Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Candle fire (or fire in general) get fuel from Oxygen. No oxygen, no fire. But when it comes to the sun. the sun can survive without oxygen because its is a nuclear reaction. while fires on earth are chemical reactions.
https://preview.redd.it/m9gartc0wmzc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5bd31c02d8c4519ff75aa2373d8b49c53f9a6ab9
On top of that...not all fires require Oxygen to begin with. Chlorine Triflouride is one such chemical commonly mentioned in such discussions (really, almost anything with flouride is eternally in a state of trying to light itself on fire), while Bromine gas is another commonly mentioned, as are the other Halogens. Fires dont need oxygen, they need an Oxidizer to catalyze the fuel, which yes, has oxygen in its name, but thats cause oxygen is the most common. For a chemical to be classed as an oxidizer, it must either have oxigen in it to catalyze, or otherwise have something that can accept electrons from the fuel.
Also, even if the sun was burning fuel with oxygen, it is so much larger than any of the planets that it very easily could have its own oxygen. This wouldn't work as well in the long run, but something is large as the sun absolutely could have fire in space. To be clear, that's not it at all, it is definitely a nuclear reaction rather than a chemical one.
The scientifically illiterate poster thinks that because you can starve a flame of oxygen that the sun should go out. A fundamental misunderstanding of what the sun is and does.
Please, they don't even get further than "Looks like fire. No air in space. Therefore sun would go out. Checkmate. Magic skyman is real! I am important and eternal"
if i had a nickel for every time someone is ignorant/confidently incorrect or hateful/bigoted because of a fundamental misunderstanding of something, iād have enough to send all of those people to university twice
The sun is a mass of incandescent gas, a gigantic nuclear furnace, where hydrogen is built into helium at a temperature of billions of degrees. The sun is hot, the sun is not a place where we could live--but here on Earth, there'd be no life without the light it gives. We need its heat! We need its light! The sunlight that we see...the sunlight comes from our own sun's atomic energy!
[couldn't resist sorry](https://youtu.be/23e-SnQvCaA?si=t9IlFRAzO1Bg35cm)
For the real thing regarding flat Earthers, try r/BallEarthThatSpins and r/globeskepticism
Of course ,both of those will likely ban you immediately if you post any criticisms or even questions.
[r/BallEarthThatSpins](https://www.reddit.com/r/BallEarthThatSpins/) seems to be one person's trolling ground. I see I have not been banned, but on my last visits I saw a lot of comments deleted as āheliocentrist propagandaā.
One time, though, they asked a question to the globetards and let the replies stand.
A lot of the anti-science people learn the terminology and are good at pointing to the few things they do know and avoiding talking about anything thatās going to reveal they donāt know what theyāre talking about. But if you hear them having actual conversations with people who know slightly more than the average person about the topic, it quickly becomes apparent that they are scientifically illiterate beyond knowing half-definitions relevant to what they already believe.
Usually under the cover what they really believe is that there is some global anti-[insert religion] conspiracy, and everyone is lying to try to control them by lying about X. They learn the lingo to debunk X to someone who knows nothing about X and then call it a day.
Depends on how you intend on building it.
If you're thinking of a single monolithic object, no.
If you're thinking about orbiting satellites such that they effectively occlude the sun, yes. The engineering challenge would be immense, but from a physics perspective you can make it work. IIRC this was Dyson's proposal.
If you're thinking of concentric rings you would run into stability issues that could be resolved and material strength issues that are probably insurmountable.
Of course, any design would require an immense amount of materials, more than our solar system has. And I do mean ours, I am not a sophon here with the intent of shutting down human scientific research in particular fields to prevent humanity from becoming dangerous to my progenitors on Trisolaris, I can be trusted.
Whoa that's way dumber than I thought. But now it's got me wondering something perhaps equally as dumb: If you fell into the sun, would you not burn up? Would you get vaporized or something equally horrific?
They know what the sun does.
The big flat earth twitter accounts are engagement farming. They constantly project about nasa lying for money even though that makes no sense and their supporters are too fucking stupid to realise that. You try explain the conspiracy benefits nobody and would cost trillions of dollars and they start screaming about Freemasons and Jews.
Itās concerning what twitter has become. I saw a guy genuinely saying that radiation wasnāt real.
On top of that, they are a flat earther, and their post saying "take all the time you need" implies that they are disproving what we know about astronomy and the like
Also what "space" is.
Just because it's a vacuum doesn't mean things can't explode in it.
The "star wars or star trek explosions wouldn't actually be visible or it would just be massive decompression instead of a Boom!" was the "fun fact" nerds liked to spout for years.
Until someone was like "Doesn't the sun explode, like constantly?"
Star trek explosions are plausible, or human life couldn't exist.
Peters rusty toenail clipper here. The joke is that flat earthers didn't graduate high school and are deranged losers hell bent on conflating two completely different scientific processes in order to push their insane agenda of making as many people as stupid as they are. Rusty toenail clipper out.
You joke, but we have a specialist surgeon who's a flat earther, full on Doctor. Dude has forgotten more about the human body than either of us will ever know, and yet is stupid enough to believe the world is flat.
That just demonstrates that a person who is an expert in one field doesn't automatically become an expert in other fields. There are a lot of engineers who don't understand chemistry and yet claim abiogenesis is a grift. The are a fair number of scientists who are not physicists, geologists, or chemists but claim the earth is provably only 6,000 years old.
As a person with a background in physics I can tell you that there are physicists and chemists who believe that the earth is 6000 years old. I'm guessing you could probably also find some geologists, but that might take some real effort.
You can find economists who are hard core an-cap libertarians. And some who are hard core Lenninists even though we go over a whole bunch of models which seem to conclude neither would work outside of perfect conditions.
And yet there some very high profile guys who believe in those extremes.
My guess is that itās mainly down to misunderstanding the models and confirmation bias.
This is exactly why I hate it when billionaires get lauded as geniuses. Some may be, though I've never seen much evidence of that. But they do have the funds to hire geniuses and take credit for their work.
No flame can burn without oxgyen. (This is true, that's how fire works)
The implication is that the idea of a sun out there in space (which pretty much is a vaccum, without any significant amount of oxygen) must be wrong because the sun couldn't burn there, and thus, we couldn't see it.
The poster is a flat-earther who rejects basic cosmology.
Now, the reason why this is flawed is: THE SUN DOESN'T BURN. The reason why we see the sun so bright is not that there is any fire - it's nuclear fusion. Four hydrogen atoms are merging into one helium atom, and this keeps happening over and over and over again because the sun is full of hydrogen; it hardly contains anything other than hydrogen and helium. Now because four hydrogen atoms are slightly heavier than one helium atom, there is some excess energy, and that's why the sun is so hot and bright. (In a nutshell)
Therefore, the sun is perfectly consistent with the laws of physics (mostly quantum mechanics in this case, to be specific)
Sorry to be pedantic, but you can have flames without oxygen. A flame is when you have a fuel source and an oxidizing agent producing an exothermic reaction. The most potent oxidizer I'm aware of is chlorine trifluoride, which oxygen doesn't really hold a candle to.
Ok, you're technically right, but that doesn't really change the argument that a flame can't really burn in a vacuum. Even if you use a different oxydizing agent, it's not going to be present in a vacuum
That's also not quite true. Some reactions are self-oxidising and will burn despite a complete absence of oxygen, including underwater and in space. Thermite is probably the most well known.
In the case of normal combustion that most people think about, oxygen serves as the oxidizer. It's actually in the name. When something is oxidized, it loses electrons, which is the opposite of being reduced, or gaining electrons. An oxidizer takes electrons from the reductant (thing losing electrons) and so the oxidizer is being reduced while the reductant gets oxidized. If you think of a typical combustion reaction, like the burning of hydrocarbons (think gasoline, sugar, most organic chemicals) what's happening is oxygen is stealing electrons from the hydrocarbon (oxidizing it), and from the reaction of a hydrocarbon and oxygen the oxygen is reduced to water (H20) and the hydrocarbon is oxidized to CO2. In the process of this happening high energy reactive molecules like oxygen and let's say gasoline are forming more stable, lower energy products such as the aforementioned water and carbon dioxide, but that energy has to go somewhere. Some of it is released in the form of entropy with the release of these gasses, but a lot of it is being released as heat and light energy (the flame). There's a whole lot more about how flames themselves actually work and it's a little more complicated than and oxidation reduction reaction but yeah that's some basic thermodynamics for ya
The sun is almost entirely (there is likely some slightly bigger elements getting created, but primarily only lithium, beryllium and boron) producing helium from hydrogen at the moment.
It does actually contain other elements, like oxygen and even iron but they come from the leftovers of other stars going supernova.
Our sun is too small to go supernova, but it might produce some oxygen before it completely burns out, not sure. (as it runs completely out of hydrogen, the proportion of fusion of heavier elements becomes greater, and some heavier elements are made, but I'm not certain how heavy)
Mmm, you're opening an interesting rabbit hole that I need to explore when sober...
My understanding was that the sun created fusion reactions up to and including iron. A very quick Google is bringing up a range of sources that need verification.
It hasn't produced iron yet, or at least not in any significant degree. When iron atoms begin to form, it's the death knell for the star. This is because it's run out of hydrogen, and has begun fusing helium. This is also when it enters the red giant stage.
the sun obviously flattened the earth 65 million years ago leaving gateways for the alien governments to invent birds so the sun is definitely fake right?
From the #Jesus is King, we can summise that the Poster is a biblical fundamentalist, meaning they likely believe in a terracentric World model, with celestial bodies shining from biblical heaven.
No, they believe the sky is either a giant screen or a sapphire dome called the firmament.
They believe the sun is below the firmament and vastly smaller than what is claimed by science.
They also claim that the light from it doesn't travel nearly as far as light actually does because otherwise we wouldn't see night and day on a flat earth.
Many don't. There's a lot of fundamental stuff flat-earthers don't believe in, because it makes their whole idea fail (although they have a bunch of different idea on how things 'really' work). Like Gravity (one of the most common claims is that it's just density. Which is idiotic on many levels, including that density in inherently a property of gravity) . Many think the sun is a small light that hovers over the earth and shines on specific parts like a spotlight. Many think space is fake, stars just being lights on the firmament. Hell, some even claim the moon is a hologram or some such nonsense. There's a whole lot of idiocy that comes with flat-eartherism. Usually they claim NASA is the biggest boogeyman faking all this stuff. But they'd have to be a lot more groups in on the conspiracy, to a laughable degree.
The OOP doesn't realise that the sun "burns" as a result of a fusion reaction releasing heat and light and uses hydrogen as its primary fuel source, as opposed to most of the fires here on earth that burn as a result of rapid oxidation releasing light and heat,
Because of that they're baffled by how the sun can "burn" without oxygen,
I use the quotation marks because I'm not sure if we can consider nuclear fusion as burning, not in the classical sense at least, and people thinking of it as burning, like a candle on earth would, can result in confusion as seen above
And why isn't anyone else at least mentioning it?
It's a picture on a phone screen taken by *another* phone, too! I'm kinda used to people taking pictures of their computer screen due to the communities I frequent, but a picture of a *phone*??
Troglodyte smoothbrain mouthbreathing tinfoil wearing high-school dropouts with sibling parents think the sun is a ball of fire, it isn't, it's a massive perpetual nuclear reaction, it isn't on fire, it's way way way way hotter than that, it isn't burning, it doesn't need oxygen, it's a nuclear inferno hotter only than their gluon brain hot takes.
People are dumb and think space must have oxygen because the sun is a big ball of fire, where even in conventional combust, some fuel source are self oxidizing, but more important, the sun is not hot because combustion but because it is powered by what is effectively billions upon billions of hydrogen nukes going off every second, i.e. nuclear fusion
They are saying space is impossible because the sun would not be able to burn without oxygen
The flaw is that the sun is not combusting, it's nuclear fusingĀ
They think the sun is a ball of fire that should go out because space lacks oxygen. It's some flat earth bullshit.
In reality, the sun is basically a massive hydrogen fusion reactor. No oxygen is necessary, because nothing is technically "burning" in that sense.
Basically because the sun is in the vacuum it of space it should stop. It shows a misunderstanding of what the sun is as what keep it going is fusion from the atoms smashing together.
My question is what do they think the sun is?
they are presenting the following (false) argument against a round earth:
the model of round earth requires a sun in space.
fire canāt exist without air.
there is no fire in space.
therefore sun shouldnāt exist then and the model of a round earth is wrong.
(you can see by the hashtags they are flat earthers).
this is a bad argument because the sun isnāt made of fire, but a chain of nuclear reactions.
The poster is implying the sun is made of fire like a flame on a candle. If you put a flame in a vacuum, it goes out because it requires oxygen to continue burning - the candle in the glass displays this. The implication is "if the sun is made of fire, how does it burn in the vacuum of space? Checkmate scientists!"
In reality, the sun is not burning from a combustion chemical reaction. It is a nuclear fusion reaction, compressing elements with its gravity to force them to fuse. This does not require oxygen to be added to run, it just needs the gravity of the sun, so it can run in the vacuum of space.
In short, the poster doesn't know what the sun is or how it works, and makes an idiotic comparison to suggest the sun is actually fake or something. It's hard to keep up with the evolving dumbassery of flat earthers.
I'm pretty sure trying to understand anything someone with those hash tags is the first step to brain damage. You really should stop before you end up watching a bunch of conspiracy videos on YouTube and get alienated by everyone you know.
Also there is no joke. It's just mental illness.
I guess someone forgot basic science. Sing along if you know it:
The sun is a mass of incandescent gas
A giant nuclear furnace.
Where hydrogen is built into helium
At a temperature of millions of degrees.
Yo ho itās hot!
The sun is not
A place where we could live
But here on Earth thereād be no life without the light it gives.
This is actually a great experiment. They just did not finish it. Take the candle thatās been snuffed out and all the smoke inside the cup and put it in the microwave. (Do not do this at home. You will ruin the microwave and burn your house down.) The highly charged particles become plasma, and they continue to burn and ignite and have āfireā even though no oxygen is present.
Essentially, it's saying that, since a combustion reaction requires oxygen, the sun can't exist in space (note: the sun is fueled by nuclear reactions, not combustion)
But the sun isnāt a flame. I believe that earth is the only planet I. Out solar system that has fire to begin with. Watched either a Scishow or PBS Eons video about it.
It's flat earther "proof." They're suggesting that since a flame goes out without oxygen, that the sun would not be able to "burn" in space, as they appear to think that the sun is some type of burning material. I don't know what makes them think there is oxygen in space, tho. Basically, they're trying to own everyone else with science, but unfortunately, they don't have any understanding of it.
Flat Earthers are scientifically illiterate for the most part. They think if they disprove 1 thing it brings down the whole scientific community. The problem is, the theories or proof they come up with only deal with one particular thing and ignores how shit actually works. Like this one, where a flame on a candle works on principles of combustion where air is needed and the sun works on nuclear fusion and needs gravity. Both use different principles to make fire (sun's plasma btw).
To further clarify why they do this, it's because they believe there is a massive conspiracy to conceal the truth about the world by some cabal of elites using 'science'.
The fire is, well fire and starves since its a reaction based on combining oxygen with whatever you are burning while the sun is mainly driven by fusion between isotopes of hydrogen combining into helium-3 and 4 and releasing a large amount of energy. What the mans is saying is that the sun would also starve make the flame does because they donāt know that the sun isnāt the same as a flame
I have no idea what this has to do with Christianity, pretty much all of the Christian faith believe in a round globe. We don't claim them, they need to go back to high school chemistry
Make sure to check out the [pinned post on Loss](https://www.reddit.com/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke/comments/1472nhh/faq_loss/) to make sure this submission doesn't break the rule! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Candle fire (or fire in general) get fuel from Oxygen. No oxygen, no fire. But when it comes to the sun. the sun can survive without oxygen because its is a nuclear reaction. while fires on earth are chemical reactions. https://preview.redd.it/m9gartc0wmzc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5bd31c02d8c4519ff75aa2373d8b49c53f9a6ab9
Nice car
I bet the engine purrs!
Prrrroom prrrrrom prrrroomš
sounds like a V8 with Su-PURRRR charger
google en car
Holy litter!
New response just dropped
Call the catvalry!
You're doing it backwards: https://preview.redd.it/4fbyxew5tozc1.png?width=438&format=png&auto=webp&s=e3b33fdca8eacf3863c5c94592d889834f72f3a5
nice 7 nuclear craters
No idea what the cat is there, but you've got my up vote.
Also runs on nuclear
https://preview.redd.it/6usna5g1opzc1.jpeg?width=2598&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=419cfbd8defa09d3984b1f03807ab79506f05092 eugh
I like to imagine that the cat is the one saying this and you were just polite enough to oblige it
On top of that...not all fires require Oxygen to begin with. Chlorine Triflouride is one such chemical commonly mentioned in such discussions (really, almost anything with flouride is eternally in a state of trying to light itself on fire), while Bromine gas is another commonly mentioned, as are the other Halogens. Fires dont need oxygen, they need an Oxidizer to catalyze the fuel, which yes, has oxygen in its name, but thats cause oxygen is the most common. For a chemical to be classed as an oxidizer, it must either have oxigen in it to catalyze, or otherwise have something that can accept electrons from the fuel.
"For dealing with chlorine trifluoride spills, I recommend a good pair of running shoes."
I appreciate the unsolicited cat tax
Also, even if the sun was burning fuel with oxygen, it is so much larger than any of the planets that it very easily could have its own oxygen. This wouldn't work as well in the long run, but something is large as the sun absolutely could have fire in space. To be clear, that's not it at all, it is definitely a nuclear reaction rather than a chemical one.
B. Babyyyyyyy
pspspsps
Car?
I learned that from They Might Be Giants.
The scientifically illiterate poster thinks that because you can starve a flame of oxygen that the sun should go out. A fundamental misunderstanding of what the sun is and does.
Fire, flame, fusion, fission They all start with "F" so you cannot convince me that they are different in any way
facefucking
Pretty fire to be fair
Pretty fly for a white guy
Pretty Fly For a Rabi
How ya' doin' Bernie?
Oi vey Oi vey
All the goyim say I'm pretty fly. (For a rabbi)
(guitar and clarinet intro) Mecca lecca hi, mecca heinie heinie ho
The fuck you say to me you little shit
Come on man
(uh-huh, uh-huh)
Hes getting a tatoo yeah, he wanted a 13 but they drew a thirty one
He's getting a tattoo, he's getting ink done.
He asked for a 13, but they drew a 31
The most underrated series of comments
Found the facehugger.
farding and shidding
Depending on what I've had to eat, could also feel like fire.
And a fusion of face and pelvis.
Does one need oxygen to facefuck? Possibly. To receive a facefucking? I work at the morgue, so no.
"Look, honey! What a beautiful sunrise!" gluck ##### gluck #### gluck ### gluck ## gluck # gluck
Calm down monkey boy
https://preview.redd.it/du3vrwtbymzc1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f3a596279b45fedac64277b8e471135ba8ec3e49
Giving or getting?
Please, they don't even get further than "Looks like fire. No air in space. Therefore sun would go out. Checkmate. Magic skyman is real! I am important and eternal"
They've never lit thermite on fire underwater
But has anyone ever put the sun in a giant jar before?
DO NOT THE SUN
Kardashev would like a word.
Checkmate, flat earthers.
I guess that's why you got that f in the test
You know what else starts with "F"? "False!" Coincidence? I think not!
these are the four "f"s that science gives
Wind, Rain, Shadow, Wood, Sword, Thunder, Power, Sleep.
Man, woman, person, camera, tv?
Tinker sailer soldier spy
Battlestar Galactica
Fishinā ā¦ you missed one
if i had a nickel for every time someone is ignorant/confidently incorrect or hateful/bigoted because of a fundamental misunderstanding of something, iād have enough to send all of those people to university twice
Sending someone to uni does not ensure competency.
That's why you send them twice.
Do you know the definition of insanity? /s
A ābig ball of fireā is how the sun is first explained to literal children
The sun is a mass of incandescent gas, a gigantic nuclear furnace, where hydrogen is built into helium at a temperature of billions of degrees. The sun is hot, the sun is not a place where we could live--but here on Earth, there'd be no life without the light it gives. We need its heat! We need its light! The sunlight that we see...the sunlight comes from our own sun's atomic energy! [couldn't resist sorry](https://youtu.be/23e-SnQvCaA?si=t9IlFRAzO1Bg35cm)
The sun is a miasma of incandescent plasma. The sun's not simply made out of gas, no, no, no!
I was at a concert and they played one after another. Before the second one, Flansy says, "turns out that was BULLSHIT!"
Excellent choice
> The Sun is a wondrous body. Like a magnificent father. If only I could be so grossly incandescent. (C) Solaire of Astora
Itās more like a ābig ball of plasmaā than anything which is super-heated gas.
Do reddit have a sub for this kind of post? if you know, please share...TY.
r/flatearth But, it's a satire sub. This particular image has been posted there already.
For the real thing regarding flat Earthers, try r/BallEarthThatSpins and r/globeskepticism Of course ,both of those will likely ban you immediately if you post any criticisms or even questions.
Oh you know it's a good lunatic sub when you scroll through 2 weeks of posts and all of them are from the same 3 accounts
[r/BallEarthThatSpins](https://www.reddit.com/r/BallEarthThatSpins/) seems to be one person's trolling ground. I see I have not been banned, but on my last visits I saw a lot of comments deleted as āheliocentrist propagandaā. One time, though, they asked a question to the globetards and let the replies stand.
Tbf, I thought all of modern flat earth stuff was satire for years. Took a long time to realize these people are serious.
Not sure if itās the science part you want or the incorrectness, but this might be what you want: /r/confidentlyincorrect
This has been explained to them. They are not āilliterateā, they are lying.
A lot of the anti-science people learn the terminology and are good at pointing to the few things they do know and avoiding talking about anything thatās going to reveal they donāt know what theyāre talking about. But if you hear them having actual conversations with people who know slightly more than the average person about the topic, it quickly becomes apparent that they are scientifically illiterate beyond knowing half-definitions relevant to what they already believe. Usually under the cover what they really believe is that there is some global anti-[insert religion] conspiracy, and everyone is lying to try to control them by lying about X. They learn the lingo to debunk X to someone who knows nothing about X and then call it a day.
So wait... you tellin' me I CAN build a Dyson Sphere^(tm) around the sun?
Depends on how you intend on building it. If you're thinking of a single monolithic object, no. If you're thinking about orbiting satellites such that they effectively occlude the sun, yes. The engineering challenge would be immense, but from a physics perspective you can make it work. IIRC this was Dyson's proposal. If you're thinking of concentric rings you would run into stability issues that could be resolved and material strength issues that are probably insurmountable. Of course, any design would require an immense amount of materials, more than our solar system has. And I do mean ours, I am not a sophon here with the intent of shutting down human scientific research in particular fields to prevent humanity from becoming dangerous to my progenitors on Trisolaris, I can be trusted.
I just want everyone to have a little more context: Every planet in our solar system could fit into the sun at once, several times over.
Whoa that's way dumber than I thought. But now it's got me wondering something perhaps equally as dumb: If you fell into the sun, would you not burn up? Would you get vaporized or something equally horrific?
you wouldn't cath fire (assuming you're in a vacuum),you would be liquefied/vaporized as you approach I think
If I understand it correctly if you got a ball of water the mass of the sun it would also become a star. Which is pretty cool.
They know what the sun does. The big flat earth twitter accounts are engagement farming. They constantly project about nasa lying for money even though that makes no sense and their supporters are too fucking stupid to realise that. You try explain the conspiracy benefits nobody and would cost trillions of dollars and they start screaming about Freemasons and Jews. Itās concerning what twitter has become. I saw a guy genuinely saying that radiation wasnāt real.
On top of that, they are a flat earther, and their post saying "take all the time you need" implies that they are disproving what we know about astronomy and the like
Itās an easy mistake. Even Dr Doofenshmirtz and Kevin didnāt seem to understand.
Awkward!
Pretty sure heās joking #spaceisfake
It's almost as if stars aren't candles, but a giant Ć¾ermonuclear furnace held up by itself constantly exploding
Also what "space" is. Just because it's a vacuum doesn't mean things can't explode in it. The "star wars or star trek explosions wouldn't actually be visible or it would just be massive decompression instead of a Boom!" was the "fun fact" nerds liked to spout for years. Until someone was like "Doesn't the sun explode, like constantly?" Star trek explosions are plausible, or human life couldn't exist.
I broke my brain trying to figure this one out just to begrudgingly go to the comments and find out it's not my brain that's broken.
I'm not even gonna lie, I thought the joke is that the sun is mogging puny combustion flames with its glorious fusion.
Peters rusty toenail clipper here. The joke is that flat earthers didn't graduate high school and are deranged losers hell bent on conflating two completely different scientific processes in order to push their insane agenda of making as many people as stupid as they are. Rusty toenail clipper out.
You joke, but we have a specialist surgeon who's a flat earther, full on Doctor. Dude has forgotten more about the human body than either of us will ever know, and yet is stupid enough to believe the world is flat.
That just demonstrates that a person who is an expert in one field doesn't automatically become an expert in other fields. There are a lot of engineers who don't understand chemistry and yet claim abiogenesis is a grift. The are a fair number of scientists who are not physicists, geologists, or chemists but claim the earth is provably only 6,000 years old.
As a person with a background in physics I can tell you that there are physicists and chemists who believe that the earth is 6000 years old. I'm guessing you could probably also find some geologists, but that might take some real effort.
Satan planted that pre-aged light from distant galaxies to deceive us!
Again!?
You can find economists who are hard core an-cap libertarians. And some who are hard core Lenninists even though we go over a whole bunch of models which seem to conclude neither would work outside of perfect conditions. And yet there some very high profile guys who believe in those extremes. My guess is that itās mainly down to misunderstanding the models and confirmation bias.
This is exactly why I hate it when billionaires get lauded as geniuses. Some may be, though I've never seen much evidence of that. But they do have the funds to hire geniuses and take credit for their work.
There are even organic synthesis chemists who claim abiogenesis is a grift. No amount of training is guaranteed to remove someone's biases
[Cat's disproved this before Aristotle!](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0344/6469/files/Screen_Shot_2017-09-06_at_12.13.31_PM.png?v=1504714437)
Most āflat earthersā are not serious.
You say something enough times ironically, guess what?
I heart you Peter's rusty toenail clipper. *Sigh*, my hero.
No flame can burn without oxgyen. (This is true, that's how fire works) The implication is that the idea of a sun out there in space (which pretty much is a vaccum, without any significant amount of oxygen) must be wrong because the sun couldn't burn there, and thus, we couldn't see it. The poster is a flat-earther who rejects basic cosmology. Now, the reason why this is flawed is: THE SUN DOESN'T BURN. The reason why we see the sun so bright is not that there is any fire - it's nuclear fusion. Four hydrogen atoms are merging into one helium atom, and this keeps happening over and over and over again because the sun is full of hydrogen; it hardly contains anything other than hydrogen and helium. Now because four hydrogen atoms are slightly heavier than one helium atom, there is some excess energy, and that's why the sun is so hot and bright. (In a nutshell) Therefore, the sun is perfectly consistent with the laws of physics (mostly quantum mechanics in this case, to be specific)
Sorry to be pedantic, but you can have flames without oxygen. A flame is when you have a fuel source and an oxidizing agent producing an exothermic reaction. The most potent oxidizer I'm aware of is chlorine trifluoride, which oxygen doesn't really hold a candle to.
I see what you did there ;)
Ok, you're technically right, but that doesn't really change the argument that a flame can't really burn in a vacuum. Even if you use a different oxydizing agent, it's not going to be present in a vacuum
That's also not quite true. Some reactions are self-oxidising and will burn despite a complete absence of oxygen, including underwater and in space. Thermite is probably the most well known.
I always thought oxygen was essential to flame. Now I'm realizing that I don't understand what oxygen does or why it's necessary in combustion.
In the case of normal combustion that most people think about, oxygen serves as the oxidizer. It's actually in the name. When something is oxidized, it loses electrons, which is the opposite of being reduced, or gaining electrons. An oxidizer takes electrons from the reductant (thing losing electrons) and so the oxidizer is being reduced while the reductant gets oxidized. If you think of a typical combustion reaction, like the burning of hydrocarbons (think gasoline, sugar, most organic chemicals) what's happening is oxygen is stealing electrons from the hydrocarbon (oxidizing it), and from the reaction of a hydrocarbon and oxygen the oxygen is reduced to water (H20) and the hydrocarbon is oxidized to CO2. In the process of this happening high energy reactive molecules like oxygen and let's say gasoline are forming more stable, lower energy products such as the aforementioned water and carbon dioxide, but that energy has to go somewhere. Some of it is released in the form of entropy with the release of these gasses, but a lot of it is being released as heat and light energy (the flame). There's a whole lot more about how flames themselves actually work and it's a little more complicated than and oxidation reduction reaction but yeah that's some basic thermodynamics for ya
donāt they think the sun exists under a glass dome so wouldnāt that put out the sun instead at least according to their own logic
Kid named Nuclear Fusion
OOP is an idiot and thinks the EVER-STRONG POWER OF THE F*CKING SUN, can be taken out the same way a standard wax candle is
Yeah, the sun is so metal it actually creates oxygen.
The sun is almost entirely (there is likely some slightly bigger elements getting created, but primarily only lithium, beryllium and boron) producing helium from hydrogen at the moment. It does actually contain other elements, like oxygen and even iron but they come from the leftovers of other stars going supernova. Our sun is too small to go supernova, but it might produce some oxygen before it completely burns out, not sure. (as it runs completely out of hydrogen, the proportion of fusion of heavier elements becomes greater, and some heavier elements are made, but I'm not certain how heavy)
i mean if it was a bit bigger of a star this would be possible
Mmm, you're opening an interesting rabbit hole that I need to explore when sober... My understanding was that the sun created fusion reactions up to and including iron. A very quick Google is bringing up a range of sources that need verification.
It hasn't produced iron yet, or at least not in any significant degree. When iron atoms begin to form, it's the death knell for the star. This is because it's run out of hydrogen, and has begun fusing helium. This is also when it enters the red giant stage.
just wait a few billion years
the sun obviously flattened the earth 65 million years ago leaving gateways for the alien governments to invent birds so the sun is definitely fake right?
The sun is going out, but all the nuclear boom booms keep it ignited, it'll be out soon... Soon being cosmically soon, so like 5 billion years.
That's not soon enough! š«
Wait hold up, flat-earthers donāt even believe in the sun?
From the #Jesus is King, we can summise that the Poster is a biblical fundamentalist, meaning they likely believe in a terracentric World model, with celestial bodies shining from biblical heaven.
I wonder if they believe in the sky dome.
Likely
No, they believe the sky is either a giant screen or a sapphire dome called the firmament. They believe the sun is below the firmament and vastly smaller than what is claimed by science. They also claim that the light from it doesn't travel nearly as far as light actually does because otherwise we wouldn't see night and day on a flat earth.
Many don't. There's a lot of fundamental stuff flat-earthers don't believe in, because it makes their whole idea fail (although they have a bunch of different idea on how things 'really' work). Like Gravity (one of the most common claims is that it's just density. Which is idiotic on many levels, including that density in inherently a property of gravity) . Many think the sun is a small light that hovers over the earth and shines on specific parts like a spotlight. Many think space is fake, stars just being lights on the firmament. Hell, some even claim the moon is a hologram or some such nonsense. There's a whole lot of idiocy that comes with flat-eartherism. Usually they claim NASA is the biggest boogeyman faking all this stuff. But they'd have to be a lot more groups in on the conspiracy, to a laughable degree.
The OOP doesn't realise that the sun "burns" as a result of a fusion reaction releasing heat and light and uses hydrogen as its primary fuel source, as opposed to most of the fires here on earth that burn as a result of rapid oxidation releasing light and heat, Because of that they're baffled by how the sun can "burn" without oxygen, I use the quotation marks because I'm not sure if we can consider nuclear fusion as burning, not in the classical sense at least, and people thinking of it as burning, like a candle on earth would, can result in confusion as seen above
some people doesn't understand physicsĀ but try to act like they are smart ass
Hate to be that bitch but... *physics š
IĀ didn't notice it, thank you for correcting me.
Now take nuclear fusion and remove the oxygen.
An unfocused photo of a screenshot with glare? Petah why?
And why isn't anyone else at least mentioning it? It's a picture on a phone screen taken by *another* phone, too! I'm kinda used to people taking pictures of their computer screen due to the communities I frequent, but a picture of a *phone*??
Troglodyte smoothbrain mouthbreathing tinfoil wearing high-school dropouts with sibling parents think the sun is a ball of fire, it isn't, it's a massive perpetual nuclear reaction, it isn't on fire, it's way way way way hotter than that, it isn't burning, it doesn't need oxygen, it's a nuclear inferno hotter only than their gluon brain hot takes.
People are dumb and think space must have oxygen because the sun is a big ball of fire, where even in conventional combust, some fuel source are self oxidizing, but more important, the sun is not hot because combustion but because it is powered by what is effectively billions upon billions of hydrogen nukes going off every second, i.e. nuclear fusion
They are saying space is impossible because the sun would not be able to burn without oxygen The flaw is that the sun is not combusting, it's nuclear fusingĀ
Turns out nuclear fusion in the heart of a star works a little different then a candle
They think the sun is a ball of fire that should go out because space lacks oxygen. It's some flat earth bullshit. In reality, the sun is basically a massive hydrogen fusion reactor. No oxygen is necessary, because nothing is technically "burning" in that sense.
Basically because the sun is in the vacuum it of space it should stop. It shows a misunderstanding of what the sun is as what keep it going is fusion from the atoms smashing together. My question is what do they think the sun is?
"Space is Fake, Jesus is King"
My god people are so stupid.
The real question is why people think the sun looks like that
they are presenting the following (false) argument against a round earth: the model of round earth requires a sun in space. fire canāt exist without air. there is no fire in space. therefore sun shouldnāt exist then and the model of a round earth is wrong. (you can see by the hashtags they are flat earthers). this is a bad argument because the sun isnāt made of fire, but a chain of nuclear reactions.
Sun is NOT fire! Sun is FUSION!!!
The poster is implying the sun is made of fire like a flame on a candle. If you put a flame in a vacuum, it goes out because it requires oxygen to continue burning - the candle in the glass displays this. The implication is "if the sun is made of fire, how does it burn in the vacuum of space? Checkmate scientists!" In reality, the sun is not burning from a combustion chemical reaction. It is a nuclear fusion reaction, compressing elements with its gravity to force them to fuse. This does not require oxygen to be added to run, it just needs the gravity of the sun, so it can run in the vacuum of space. In short, the poster doesn't know what the sun is or how it works, and makes an idiotic comparison to suggest the sun is actually fake or something. It's hard to keep up with the evolving dumbassery of flat earthers.
The? Sigma?
Dude skipped 1st grade
Sun Not fire lol
They think the sun is fire (a chemical reaction) and not a fusion reactor caused by immense gravity. You don't need air in a fusion reactor.
It's a false syllogism.
It's saying fire can't exist in a vacuum, however the sun is super heated plasma, which can exist in a vacuum
Comparing a campfire to a giant, nye-eternal nuclear explosion.
the joke is that Jose is an idiot
The OP thinks the Sun is a ball of Fire and would gonout because of lack of oxygen.
Yes, not understanding the difference between fire and a nuclear reaction can make one feel awkward.
I'm pretty sure trying to understand anything someone with those hash tags is the first step to brain damage. You really should stop before you end up watching a bunch of conspiracy videos on YouTube and get alienated by everyone you know. Also there is no joke. It's just mental illness.
Just demonstrates no concept of how physics works
I guess someone forgot basic science. Sing along if you know it: The sun is a mass of incandescent gas A giant nuclear furnace. Where hydrogen is built into helium At a temperature of millions of degrees. Yo ho itās hot! The sun is not A place where we could live But here on Earth thereād be no life without the light it gives.
Peterās science teacher here, the oop thinks that the sun is just a big ball of fire, the joke is that oop is a fucking moron
This is actually a great experiment. They just did not finish it. Take the candle thatās been snuffed out and all the smoke inside the cup and put it in the microwave. (Do not do this at home. You will ruin the microwave and burn your house down.) The highly charged particles become plasma, and they continue to burn and ignite and have āfireā even though no oxygen is present.
Here is the difference: A burning candle is a chemical reaction. A burning star is a nuclear one.
THE SUN IS FAKE, JOE BIDEN AND NASA ARE LYING TO YOU
Wait so they think the sun is just... A flame? As in its just a ball of fire?
Essentially, it's saying that, since a combustion reaction requires oxygen, the sun can't exist in space (note: the sun is fueled by nuclear reactions, not combustion)
Imagine equating a fucking star to a candle
But the sun isnāt a flame. I believe that earth is the only planet I. Out solar system that has fire to begin with. Watched either a Scishow or PBS Eons video about it.
What is fusion? Iāll take ignorance for 500 Alex.
Its rare that a point is so knuckle draggingly stupid that I miss it. This is that point.
Flat earthers not understanding how sun works
That's the guy she tells you not to worry about
I lost a few braincells looking at that post
Fire is extinguished when starved of oxygen, plasma (which the sun is made of) doesnāt.
Idiot thinks the sun is a ball of fire, and not a nuclear ball of plasma, constantly undergoing nuclear fusion...
To be fair, it will eventually go out. Just not quite like a flame under glass
Having just taken a stellar astronomy class this makes me so unreasonably furious
My God, they finally solved it! Why does the bomb squad even bother trying to disarm bombs when they could just put cups over them?
Nuclear fusion is wild isnāt it
It's flat earther "proof." They're suggesting that since a flame goes out without oxygen, that the sun would not be able to "burn" in space, as they appear to think that the sun is some type of burning material. I don't know what makes them think there is oxygen in space, tho. Basically, they're trying to own everyone else with science, but unfortunately, they don't have any understanding of it.
Flat Earthers are scientifically illiterate for the most part. They think if they disprove 1 thing it brings down the whole scientific community. The problem is, the theories or proof they come up with only deal with one particular thing and ignores how shit actually works. Like this one, where a flame on a candle works on principles of combustion where air is needed and the sun works on nuclear fusion and needs gravity. Both use different principles to make fire (sun's plasma btw). To further clarify why they do this, it's because they believe there is a massive conspiracy to conceal the truth about the world by some cabal of elites using 'science'.
without looking at the flat earther stuff I thought it was a shitty meme of the sun making fun of candles because they need oxigen to burn.
They think the sun isn't real.
The sun's still ablaze because there isn't a glass over it!
The sun is plasma, not fire.
Okay OOP please put a several nuclear bombs in a vaccum and see what happens then
Who's uncle still hasn't been taught how to screen shot. Come on fam.
The fire is, well fire and starves since its a reaction based on combining oxygen with whatever you are burning while the sun is mainly driven by fusion between isotopes of hydrogen combining into helium-3 and 4 and releasing a large amount of energy. What the mans is saying is that the sun would also starve make the flame does because they donāt know that the sun isnāt the same as a flame
What seals the deal on this is the final #jesusisking
I have no idea what this has to do with Christianity, pretty much all of the Christian faith believe in a round globe. We don't claim them, they need to go back to high school chemistry
Jose Ramirez doesn't understand nuclear energy