Planet Earth, our worthwhile & essential home, stores rich heritage of living species in all forms. Listen to the voice of the voiceless. Be the advocate of the helpless with their rights to live. Never doubt that a small caring group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world to a better world. Conservation is the key for survival. Protect Animals, Wildlife, Mother Nature! Extinction is forever. O.N.E.P.
Thursday, December 1, 2022
Wednesday, November 30, 2022
Monday, January 24, 2022
Sunday, September 26, 2021
Global Warming. The Sun. Solar Flares. Is our Sun, young or old? What will it happen when the Sun die?...
Global Warming. The Sun. Solar Flares.
Is our Sun, young or old?...
What will it happen when the Sun die?...
What will our Sun look
like after it dies?
Scientists have made
predictions about what the end will look like for our Solar System, and when
that will happen. And humans won't be around to see the final act.
Previously, astronomers thought it would
turn into a planetary nebula – a luminous bubble of gas and dust – until
evidence suggested it would have to be a fair bit more massive.
An international team of astronomers
flipped it again in 2018 and found that a planetary nebula is indeed the most
likely solar corpse.
The Sun is about 4.6 billion years old –
gauged on the age of other objects in the Solar System that formed around the
same time. Based on observations of other stars, astronomers predict it will reach
the end of its life in about another 10 billion years.
There are other things that will happen
along the way, of course. In about 5 billion years, the Sun is due to turn into
a red giant. The core of the star will shrink, but its outer layers will expand
out to the orbit of Mars, engulfing our planet in the process. If
it's even still there.
One thing is certain: By that time, we
won't be around. In fact, humanity only has about 1 billion years left unless
we find a way off this rock. That's because the Sun is increasing in brightness
by about 10 percent every billion years.
That doesn't sound like much, but that increase in brightness will end life on Earth. Our oceans will evaporate, and the surface will become too hot for water to form.
We'll be about as kaput as
you can get. I hope this information may begin to illustrate your ideas about Global Warming... Later on, I shall explain...
It's what comes after the red giant that
has proven difficult to pin down. Several previous studies have found that, in order for a bright planetary
nebula to form, the
initial star needs to have been up to twice as massive as the Sun.
However, the 2018 study used computer
modeling to determine that, like 90 percent of other stars, our Sun is most
likely to shrink down from a red giant to become a white dwarf and then end as
a planetary nebula.
"When a star dies it ejects a mass of
gas and dust – known as its envelope – into space. The envelope can be as much
as half the star's mass. This reveals the star's core, which by this point in
the star's life is running out of fuel, eventually turning off and before
finally dying," explained astrophysicist Albert Zijlstra from
the University of Manchester in the UK, one of the authors of the paper.
"It is only then the hot core makes
the ejected envelope shine brightly for around 10,000 years – a brief period in
astronomy. This is what makes the planetary nebula visible. Some are so bright
that they can be seen from extremely large distances measuring tens of millions
of light years, where the star itself would have been much too faint to
see."
The data model that the team created
actually predicts the life cycle of different kinds of stars, to figure out the
brightness of the planetary nebula associated with different star masses.
Planetary nebulae are relatively common
throughout the observable Universe, with famous ones including the Helix
Nebula, the Cat's Eye Nebula, the Ring Nebula, and the Bubble Nebula.
They're named planetary nebulae not
because they actually have anything to do with planets, but because, when the
first ones were discovered by William Herschel in the late 18th century, they
were similar in appearance to planets through the telescopes of the time.
Almost 30 years ago, astronomers noticed
something peculiar: The brightest planetary nebulae in other galaxies all have
about the same level of brightness. This means that, theoretically at least, by
looking at the planetary nebulae in other galaxies, astronomers can calculate
how far away they are.
The data showed that this was correct, but
the models contradicted it, which has been vexing scientists ever since the
discovery was made.
"Old, low mass stars should make much
fainter planetary nebulae than young, more massive stars. This has become a
source of conflict for the past 25 years," said Zijlstra
"The data said you could get bright
planetary nebulae from low mass stars like the Sun, the models said that was
not possible, anything less than about twice the mass of the Sun would give a
planetary nebula too faint to see."
The 2018 models have solved this problem
by showing that the Sun is about the lower limit of mass for a star that can
produce a visible nebula.
Even a star with a mass less than 1.1
times that of the Sun won't produce a visible nebula. Bigger stars up to 3
times more massive than the Sun, on the other hand, will produce the brighter
nebulae.
For all the other stars in between, the
predicted brightness is very close to what has been observed.
"This is a nice result," Zijlstra said. "Not only do we now have a way to measure the presence of stars of ages a few billion years in distant galaxies, which is a range that is remarkably difficult to measure, we even have found out what the Sun will do when it dies!"
Friday, September 10, 2021
Wednesday, March 25, 2020
Entered into the Tunnel to the Unknown, a Real Mystery...
If you care, you may Read My Older Posts.
Monday, December 9, 2019
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Happy 10th Anniversary in Blogland!!
with 3 grandchildren.
a little glimpse of me.
Wednesday, December 5, 2018
Mind Blowing! How Old is the Universe?
Tuesday, November 13, 2018
Sunday, September 9, 2018
Have a Blessed Sunday & Season Ahead!!
Saturday, March 17, 2018
TIME FOR A BREAK.
Sadly, this BLOG RETIRED for awhile -due to personal issues.
Monday, January 1, 2018
Friday, June 23, 2017
The Earth Natural Resources are Not Endless.
The ecological footprint measures human demand on nature, i.e., the quantity of nature it takes to support people or an economy. It tracks this demand through an ecological accounting system. The accounts contrast the biologically productive area people use for their consumption to the biologically productive area available within a region or the world (biocapacity). In short, it is a measure of human impact on Earth's ecosystem and reveals the dependence of the human economy on natural capital.
The ecological footprint is defined as the biologically productive area needed to provide for everything people use: fruits and vegetables, meat, fish, wood, fibers, absorption of carbon dioxide from fossil fuel use, and space for buildings and roads. Biocapacity is the productive area that can regenerate what people demand from nature.
Footprint and biocapacity can be compared at the individual, regional, national or global scale. Both footprint and biocapacity change every year with number of people, per person consumption, efficiency of production, and productivity of ecosystems. At a global scale, footprint assessments show how big humanity's demand is compared to what planet Earth can renew. Global Footprint Network calculates the ecological footprint from UN and other data for the world as a whole and for over 200 nations. They estimate that as of 2013, humanity has been using natural capital 1.6 times as fast as nature can renew it. Our Planet Earth is NOT ABLE to SUSTAIN these growing numbers.
Ecological footprint analysis is widely used around the Earth in support of sustainability assessments. It can be used to measure and manage the use of resources throughout the economy and explore the sustainability of individual lifestyles, goods and services, organizations, industry sectors, neighborhoods, cities, regions and nations. Since 2006, a first set of ecological footprint standards exist that detail both communication and calculation procedures. The latest version is the updated standards from 2009..
The root of many early forms of civilization, agriculture has been a primary reason for anthropization. In order to cultivate food or breed animals, land needs to be altered to support these activities. This could mean that soil is tilled or structures are built in order to facilitate the agriculture.
These activities can lead to soil erosion, pollution (pesticides, greenhouse gas emissions, etc.), and subsequently -habitat fragmentation, and overall -an increased ecological footprint. It is also worth noting that the line between agriculture and industry often overlaps, and many of these effects take place as a result of industry as well.
As well, within the last century, with any urbanized area there also needs to be roads to support transportation. This transportation is a continued source of pollution, and the roads are a large source of soil erosion.
In order to support humans, industrial buildings and processes are apparently essential. To create more urban development, and to aid agriculture, many products need to be processed, refined, or constructed. The key component to this is that in order to have factories, the materials used to create a product need to be gathered. For the wide range of products that have been created and refined in this anthropological age, there is a plethora of substances that are harvested. Many of these materials are non-renewable (e.g. fossil fuel, metal ores, etc.) and the harvest of these results in relatively permanent anthropization. For resources that are depended on in high quantity, this can also mean temporary depletion or damage to the source of the resource (e.g. depletion or pollution of fresh water reserves, improper or inefficient silviculture, etc.). Even sustainable or renewable industrial anthropization still affects the environment. While the resource in question may not be in jeopardy, the harvest and processing of this can still cause severe change and damage to the whole environment.
To power the ever-growing human race, energy is needed. Power-harvesting structures are built to harness energy, such as dams, windmills, and nuclear reactors. These sources of energy ultimately fuel the rest of anthropological activity and are essential in this way. However, many of these methods have consequences. With dams, construction aside, they can cause flooding, habitat fragmentation, and other effects. With nuclear reactors, they have a lasting effect in that typically a lifespan of one of these is around 50 years, -and afterwards, the nuclear waste needs to be dealt with and the structure itself needs to be shut down and cannot be used further. To safely dispose of this even low-level waste can take hundreds of years, ranging upwards with increased radioactivity. To produce, and -as a result of this production of energy, it requires a lot of anthropized land.
Obviously the change in population has a direct effect on the anthropological impact, but changes in technology and knowledge have greatly changed anthropization throughout the Holocene. The tools that have been developed and the evolution of the methods that humans use in order to anthropize have changed drastically. For example, the Great Pyramids in Egypt were not constructed by some large machine, instead by thousands of humans. They were still able to build massive monuments, but the efficiency, and also the environmental damage -as a result of their efforts- is much different than today. This is just an example. However, it does show that the environmental effect of modern anthropization is generally greater, not just because of the sizable increase in population when comparing today to ancient times. The pollution and loss of biodiversity was largely natural, not man-made, and the anthropization existed on a much lower level. As the over-population of the Earth continues to increase -for the foreseeable future, this anthropization will continue to evolve.
Saturday, September 10, 2016
This Blog Retired. I'm a Desert Island. Read My Older Posts, if you Wish.
Friday, January 8, 2016
The Lessons in This Blog will Go on a Season Break.
I hope you come back to visit me again...
Friday, December 4, 2015
"Do NOT KILL MOTHERS!! Their BABIES will Become ORPHANS."
I have always had my own moral values, and it seems as if I was misunderstood...
I AM A SOLDIER IN THE ALMIGHTY ARMY OF GOD.
I AM A CHRISTIAN MOTHER & GRANDMOM TOO.
I LOVE MY CHILDREN & GRANDCHILDREN!
Thursday, November 19, 2015
SUMMER SWALLOW.
Thanks for caring and for asking about these magnificent birds, my friends!
Yes! I think they migrate from San Francisco, California to South America back and forth. They travel thousands and thousands of kilometers and miles to live in Summer Time all year round. So, in other words, when the cool weather hits in California, these birds will fly away and migrate to the southern part of South America, where they find REFUGE.
Can you believe they are all over the place around my window and private terrace?
I see them flying happily around my place in a skyline building on the top floor. You see I cry tears of joy when I see them here. They are called, "GOLONDRINAS" in Spanish. I LOVE THEM WITH ALL MY HEART & SOUL!!
I Love Birds & Golondrina de Verano...
Thank you for reading my posts!!
















































