>no one is talking about the blinding star that will appear in our sky visible throughout the planet for daysi thought you guys were star gazers>NASA has predicted that the much-anticipated “once-in-a-life-time” star explosion — or nova — will be visible to the naked eye sometime this summer, Mid July-early August>NASA estimates that the “brief” phenomenon will be visible to the naked eye for around a week.T Coronae Borealis, dubbed the “Blaze Star” and known to astronomers simply as “T CrB,” is a binary system nestled in the Northern Crown some 3,000 light-years from Earth. The system is comprised of a white dwarf – an Earth-sized remnant of a dead star with a mass comparable to that of our Sun – and an ancient red giant slowly being stripped of hydrogen by the relentless gravitational pull of its hungry neighbor.The hydrogen from the red giant accretes on the surface of the white dwarf, causing a buildup of pressure and heat. Eventually, it triggers a thermonuclear explosion big enough to blast away that accreted material. For T CrB, that event appears to reoccur, on average, every 80 years.Don’t confuse a nova with a supernova, a final, titanic explosion that destroys some dying stars, Hounsell said. In a nova event, the dwarf star remains intact, sending the accumulated material hurtling into space in a blinding flash. The cycle typically repeats itself over time, a process which can carry on for tens or hundreds of thousands of years.
>>38277959The Messiah cometh
>>38277959So how will this create a new star?NASA has never and will never be able to document new stars being formed.
>>38277959Sounds coolWhen is this
>>38277991theres probably some prophesy that talks about this haha>>38278036the star is already there its just gonna be very bright so most people will assume its a "new star" because it will be extremely bright
>>38278065>so most people will assume its a "new star"Typical demonic NASA. Spinning lies and stretching truths to fit a narrative.Space is Fake. NASA is fake and gay. Christ is King.
>>38278036Project Blue Beam will be used to make a light up there according to NASA predictions? (to validate le bullshit field of study called astrophysics)
>>38278089>Typical demonic NASA. Spinning lies and stretching truths to fit a narrative.Please quote a single place that NASA said this makes a new star.Not even the journalists in OP's article said that.That NASA lies doesn't mean you can just make shit up and have it believed.
>>38277959Nothing ever happens
>>38278051In approximately two weeks
>>38278304this isnt the first time either nigger.
>>38277959Those interested in astronomy already know, anon. While this is amazing it's not some paranormal supernova super shit. It's a periodic nova event between two binary stars.
>>38278036Of course not, dumbass, we're already past that phase of the universe. It would be /very/ exciting if it happened and that's why people keep looking but as far as we know, every star is already cooked.
>>38278330Look closer at your screenshot and see the only part that is quoting NASA does not say anything about a new star.Please quote NASA saying this.Or do you think NASA should get to control what the media says?
>>38278304Space is fake and those NASA heretics, and anyone who dwells into the study of the stars and astrology are devil worshippers. Their blasphemous bodies need to be purified by fire stake the Holy Inquisition so their souls can be forgiven.Is the only type of tough love these degenerate lost souls need in order to be saved.
>>38278353>Or do you think NASA should get to control what the media says?Now I know you're retarded... Who do you think tells the media what to say about upcoming NASA events?
>>38278368>>38278380So you can't produce anything where NASA says it is a new star.And I didn't ask if they did.I asked if you think they should.And you ran away from the question.
>>38277959Why are 90%+ of the participants of this board drooling morons?
>>38278487Most of these anons are mentally ill and refuse to confront it. There's some good threads but you're sifting through shit to find them.
>>38278389>asks reddit level gatchas Then explain where the 'new star' phrase comes from which is clearly a coordinated "key phrase' that was told to be used by MSM.the only people who would tell the mdeia to say 'new star' are the people giving them the information.
>>38278389Think they should? What does this even mean???
>>38278350>we're already past that phase of the universeSo at some point stars COULD form, now they cant?Sounds about as farfetch'd as nothing exploding into everything.
>>38278612You have to remember the universe is approximately 13.7b years old. All the loose matter that could accrete to form stars has already done that.Also "nothing" didn't "explode." Everything was already there before the inflaton field went nuts.
>>38278036Antisemitism. How dare you deny amazing nasha! Lol
>>38278777checked and blessed
>>38278777777.
>>38278785Thanks anon, bless you too!
>>38277959>“once-in-a-life-time”Dick Van Dike saw the previous one when he was 19.You can see the next one after this one, just stay alive for another 81 years.
>>38277959>>38278834>“once-in-a-life-time”anyone born post 2000 wont die of natural causes until 2200.
>>38277959it’s barely going to be visible, you’ve probably never even seen its constellation
>>38278036>So how will this create a new star?It won’t>NASA has never and will never be able to document new stars being formed.wrong
>>38278612>>38278628you’re both completely wrongnew stars form all the timethe closest star-forming region to us is the orion nebula, with visible proto-stars in a big gas cloudthe stelliferous “star forming” era won’t end for a very long timeignorance wouldn’t be so bad if you didn’t pretend you weren’t
>>38278865New stars formed so long ago that some already died when we see them form.
>>38278520>Then explain where the 'new star' phrase comes fromFrom CNN and popsci articles.Why did you listen to them?Unless you are reading their articles - or just reading and accepting headlines to rant about - you would never have heard the phrase.Speaking of - why do you accept novas at all? Or that this one will come about specifically?All that comes from space agencies.Dont they lie?>>38278553It's a simple question.Do you think NASA should tell media companies what to print?If popsci journalists and CNN decide to call a nova "a new star", should NASA have the power to stop them?
