Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:17, 3 October 2010

Dr.Submillimeter's Humorous Catagories

This userbox is wrong.

This user is homesick.

This userbox is correct.

This user likes going to the Seaside

This user likes walking by the Sea

This user likes walking by the Coast

This user enjoys camping.

This user plays association football.

This user is addicted to travel.

This user is a certified scuba diver.

This user is a beginner archer.

This user is a swimmer.

This user enjoys geocaching.

This user enjoys wakeboarding.

This user enjoys playing golf.

This user loves the Spring.

This user enjoys filmmaking.

This user loves to go camping.

This user does weight training.

This user plays racquetball.

This user supports the right of all women to go without a top at the beach, the local pool, or in public.

This user is a surfer.

This user supports Humans United Against Robots.

This user thinks it was Miss Scarlet in the Conservatory with the Candlestick.

This user's computer is infected with malware!

User:Richard0612/Userbox Archive/User 911truth

• User:Richard0612/Userbox Archive/User 911truth

${\displaystyle T_{\mathrm {p} }=\left({\frac {L(1-A)}{16\pi \sigma D^{2}}}\right)^{\tfrac {1}{4}}}$

${\displaystyle T_{\mathrm {p} }=T_{\ast }\left^{\frac {1}{4}}}$

${\displaystyle \sigma \cdot T_{\mathrm {p} }^{4}={\frac {\sigma \cdot T_{\ast }^{4}}{4\pi \cdot d^{2}}}\cdot {\frac {4\pi \cdot R_{\ast }^{2}}{4\pi \cdot R_{\mathrm {p} }^{2}}}\cdot \pi \cdot R_{\mathrm {p} }^{2}(1-A_{\mathrm {p} })}$

code for Earth at Perihelion: ${\displaystyle f_{p}={\frac {((6.955\times 10^{8})^{2})\times (5.67051\times 10^{-8})\times (5778^{4})}{((1-(1\times 0.016710219))\times 149597876600)^{2}}}=1,412.903\ W/m^{2}}$

code for Gliese 581 c at Periastron: ${\displaystyle f_{p}={\frac {((0.38\times 6.955\times 10^{8})^{2})\times (5.67051\times 10^{-8})\times (3480^{4})}{((0.073-(0.073\times 0.16))\times 149597876600)^{2}}}=6.9\times 10^{3}\ W/m^{2}}$

${\displaystyle {\frac {Gl\ 581\ c\ Periastron\ Insolation}{Earth's\ Solar\ Constant}}=}$ ${\displaystyle {\frac {6.9\times 10^{3}\ W/m^{2}}{1,366.079\ W/m^{2}}}=505\%}$

This editor has decided to leave Misplaced Pages.

REVENGE TAKEDOWN

This editor has decided to leave Misplaced Pages.

REVENGE TAKEDOWN

Suspended retirement:

My local TV news has said Gliese 581 g is "habitable for humans."
So I have temporarly suspended my retirement to address the usual Misplaced Pages insanity.
GabrielVelasquez (talk) 19:28, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Recent behavior

Uh, actually, you edited with this edit earlier today, although I myself don't see a personal attack directly in it. "Ok, buddy" as per here could be taken badly, but I don't see it myself. Telling someone to "get back on their meds" as per your edit summary here probably does violate WP:NPA, even though on your own talk page, so this summary is probably a misstatement. Just reminding you to try to be a bit more careful with the language, OK? John Carter (talk) 19:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah Ok, old friend, you know false accusations of attacks put me on the attack, thanks.
Thanks for reminding me to be tolerant of stupidity. GabrielVelasquez (talk) 19:36, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Re: habitable zone ring

I would say the only way this image could be more perfect is if you added the habitable zone ring.
I don't need a reply, it's just a suggestion.
GabrielVelasquez (talk) 08:01, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. The reason I don't put habitable-zone boundaries in the orbit diagrams I make is because of the large number of different definitions out there of how to define the habitable-zone. Not all of these can be plotted easily on an orbit diagram, for example if the calculation depends on orbital eccentricity or planetary mass. Extrapolating a model developed for an Earth-mass planet orbiting a G-dwarf to the cases for 3 or 6 Earth-masses planets orbiting an M-dwarf is probably not going to give reliable results. And given the controversies that always seem to arise in discussions of planetary habitability on Misplaced Pages, I can't see much prospect for agreement on such matters. Icalanise (talk) 15:15, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't want to debate or disagree with you, but is sounds to me like you are making the irradiance of the star dependent on the size of the planet, if looked at in the most simplistic way. I'm also aware of all the dimesion that need too be looked at specifically for the status of the planet itself, but I added the chart regarding zone limits in the Habitable zone article so I right away think since that figures are there, you can just scale them for Gliese's luminosity. Plenty of independent references also exist (MH Hart - Icarus, 1979 - Elsevier)

"In our own solar system, the CHZ is thought to extend from a distance of 0.725 to 3.0 astronomical units, based on various scientific models:"

I don't know if it's a linear relation so I'll leave the math to you. GabrielVelasquez (talk) 17:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think just scaling these for Gliese 581's luminosity is going to provide a good estimate of where the HZ should be. See for example Kasting et al. (1993) table 3. This shows that the habitable zone moves to lower values of the incident flux for cooler stars. Apparently tidal locking effects were not included in that table, this would again cause the boundaries to change, though I'm not sure what the precise effects would be. Table 1 in that paper shows effects of planetary mass: the reason for the effects they show is because the scale height of the atmosphere is smaller on a high-gravity planet, thus changing the greenhouse properties. On the other hand they don't seem to attempt to model the different rates of geological evolution on such planets, which is also going to be a factor. Icalanise (talk) 18:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

October 2010

Template:Z8

GabrielVelasquez (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

no real info on reason for block,
looks very fishy to me.
GIVE A REAL REASON.
What is this for and where is the proof?
I don't have a real opportunity to request to be unblocked
because requesting information on this will probably count

as my only allowed request to be unblocked 

And I am sure that was done deliberately
So being malformed I ask that it be dismissed.
Also, what ever this is about, two weeks is ridiculously harsh.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Malformed block template, <br /> no real info on reason for block, <br /> looks very fishy to me. <br /> GIVE A REAL REASON. <br /> What is this for and where is the proof?<br /> I don't have a real opportunity to request to be unblocked <br /> because requesting information on this will probably count<br /> as my only allowed request to be unblocked <br /> And I am sure that was done deliberately<br /> So being malformed I ask that it be dismissed.<br /> Also, what ever this is about, two weeks is ridiculously harsh.<br /> Where the improvements made recently considered?  |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Malformed block template, <br /> no real info on reason for block, <br /> looks very fishy to me. <br /> GIVE A REAL REASON. <br /> What is this for and where is the proof?<br /> I don't have a real opportunity to request to be unblocked <br /> because requesting information on this will probably count<br /> as my only allowed request to be unblocked <br /> And I am sure that was done deliberately<br /> So being malformed I ask that it be dismissed.<br /> Also, what ever this is about, two weeks is ridiculously harsh.<br /> Where the improvements made recently considered?  |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Malformed block template, <br /> no real info on reason for block, <br /> looks very fishy to me. <br /> GIVE A REAL REASON. <br /> What is this for and where is the proof?<br /> I don't have a real opportunity to request to be unblocked <br /> because requesting information on this will probably count<br /> as my only allowed request to be unblocked <br /> And I am sure that was done deliberately<br /> So being malformed I ask that it be dismissed.<br /> Also, what ever this is about, two weeks is ridiculously harsh.<br /> Where the improvements made recently considered?  |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

• Requests for unblock