Wooden_Ad_3096
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_ixqi1g1 wrote
Reply to comment by JimiWanShinobi in Mars may be slowly ripping its largest moon apart by peterabbit456
A moon is a natural satellite
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_ixqfl83 wrote
Reply to comment by drunkenly_scottish in NASA’s Orion Sends Back New Views of Moon’s Surface by Maxcactus
Want’s to make sure you aren’t on the moon.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_ixqf1wx wrote
Reply to comment by JimiWanShinobi in Mars may be slowly ripping its largest moon apart by peterabbit456
You’re mistaking the definition of a moon for the definition of a planet.
Moons don’t need a specific shape, planets do.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_ixqexg4 wrote
Reply to comment by Klondike2022 in Mars may be slowly ripping its largest moon apart by peterabbit456
No, it would stay the same.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_ix7mtr3 wrote
Reply to comment by bk15dcx in [OC] The Most Common Atoms and Bonds in the Virtual Chemical Universe by Sulstice2
Atoms are quantum particles
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_itfdsv8 wrote
Reply to Dumb? Question by regrettinglifelol
Yes, bodies in space will stay preserved, but there aren’t any in space right now.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_itfdpwr wrote
Reply to comment by ogromnyy-konchil in Atmosphere composition of Mars by ptitrainvaloin
Global warming by itself wouldn’t be able to kill every living thing.
Most likely all life dies because it’s core cooled, which means it couldn’t be protected from radiation.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is5j6et wrote
Reply to comment by Froggmann5 in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
That’s just the definition of space, is it not?
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is5e3is wrote
Reply to comment by timhamlin in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
We are the same size because gravity and electromagnetism counteracts the expansion.
Basically the expansion “pushes” two things apart, but if they are close enough, their gravity will just pull them together faster.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is558zt wrote
Reply to comment by ExamOk4257 in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
They would… merge, I guess.
What you’re saying just sounds like a convoluted way of describing a black hole collision.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is548r0 wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
Why did you think repeating the same exact comment would help me understand what you’re trying to say?
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4yn05 wrote
Reply to comment by microcosm315 in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
Yes, it has been proven some time ago.
Nobel prizes are awarded decades after a discovery.
And Schrodinger’s isn’t true btw.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4yk72 wrote
Reply to comment by ExamOk4257 in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
-
Not sure what you mean by “foldable”.
-
I guess? I don’t know why you would though.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4yi6h wrote
Reply to comment by timhamlin in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
The universe is expanding at a rate of 73.3 kilometers per second per mega parsec.
And no, everything isn’t getting bigger because of that. Gravity counteracts the expansion, so it has no affect at our scales.
The expansion really only affects intergalactic scales.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4y9es wrote
Reply to comment by mudplugg in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
Common misconception.
So first, the singularity in a black hole and the one at the big bang are not the same.
The one in the black hole is an infinitely dense point, while the one at the big bang is just infinitely dense.
Second, those singularities don’t actually exist, they are just a product of our incomplete theories.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4y60d wrote
Reply to comment by Retiredmech in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
10 to 50 million light years away, they could see the milky way, and that’s about it.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4y1ez wrote
Reply to comment by Froggmann5 in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
Nothing changes about the space in that area, since space literally is just nothingness, like the previous guy said.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4xyc7 wrote
Reply to comment by PeanutSalsa in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
It does, it’s orbit isn’t a perfect circle.
But if you mean it’s average distance, well it also does, but barely.
Since there really isn’t anything in space, earth isn’t being slowed down by anything, but space isn’t completely empty, so there is a tiny bit of friction.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4xuvu wrote
Reply to comment by Fewluvatuk in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
Anything moving at the speed of light does not have a frame of reference.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4xsqt wrote
Reply to comment by microcosm315 in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
Probably.
All it says is that the states of particles aren’t determined until they are observed.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_is4xohj wrote
Reply to comment by Rex_Mundi in Ask Anything Wednesday - Physics, Astronomy, Earth and Planetary Science by AutoModerator
Hard to tell for me, but I don’t think so.
It’s not circular and there isn’t raised land completely surrounding it.
Wooden_Ad_3096 t1_ixqim1z wrote
Reply to comment by dpdxguy in Orion snaps 'selfie' with the Moon as it prepares for distant retrograde orbit | Insertion burn scheduled to take place today then engineers have six days to see how spacecraft fares in deep space by chrisdh79
They got to watch out for the space spaghetti