Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9057 total)
481 online now:
AZPaul3, nwr (2 members, 479 visitors)
Newest Member: drlove
Post Volume: Total: 889,939 Year: 1,051/6,534 Month: 1,051/682 Week: 104/182 Day: 25/24 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   new creation/evolution debate forum
Member (Idle past 3758 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009

Message 69 of 121 (618183)
06-01-2011 9:58 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by dwise1
06-01-2011 7:38 PM

Re: Shrinking sun, dust moon
No, it would be a problem. Gravitational collapse would heat up the sun's core via the Kelvin–Helmholtz mechanism, which was proposed in the 19th century as a mechanism for the burning of the sun. If that were happening, then some of the energy emanating from the sun would be from gravitational collapse; ie, only some of the energy would be from thermonuclear fusion.
Our mass-loss figure is calculated with E=mc2. First we measure the total energy output of the sun per second, and then we plug that value in for E and solve for m. If less than the total energy output is due to fusion, then less mass is being lost.


I'm pretty sure this is false according to relativity, and that the energy released by gravitational collapse does contribute mass when in it's potential form, and so mass would still be lost in equal amount if the same quantity of energy is emitted via gravity collapse or nuclear fusion.

But this is only by intuition, I may be wrong so input by Cavediver or anyone else would be appreciated.

Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by dwise1, posted 06-01-2011 7:38 PM dwise1 has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022