In reply to H LV's message of Fri, 3 Jun 2016 15:16:16 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
On May 30, 2016 6:38 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to H LV's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 15:11:52 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
1) I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the output of
the star
itself
In reply to H LV's message of Fri, 3 Jun 2016 15:16:16 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>On May 30, 2016 6:38 PM, wrote:
>>
>> In reply to H LV's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 15:11:52 -0400:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>>
>> 1) I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the output of
>the
On May 30, 2016 6:38 PM, wrote:
>
> In reply to H LV's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 15:11:52 -0400:
> Hi,
> [snip]
>
> 1) I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the output of
the star
> itself is simply variable?
Given what is known about how stars work they
In reply to David Roberson's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 21:56:46 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>One would think that the astronomers have cataloged enough stars during the
>original research project to know how the variable ones behave. Of course it
>is entirely possible that what they are seeing is a
-
From: mixent <mix...@bigpond.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Mon, May 30, 2016 6:38 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The most mysterious star in the universe
In reply to H LV's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 15:11:52 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
1) I wonder if they have considered the
In reply to H LV's message of Mon, 30 May 2016 15:11:52 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
1) I wonder if they have considered the possibility that the output of the star
itself is simply variable?
>The most mysterious star in the universe
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gypAjPp6eps
>
>Published on Apr 29,
6 matches
Mail list logo