|
 |
Iversen’s Multiconfused Log (see p.1!) | ||
Tags: Multilingual | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Language Learning Log |  | |
 Fasulye Heptaglot Winner TAC 2012 Moderator Germany fasulyespolyglotblog Joined 5853 days ago 5460 posts - 6006 votes  1 sounds Speaks: German*, DutchC1, EnglishB2, French, Italian, Spanish, Esperanto Studies: Latin, Danish, Norwegian, Turkish Personal Language Map | Message 265 of 3959 09 February 2009 at 2:02pm | IP Logged | ||
Indeed this topic is of a higher level than texts written for amateur astronomers. No surprise that it has been published in "Scientific American". So I have thought in the right direction that singularity has to do with black holes. These black holes which are the result of collapsed extremely massive (edit) (not: heavy) stars Harald Lesch of BR Alpha calls "stellare schwarze Löcher". But those black holes in the centre of gallaxies must be of a different nature or they are composed of several stellar black holes united. I don't understand the theoretical side of the topic well, it goes in the dircetion of what for example Stephen Hawking explores. I'm not good at dealing with astronomic theories, there you have just discovered a weak point of my intelligence. But never mind, the topic of astronomy has enough other interesting aspects to offer. Edit: Oh, what a blunder, I have to edit that! Stars can never be heavy, because due the lack of gravitation they have no weight. They only have a mass, so I have to speak about "massive stars" instead of "heavy stars". Zitat von Rudolph Kippenhahn in "Kippenhahn's Sternstunden" (2006) hierzu: "Sterne an sich haben kein Gewicht, denn Gewicht ist keine Eigenschaft eines Körpers und schon gar nicht eines Sterns. Vom Gewicht eines Körpers zu sprechen macht nur Sinn, wenn erklärt wird, welches Schwerefeld ihm Gewicht verleiht." Fasulye-Babylonia Edited by Fasulye on 09 February 2009 at 2:33pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6709 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 266 of 3959 09 February 2009 at 2:20pm | IP Logged | ||
|
A singularity can be defined as a place where the laws of nature break down, for instance because they lead towards infinity of something - in the case of black wholes that would be weight and paucity of space. Naked singularities don't have to have a high mass, so in principle you could get exceedingly close to one and yet escape. And your behaviour after such a meeting would be fairly unpredictable.
Btw. I have used the word 'heavy' because I couldn't find the Latin word for 'mass' (in the physical sense). And while it is true that mass is an inherent property while 'weight' only occurs in a gravitational field, it is also the case that if you put two objects with different masses in the same gravity field then the one with most mass will also be the heavier one. edited: same mass --> dífferent masses Edited by Iversen on 10 February 2009 at 6:37am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Fasulye Heptaglot Winner TAC 2012 Moderator Germany fasulyespolyglotblog Joined 5853 days ago 5460 posts - 6006 votes 1 sounds Speaks: German*, DutchC1, EnglishB2, French, Italian, Spanish, Esperanto Studies: Latin, Danish, Norwegian, Turkish Personal Language Map | Message 267 of 3959 09 February 2009 at 2:25pm | IP Logged | ||
That's a good significant definition. As I may conclude, then both, black holes and Big Bang itself are singularities. Fasulye-Babylonia 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6709 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 268 of 3959 09 February 2009 at 3:05pm | IP Logged | ||
|
so iss's
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Jar-ptitsa Triglot Senior Member Belgium Joined 5904 days ago 980 posts - 1006 votes Speaks: French*, Dutch, German | Message 269 of 3959 09 February 2009 at 4:15pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Guten Abend!!!!!!!
Sehr geehrter Herr Iversen und geehrte Frau Fasulye-Babylonia, ich möchte einige Bilder als Abbildung ihrer Diskussion bereitstellen. Hochachtungsvoll, Jar-Ptitsa-Sênmurw :-) 
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Fasulye Heptaglot Winner TAC 2012 Moderator Germany fasulyespolyglotblog Joined 5853 days ago 5460 posts - 6006 votes 1 sounds Speaks: German*, DutchC1, EnglishB2, French, Italian, Spanish, Esperanto Studies: Latin, Danish, Norwegian, Turkish Personal Language Map | Message 270 of 3959 09 February 2009 at 4:59pm | IP Logged | ||
Hi Jar-ptisa, danke für die schönen Abbildungen, die unser Thema sozusagen abrunden. In manchen Threads in diesem Forum wird so viel Small-Talk geredet, ich finde dann muss es auch mal sein, dass etwas Anspruchsvolles diskutiert wird. Einige Monate lang hatte ich an einem niederländischen Astronomieforum teilgenommen, dort kam aber die Kommunikation nie richtig in Gang. Für mich ist das ein Glücksfall, dass ausgerechnet in einem Sprachenforum - wo ich das gar nicht erwartet hätte(!) - mir ein Gesprächspartner wie Iversen zur Verfügung steht, der fremdsprachenbezogen mit mir auch mal ein astronomisches Fachthema durchspricht. In einer so kurzen Sequenz lerne ich mehr, als ich in mehreren Monaten Teilnahme am Astronomieforum gelernt hatte. (edit) Super, dass Jar-ptisa unsere "Fachsimpelei" auch interessant findet! Fasulye-Babylonia Edited by Fasulye on 10 February 2009 at 1:43am 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Fasulye Heptaglot Winner TAC 2012 Moderator Germany fasulyespolyglotblog Joined 5853 days ago 5460 posts - 6006 votes 1 sounds Speaks: German*, DutchC1, EnglishB2, French, Italian, Spanish, Esperanto Studies: Latin, Danish, Norwegian, Turkish Personal Language Map | Message 271 of 3959 09 February 2009 at 5:13pm | IP Logged | ||
This is not logical, Iversen. If you put two objects with the same mass in the same gravity field, then both objects have the same weight, so one is as heavy as the other. Perhaps you wanted to say that, if you have two objects in the same gravity field having a different mass, then the object with the bigger mass will also be the heavier object. Fasulye-Babylonia Edited by Fasulye on 09 February 2009 at 5:23pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Fasulye Heptaglot Winner TAC 2012 Moderator Germany fasulyespolyglotblog Joined 5853 days ago 5460 posts - 6006 votes 1 sounds Speaks: German*, DutchC1, EnglishB2, French, Italian, Spanish, Esperanto Studies: Latin, Danish, Norwegian, Turkish Personal Language Map | Message 272 of 3959 09 February 2009 at 5:38pm | IP Logged | ||
I checked it as well, the word "mass / Masse" in the physical sense cannot be found in my Pons Schülerwörterbuch Latein. So I searched a bit in the German-Latin section of some online dictionaries. This is the result: mass = massa Fasulye-Babylonia Edited by Fasulye on 10 February 2009 at 12:02am 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
