Astro Theories

Post by **Airconvent** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 1:46 am

I think in saying "Astro Theories" they meant "Astro Physics?".
Currently we are trying to keep the forums range lean so as not to end up having only a few posts in each forum. it makes for easier reading also.
Adding of forums is actually dependent on the how active it is.

On the subject of astrophysics, i opine that this branch is more of arm chair astronomy unless its your job, eg. researcher, scientist.
Me, I prefer to practical aspects of the hobby. I don't want to talk about quarks or what-not. I just want to maximise on the use of my 4" "time machine", so I can peer way back in time and see things that happened hundreds and thousands of years ago...

rich

QuantumGravity · Post by **QuantumGravity** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 2:31 pm

Hmm... "Astro Theories" would mean the theoretical side of astronomy, which includes astrophysics, cosmology, particle physics, blah blah blah...

I actually believe that more people know about the theoretical side of astronomy than the practical side, as the practical side requires some equipments and also you have to stay awake through the night (or rather the early morning). Btw, we need not be professionals (like Albert Lim) or whatever to talk about theories. Anyone with just a slight intellect in the field of astronomy would be able to post.

Anyway, I believe that both practical and theoretical astronomy is important...

carlogambino · Post by **carlogambino** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 3:11 pm

Personally, I think both are equally important. Without observation, you wouldnt even be able to substantiate and derive the theories on astronomy. Without theories however, you wouldn't know the significance of what you're seeing up there. Both fields are equally important to the advancement of astronomy.

QuantumGravity · Post by **QuantumGravity** » Tue Jul 13, 2004 4:53 pm

Yup... that's my point... however, it seems like this forum is too focused on practical. But for now, that's okay

blazingice · Post by **blazingice** » Sun Jul 18, 2004 2:14 am

zong wrote:
weixing wrote:Remember, if you look at the sky offen, who knows that one day you might get a chance to spot a SuperNova "explode" in front of your eyes... dream on...
Well, since this is theories thread.. THEORETICALLY you may be able to see supernova explosion. According to old estimates it is once a few decades or centuries, but recent estimates (if some theories - I forgot which - are proven true) tell us of one every few years, just in the Milky Way alone! ;)

So keep your eyes open!

Well, I think that PRACTICALLY it is possible to see a supernova explosion, too! Not just theoritically. There have been a few supernovae that could be observed with the naked eye in the past 1000 years. 1987A, for example, was as bright as a fourth-magnitude star, so given good sky conditions, it would have been possible to see it. In 1054, the Chinese saw a supernova explosion in the sky. They termed it a 'Guest Star'. In the 1500s, Tycho Brahe observed a supernova in Cassiopeia.

So, as zong said, keep your eyes open. No harm trying, just don't get disappointed if you don't see one though. If you DO see one, and it's a confirmed supernova, then consider yourself very very very lucky