't even know he had died (or that he was seriously sick) at the time I saw it. I also had dreams of John Lennon and Lady Diana, the night they died, before I heard the news that came out the next morning. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae Some of them certainly can appear and fizz out in seconds. Um, no.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Not even one? In the whole wide entire universe? Supernovae are *stars*, remember...too much Stuff involved to be done with that fast. Could've been something even more exotic, but not a supernova. The speed of the flare up would entirely depend upon the size of the star compared to the forces around it, and how far it into space it flared up. If the distance that the expansion occured was only a short one and the power behind the initial implosion and consequent explosion were very high, plus the environmental forces in the region (including gravity) did not restrict the expansion phase, then certainly short duration supernova's are possible and probably very common. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Not even one? In the whole wide entire universe? Supernovae are *stars*, remember...too much Stuff involved to be done with that fast. Could've been something even more exotic, but not a supernova. The speed of the flare up would entirely depend upon the size of the star compared to the forces around it, and how far it into space it flared up. If the distance that the expansion occured was only a short one and the power behind the initial implosion and consequent explosion were very high, plus the environmental forces in the region (including gravity) did not restrict the expansion phase, then certainly short duration supernova's are possible and probably very common. Are those still called supernovae?
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae Some of them certainly can appear and fizz out in seconds. Um, no.. Wrong. You need to understand the forces possible in far flung parts of the universe, not just base your thinking on local stellar objects. Some stars are very small and very powerful, and the extent of the blast can be a short distance. Certainly possible, probably common. And how would you explain a supernova occuring about 14 billion years ago, which to our time-frame would be close to the beginning of time, which, by our time-frame perspective had a different space-time structure, time was, in a sense, faster, and yet, the event, by our spatial perspective, is on the far-flung expanding edge of our known universe. To use simple linear and layman's thinking at this point will not suffice. Even the physicists cannot be sure how these events extrapolate into our time-space perspective. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Not even one? In the whole wide entire universe? Supernovae are *stars*, remember...too much Stuff involved to be done with that fast. Could've been something even more exotic, but not a supernova. The speed of the flare up would entirely depend upon the size of the star compared to the forces around it, and how far it into space it flared up. If the distance that the expansion occured was only a short one and the power behind the initial implosion and consequent explosion were very high, plus the environmental forces in the region (including gravity) did not restrict the expansion phase, then certainly short duration supernova's are possible and probably very common. Are those still called supernovae? If you are in the vicinity of on of them, for example, in the far reaches of the so-called dark-zone, then they often have another word for them, but I don't remember it :-) Seriously though, I think so, because what I am talking about is the same phenomena, smaller in scale, more powerful, shorter lived (athough main-stream (read: lagging) theory, suggests there must be a certain mass -- although mass has nothing to do with size when it comes to stars, therefore, the distance covered could minute, and yet super-powerful and luminous) Space contains regions that have different ratios of the elements of the structure of space-time and these are very different from our region in the way the energies can have lesser or higher impacts on their surroundings, and even the speed of light becomes variable ad breakable. An analogy would be that, imagine a giant man 3,000 feet tall walking on Earth, what an impact that would have, but the same man walking on a planet the 10 times the size of Jupiter or bigger, he would seem vulnerable and minute and the impacts would be completely unrelated. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae Some of them certainly can appear and fizz out in seconds. Um, no.. Wrong. You need to understand the forces possible in far flung parts of the universe, not just base your thinking on local stellar objects. Some stars are very small and very powerful, and the extent of the blast can be a short distance. Certainly possible, probably common. And how would you explain a supernova occuring about 14 billion years ago, which to our time-frame would be close to the beginning of time, which, by our time-frame perspective had a different space-time structure, time was, in a sense, faster, and yet, the event, by our spatial perspective, is on the far-flung expanding edge of our known universe. To use simple linear and layman's thinking at this point will not suffice. Even the physicists cannot be sure how these events extrapolate into our time-space perspective. OffWorld Ummm... Have supernovae been observed to occur 14 billion years ago?
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel babajii_99@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues curtisdeltablues@ wrote: Cool experience no matter what you combine with it. The universe is an awesome place. If it inspired awe then it was the spirit of Doug. Good enough. Sometimes, the soul energy can appear this way; for me anyway, sometimes I think of someone, and I get a flash of light, like a shooting star, that fades away... So, it could have been, a sort of inner experience- or a perception of the soul's energy?... r.g. Maybe, except I had absolutely no interest in Doug, never thought about him, (and even found him off-putting a bit), and I didn't even know he had died (or that he was seriously sick) at the time I saw it. I also had dreams of John Lennon and Lady Diana, the night they died, before I heard the news that came out the next morning. OffWorld Hope you won't be dreaming of me any time soon! ;-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae Some of them certainly can appear and fizz out in seconds. Um, no.. Wrong. You need to understand the forces possible in far flung parts of the universe, not just base your thinking on local stellar objects. Some stars are very small and very powerful, and the extent of the blast can be a short distance. Certainly possible, probably common. And how would you explain a supernova occuring about 14 billion years ago, which to our time-frame would be close to the beginning of time, which, by our time-frame perspective had a different space-time structure, time was, in a sense, faster, and yet, the event, by our spatial perspective, is on the far-flung expanding edge of our known universe. To use simple linear and layman's thinking at this point will not suffice. Even the physicists cannot be sure how these events extrapolate into our time-space perspective. Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae Some of them certainly can appear and fizz out in seconds. Um, no.. Wrong. You need to understand the forces possible in far flung parts of the universe, not just base your thinking on local stellar objects. Some stars are very small and very powerful, and the extent of the blast can be a short distance. Certainly possible, probably common. And how would you explain a supernova occuring about 14 billion years ago, which to our time-frame would be close to the beginning of time, which, by our time-frame perspective had a different space-time structure, time was, in a sense, faster, and yet, the event, by our spatial perspective, is on the far-flung expanding edge of our known universe. To use simple linear and layman's thinking at this point will not suffice. Even the physicists cannot be sure how these events extrapolate into our time-space perspective. Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful).
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. Not under the current definition, at least.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). However, without a rather large bit of debate, the phenomenon wouldn't be called a supernova. Look at the recent debate surrounding whether or not Pluto should be called a planet.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae Some of them certainly can appear and fizz out in seconds. Um, no.. Wrong. You need to understand the forces possible in far flung parts of the universe, not just base your thinking on local stellar objects. Some stars are very small and very powerful, and the extent of the blast can be a short distance. Certainly possible, probably common. And how would you explain a supernova occuring about 14 billion years ago, which to our time-frame would be close to the beginning of time, which, by our time-frame perspective had a different space-time structure, time was, in a sense, faster, and yet, the event, by our spatial perspective, is on the far-flung expanding edge of our known universe. To use simple linear and layman's thinking at this point will not suffice. Even the physicists cannot be sure how these events extrapolate into our time-space perspective. OffWorld Ummm... Have supernovae been observed to occur 14 billion years ago? Ummm...supernova are not very often observed. Period. The observation of a supernova by astronomers is a rare event. Another layman's misconception. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae Some of them certainly can appear and fizz out in seconds. Um, no.. Wrong. You need to understand the forces possible in far flung parts of the universe, not just base your thinking on local stellar objects. Some stars are very small and very powerful, and the extent of the blast can be a short distance. Certainly possible, probably common. And how would you explain a supernova occuring about 14 billion years ago, which to our time-frame would be close to the beginning of time, which, by our time-frame perspective had a different space-time structure, time was, in a sense, faster, and yet, the event, by our spatial perspective, is on the far-flung expanding edge of our known universe. To use simple linear and layman's thinking at this point will not suffice. Even the physicists cannot be sure how these events extrapolate into our time-space perspective. Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. Except for the one I saw. And such short flare-ups you will see confirmed or postulated in science journals within the next couple of years. Then, at that moment, you will remember my name ;-) OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. She stated, in the same emphatic fashion that some used to say that the Earth cannot revolve around the Sun. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. I can't say that with absolute certainty, but going by the scientifically accepted speed limit on the visible universe being that of light, and extrapolating the expansion of mass from a star using that speed limit, then yes, a convincing case can be made for the phenomenon described to not be a supernova.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). However, without a rather large bit of debate, the phenomenon wouldn't be called a supernova. Look at the recent debate surrounding whether or not Pluto should be called a planet. Exactly-- well yeah, it is all consensus science, and I'm taking the accepted scientific definitions and limits into account, and still it seems like there remains an awful lot of open ground, don't you think?
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. Not under the current definition, at least. Yep- I remember in biology class learning about cell structure- this was mid-60's, and the teacher pointed out these things in a cell called 'golgi bodies' and that's all they knew about that cellular component at that time. Now they know everything: http://tinyurl.com/2nof35 Same thing will happen with supernovae.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. I can't say that with absolute certainty, but going by the scientifically accepted speed limit on the visible universe being that of light, and extrapolating the expansion of mass from a star using that speed limit, then yes, a convincing case can be made for the phenomenon described to not be a supernova. Except that some recent theories suggests that the speed of light, was never constant, and in the past travelled much faster than we observe it today. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. She stated, in the same emphatic fashion that some used to say that the Earth cannot revolve around the Sun. Actually I stated it in the same emphatic fashion that some use to say the earth is not the center of the universe.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: [...] Ummm... Have supernovae been observed to occur 14 billion years ago? Ummm...supernova are not very often observed. Period. The observation of a supernova by astronomers is a rare event. Another layman's misconception. Patiently: Out of all the miniscule number of supernovae that have been observed, is there even one that is thought to have occurred 14 billion years ago?
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. I can't say that with absolute certainty, but going by the scientifically accepted speed limit on the visible universe being that of light, and extrapolating the expansion of mass from a star using that speed limit, then yes, a convincing case can be made for the phenomenon described to not be a supernova. Except that some recent theories suggests that the speed of light, was never constant, and in the past travelled much faster than we observe it today. By the time stars formed, I'm pretty sure that the constant was close to today's value.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. I can't say that with absolute certainty, but going by the scientifically accepted speed limit on the visible universe being that of light, and extrapolating the expansion of mass from a star using that speed limit, then yes, a convincing case can be made for the phenomenon described to not be a supernova. Except that some recent theories suggests that the speed of light, was never constant, and in the past travelled much faster than we observe it today. OffWorld Cool theory- definitely something to take into account.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. I can't say that with absolute certainty, but going by the scientifically accepted speed limit on the visible universe being that of light, and extrapolating the expansion of mass from a star using that speed limit, then yes, a convincing case can be made for the phenomenon described to not be a supernova. That's the ticket. And the outer shell of a supernova explosion expands at something like only a 10th of the speed of light, 18,600 miles per second. But it isn't that the explosion is slow, it's that it's huge.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. She stated, in the same emphatic fashion that some used to say that the Earth cannot revolve around the Sun. Actually I stated it in the same emphatic fashion that some use to say the earth is not the center of the universe. Thereby she implied that there is a center to the universewhich, in truth, there is not :) OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. I can't say that with absolute certainty, but going by the scientifically accepted speed limit on the visible universe being that of light, and extrapolating the expansion of mass from a star using that speed limit, then yes, a convincing case can be made for the phenomenon described to not be a supernova. Except that some recent theories suggests that the speed of light, was never constant, and in the past travelled much faster than we observe it today. By the time stars formed, I'm pretty sure that the constant was close to today's value. Then you know more than the astronomers do. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: [...] Ummm... Have supernovae been observed to occur 14 billion years ago? Ummm...supernova are not very often observed. Period. The observation of a supernova by astronomers is a rare event. Another layman's misconception. Patiently: Out of all the miniscule number of supernovae that have been observed, is there even one that is thought to have occurred 14 billion years ago? Impatiently: Consider the following, for 10 years, then come back and re-phrase your question. http://tinyurl.com/yuw2dq OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig sparaig@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: snip Nevertheless, supernovae are not seen from earth to flare up and die out in a matter of seconds. You could be right, based on the recorded evidence, but I don't think that rules out the probability that this could have been an actual astronomical event witnessed from earth, yet not recorded before? Possibly as some have suggested, something that looked like a super nova, but wasn't. Who knows? I just figure the odds are in the favor, given the vast size of the observable Universe, of a newly discovered, or unrecorded event, not yet incorporated into our current body of knowledge regarding observable astronomical phenomenon. (whew- that's a mouthful). I said earlier that it could have been some even more exotic event. But it couldn't have been a supernova. I can't say that with absolute certainty, but going by the scientifically accepted speed limit on the visible universe being that of light, and extrapolating the expansion of mass from a star using that speed limit, then yes, a convincing case can be made for the phenomenon described to not be a supernova. Except that some recent theories suggests that the speed of light, was never constant, and in the past travelled much faster than we observe it today. By the time stars formed, I'm pretty sure that the constant was close to today's value. Then you know more than the astronomers do. MMMmmm... they used to assume that the speed of light was always a constant. Now, there is evidence that that may not be the case. Are you aware of any statements by astronomers to suggest that there is evidence that the speed of light, AFTER stars were formed, was significantly different than today's accepted figure? By significantly, I mean large enough to allow for the kind of supernova that you assert could have happened 14 billion years ago.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
Offworld is without doubt the most ignorant fool when it comes to supernovae. I'm astounded that I had to bother to announce this -- what the hell are the rest of you folks thinking to let Offworld spew absolute nonsense at you like that and not one of you had the idea to, like, what?, maybe Google the word supernova? This group doesn't deserve me setting it straight about Offworld's misinformation. Look it up yourselves and stop being so uninformed, and do something about the spouting of pure crappola from creeps like Offworld -- an amazingly dense block of ignorance. There's some good thought posted here, but sometimes, it just isn't worth the scrolling past all the posts of the idiots to find them. I feel a loss of personal integrity to see these dangerous pricks running amuck in our culture and just sit here like the rest of you and do nothing about it -- like, never come back here again and be exposed to such low mentalities. I wish the good writers here would pack up and leave -- then I could stop coming here. Astronomerforidiots
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Offworld is without doubt the most ignorant fool when it comes to supernovae. I'm astounded that I had to bother to announce this -- what the hell are the rest of you folks thinking to let Offworld spew absolute nonsense at you like that and not one of you had the idea to, like, what?, maybe Google the word supernova? This group doesn't deserve me setting it straight about Offworld's misinformation. Look it up yourselves and stop being so uninformed, and do something about the spouting of pure crappola from creeps like Offworld -- an amazingly dense block of ignorance. There's some good thought posted here, but sometimes, it just isn't worth the scrolling past all the posts of the idiots to find them. I feel a loss of personal integrity to see these dangerous pricks running amuck in our culture and just sit here like the rest of you and do nothing about it -- like, never come back here again and be exposed to such low mentalities. I wish the good writers here would pack up and leave -- then I could stop coming here. Astronomerforidiots Offworld was only speaking from personal experience. I mean, look at his name: he was THERE, man.
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0703/feature3/multimedia.html March 2007 National Geographic magazine: Once a second somewhere in the universe a star explodes with the brilliance of an entire galaxy I saw one. No-one will believe this but, I saw one the day Doug Henning died. (I should point out I had, and have, no sense of interest or connection to Doug Henning or anything he did whatsoever...totally uninteresting to me). On the day Doug Henning died, I walked out of the dome in the evening, happened to look straight up, and I saw a bright point of light come alive and then fade slowly over about 2-3 seconds. I thought: Wow, I just saw a supernova - amazing. I had studied astronomy in-depth as a teenager, and I could think of nothing else that would do that, so deep in the evening sky. It was like a silent beacon from deep deep in the warmth of space, there was a warmth and bliss to everything in those moments. And I thought, maybe I imagined it, but I'll just check its position and see if there are any reports in astronomy magazines. So I noted its position between Orion and Casseoppeia. A few weeks later I was in a bookstore browsing, and decided to look the position up, to see where it was. I was amazed to find that the constellation it was in was Auriga (which I had forgotten since my teenage studies), and further that Auriga meant The Charioteer, so I thought that was neat, because Maharishi had always been going on about Brahman being the Charioteer. But further I looked and then I discovered that within Auriga, right around the region where I saw the supernova (or whatever it was) was a tiny constellation I had never heard of called the Magicians. How funny, since it was the day Doug Henning died who was so close to Maharishi's heart. I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
Cool experience no matter what you combine with it. The universe is an awesome place. If it inspired awe then it was the spirit of Doug. Good enough. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0703/feature3/multimedia.html March 2007 National Geographic magazine: Once a second somewhere in the universe a star explodes with the brilliance of an entire galaxy I saw one. No-one will believe this but, I saw one the day Doug Henning died. (I should point out I had, and have, no sense of interest or connection to Doug Henning or anything he did whatsoever...totally uninteresting to me). On the day Doug Henning died, I walked out of the dome in the evening, happened to look straight up, and I saw a bright point of light come alive and then fade slowly over about 2-3 seconds. I thought: Wow, I just saw a supernova - amazing. I had studied astronomy in-depth as a teenager, and I could think of nothing else that would do that, so deep in the evening sky. It was like a silent beacon from deep deep in the warmth of space, there was a warmth and bliss to everything in those moments. And I thought, maybe I imagined it, but I'll just check its position and see if there are any reports in astronomy magazines. So I noted its position between Orion and Casseoppeia. A few weeks later I was in a bookstore browsing, and decided to look the position up, to see where it was. I was amazed to find that the constellation it was in was Auriga (which I had forgotten since my teenage studies), and further that Auriga meant The Charioteer, so I thought that was neat, because Maharishi had always been going on about Brahman being the Charioteer. But further I looked and then I discovered that within Auriga, right around the region where I saw the supernova (or whatever it was) was a tiny constellation I had never heard of called the Magicians. How funny, since it was the day Doug Henning died who was so close to Maharishi's heart. I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of off_world_beings Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 9:23 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , bob_brigante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0703/feature3/multimedia.html March 2007 National Geographic magazine: Once a second somewhere in the universe a star explodes with the brilliance of an entire galaxy I saw one. No-one will believe this but, I saw one the day Doug Henning died. (I should point out I had, and have, no sense of interest or connection to Doug Henning or anything he did whatsoever...totally uninteresting to me). On the day Doug Henning died, I walked out of the dome in the evening, happened to look straight up, and I saw a bright point of light come alive and then fade slowly over about 2-3 seconds. I thought: Wow, I just saw a supernova - amazing. I had studied astronomy in-depth as a teenager, and I could think of nothing else that would do that, so deep in the evening sky. It was like a silent beacon from deep deep in the warmth of space, there was a warmth and bliss to everything in those moments. And I thought, maybe I imagined it, but I'll just check its position and see if there are any reports in astronomy magazines. So I noted its position between Orion and Casseoppeia. A few weeks later I was in a bookstore browsing, and decided to look the position up, to see where it was. I was amazed to find that the constellation it was in was Auriga (which I had forgotten since my teenage studies), and further that Auriga meant The Charioteer, so I thought that was neat, because Maharishi had always been going on about Brahman being the Charioteer. But further I looked and then I discovered that within Auriga, right around the region where I saw the supernova (or whatever it was) was a tiny constellation I had never heard of called the Magicians. How funny, since it was the day Doug Henning died who was so close to Maharishi's heart. I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Wikipedia says it takes several weeks or months: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernovae
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of off_world_beings Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 9:23 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0703/feature3/multimedia.html March 2007 National Geographic magazine: Once a second somewhere in the universe a star explodes with the brilliance of an entire galaxy I saw one. No-one will believe this but, I saw one the day Doug Henning died. (I should point out I had, and have, no sense of interest or connection to Doug Henning or anything he did whatsoever...totally uninteresting to me). On the day Doug Henning died, I walked out of the dome in the evening, happened to look straight up, and I saw a bright point of light come alive and then fade slowly over about 2-3 seconds. I thought: Wow, I just saw a supernova - amazing. I had studied astronomy in-depth as a teenager, and I could think of nothing else that would do that, so deep in the evening sky. It was like a silent beacon from deep deep in the warmth of space, there was a warmth and bliss to everything in those moments. And I thought, maybe I imagined it, but I'll just check its position and see if there are any reports in astronomy magazines. So I noted its position between Orion and Casseoppeia. A few weeks later I was in a bookstore browsing, and decided to look the position up, to see where it was. I was amazed to find that the constellation it was in was Auriga (which I had forgotten since my teenage studies), and further that Auriga meant The Charioteer, so I thought that was neat, because Maharishi had always been going on about Brahman being the Charioteer. But further I looked and then I discovered that within Auriga, right around the region where I saw the supernova (or whatever it was) was a tiny constellation I had never heard of called the Magicians. How funny, since it was the day Doug Henning died who was so close to Maharishi's heart. I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Not even one? In the whole wide entire universe?
[FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of off_world_beings Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 9:23 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: A supernova a second --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife%40yahoogroups.com , bob_brigante no_reply@ wrote: http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0703/feature3/multimedia.html March 2007 National Geographic magazine: Once a second somewhere in the universe a star explodes with the brilliance of an entire galaxy I saw one. No-one will believe this but, I saw one the day Doug Henning died. (I should point out I had, and have, no sense of interest or connection to Doug Henning or anything he did whatsoever...totally uninteresting to me). On the day Doug Henning died, I walked out of the dome in the evening, happened to look straight up, and I saw a bright point of light come alive and then fade slowly over about 2-3 seconds. I thought: Wow, I just saw a supernova - amazing. I had studied astronomy in-depth as a teenager, and I could think of nothing else that would do that, so deep in the evening sky. It was like a silent beacon from deep deep in the warmth of space, there was a warmth and bliss to everything in those moments. And I thought, maybe I imagined it, but I'll just check its position and see if there are any reports in astronomy magazines. So I noted its position between Orion and Casseoppeia. A few weeks later I was in a bookstore browsing, and decided to look the position up, to see where it was. I was amazed to find that the constellation it was in was Auriga (which I had forgotten since my teenage studies), and further that Auriga meant The Charioteer, so I thought that was neat, because Maharishi had always been going on about Brahman being the Charioteer. But further I looked and then I discovered that within Auriga, right around the region where I saw the supernova (or whatever it was) was a tiny constellation I had never heard of called the Magicians. How funny, since it was the day Doug Henning died who was so close to Maharishi's heart. I don't know the exact time Doug died or wether it coincided at all with me walking out the dome around 6.45 - 7pm in the evening, but that is my story of having seen (maybe) a supernova. OffWorld Cool story, but I don't think supernovae blow up and fizz out in a matter of seconds. Not even one? In the whole wide entire universe? Not and be a supernova in the definition used by astronomers.
