olofscience

Members
  • Content

    833
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  • Feedback

    N/A
  • Country

    United Kingdom

olofscience last won the day on April 8 2020

olofscience had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

87 Good

About olofscience

Gear

Jump Profile

  • Freefall Photographer
    No

Ratings and Rigging

  • USPA Coach
    No
  • Pro Rating
    No
  • Wingsuit Instructor
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I just gave her a shovel...she was the one who kept digging
  2. Yeah she did that much earlier in the thread. She applied the Stefan-Boltzmann equation to anything that has W/m^2 even though it's not a blackbody. Edit: I did point out that photons don't have a temperature, their energy is measured in eV, but she ignored it (among many other things)
  3. It was sad, and also a bit amusing, to watch her descent into incomprehensible nonsensical ramblings...
  4. Running out of more complex words again... Um, what are you talking about? Were you counting pixels again?
  5. I did no such thing. You're the one who keeps jumping topics!
  6. But to think, I was about to be demolished with ZP's clever trap about protoplanets! Disappointingly, she has now moved to random topics as it wasn't very clever at all.
  7. lol, what? Abandoning the protoplanets now? This is starting to get boring.
  8. Irrelevant? You're still thinking they used the photo of the blob to measure the size of the planet? They actually describe their method: They're the SOURCE of the numbers you're saying. They didn't "count pixels on the image". They actually calculated it, from, surprise surprise, the blackbody equation that you keep using inappropriately for lasers: https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.04483
  9. But they're near enough that diffraction error is not significant. Again, the astronomers in THAT PAPER did not use the size of the blob to calculate the radius of the protoplanet.
  10. There's only one star whose angular size is actually measurable from earth - Betelgeuse. The size of the bright spots on any astronomical image only gives you an indication of the brightness of the object, not the size. You can even try this yourself. A tiny but bright laser pointer will look like the sun when captured by a camera from a distance, but a larger but dimmer light will look like a point of light.
  11. You do know that they didn't use the size of the blob in the photo to calculate the radius right? That would be subject to a lot of diffraction error.
  12. What Billvon said. From the Wikipedia article: And it's a large planet: https://earthsky.org/space/astronomers-see-baby-planet-pds-70b-growing
  13. I don't know. I've just emailed one of the astronomers involved, so I'll probably have some answers by next week.
  14. You only think it's simple because that's the limit of your ability. The black circle marks the position of the star PDS 70, but your question is more specific and that will depend on the specific processing to get the image, which I didn't do.
  15. You don't need confirmation of seeing the same thing to explain your point, and you've already proved again and again that you're deceptive.