Recent searches
Search options
I don't really know why people study astronomy in such great detail - except that it's fun. I think it's important to understand how the universe as we know it began about 14 billion years ago, and understand how the Earth was formed about 4.5 billion years ago, and how evolution brought us here. My life fits into this frame. But is it important to know the various dramatic ways that stars can die?
I don't think so... but it's sure fun!
Here's a tiny white dwarf star called a 'polar' sucking hot gas from its much larger but lighter companion. It's called a 'polar' because its magnetic field is so strong that the gas falling in is forced to move along the field lines, rather than forming the usual pancake-shaped 'accretion disk' and slowly spiralling in.
This means the ionized gas falling onto this white dwarf lands only on its north and south magnetic poles. It's like how ions from the Sun hit our Earth near its poles, producing auroras there. But it's vastly more intense! The magnetic field of a 'polar' is about 100 million times stronger than the Earth's magnetic field. And a lot more stuff is falling in. Now and then a *huge* amount.
So, polars are considered 'cataclysmic variable stars': now and then they blast out huge amounts of radiation, as a clump of infalling gas hits their surface. There are different kinds of cataclysmic variable stars. This is just one!
Now, why is it so fun to think about this... instead of, say, politics, or ecology? I guess the question answers itself. So now I'm wondering how much we can justify science based on escapism. Maybe a bit is okay. We need to have some fun, after all.
The Universe is not the creation of man. This is why there is such a pain-staking care taken sending probes, and rovers to Marsh that is void of any containment of Earth's environment, including life.
Humanity is learning the priceless opportunity to study the "outside World", free of any pre-concluded results like imaginary crimes committer by Trump in the next 4 years.
I think it is the nature of Homo sapiens to try to understand everything, and, as a side effect, it is what allowed us to survive as a species (so far).
People who deal with young children, because they have them, or because they teach them, know that children want to know everything, even if "it doesn't matter". Particularly at about 4 years of age, they ask "how" and "why" about 100 times a day.
Perhaps scientists are people who didn't grow up. 
@MartinEscardo - I never fully grew up: when I was a kid I wanted to learn names of dinosaurs and now I want to learn about Lie groups, cataclysmic variable stars, elementary particles, etc.
Quoting a story:
Robert Wilson worked in the Manhattan Project and later helped set up the particle accelerator Fermilab. On April 19, 1969, Wilson was among a number of scientists who testified in Washington, DC before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy concerning this multimillion-dollar project to be built in Batavia, Illinois. Despite the key role physicists played in ending World War II, some members of Congress were skeptical of paying a hefty price tag for a machine that did not seem to directly benefit the U.S. national interest.
During Wilson’s testimony, then-senator John Pastore bluntly asked, "Is there anything connected with the hopes of this accelerator that in any way involves the security of the country?"
"No, sir, I don’t believe so," Wilson replied.
"It has no value in that respect?"
"It has only to do with the respect with which we regard one another, the dignity of man, our love of culture. It has to do with: Are we good painters, good sculptors, great poets? I mean all the things we really venerate in our country and are patriotic about. It has nothing to do directly with defending our country except to make it worth defending."
@johncarlosbaez I wish I could write this in justifications for grant applications.
@johncarlosbaez @MartinEscardo
I love this Wilson quote!
@johncarlosbaez I get that this is meant to be a positive post that celebrates learning for the sake of learning.
But I don't really understand why that isn't importatnt.
Following this idea further, it seems like the vast majority of pure math also isn't important.
I suppose I'm saying that fun is important.
@tobymeadows - This was not a positive post that celebrates learning for the sake of learning. We've seen plenty of those. I do think fun is important: "we all need to have some fun, after all". Without fun we really can't survive. I also think understanding the universe is one of our highest callings, not just fun. But the survival of the planet, and of democracy, and a flourishing civil society, are also important. Right now these are imperiled, so I think everyone who has the freedom to learn for the sake of learning - like me - should be questioning how much time they should be spending on that, and why. So I just thought I'd gently raise the issue.
There's a lot to discuss here.
@johncarlosbaez Thanks.
This is definitely something to think more about. I'm not sure what to think.
In some ways, they win if you stop. Sigh.
@tobymeadows - These days I spend a lot of time using math for modeling in epidemiology and I hope someday climate change. Then I spend a lot of time having fun: doing pure math, explaining stuff and so on.
@johncarlosbaez A dumb question from the guy sleeping in the back row: Is this object highly magnetic/polararized because it is full of magnetically alligned materials or is it an induced field because a huge amount of ions are falling/spinning into it?
@johncarlosbaez Is there like an animation of how would the star look like? with those magnetic fields visible due to the gas...
@Don_Rubiel - I don't know of any such animations. You can see an image and hear a discussion shortly after 11:16 here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=heeAqtuXo70
"CV" stands for "cataclysmic variable star", but they show an artist's impression of one with a strong magnetic field... more detailed than my picture here.
@johncarlosbaez It's one of those 'Why do this rather than feed the starving?' sort of questions that could be asked about pretty much any profession or activity that we do.
Perhaps the answer has to do with diversity. Diversity of thought, diversity of interests etc. Also about balancing minimising bad outcomes vs maximising good outcomes. A pessimist minimises the bad, an optimist maximises the good. Maybe we can add that a realist understands a balance is good, but at the population level rather than individual level.
Maybe it’s because a world in which knowledge and understanding is valued is a world worth living in?
@johncarlosbaez The probability of contact with aliens is increasing. However, I think we humans are not prepared to face the risk. Imagine if one day we detect signs of alien life and found that their fleet will reach Earth in 100 years, I believe astronomy would immediately become the hottest in all universities!