NASA: How long does it take light to get out from the inside of the Sun?

According to the famous 'drunkard's walk' problem, the distance a drunk, making random left and right turns, gets from the lamp post is his typical step size times the square root of the number of steps he takes. For the sun, we know how far we want to go to get out....696,000 kilometers, we just need to know how far a photon travels between emission and absorption, and how long this step takes. This requires a bit of physics!

The interior of the sun is a seathing plasma with a central density of over 100 grams/cc. The atoms, mostly hydrogen, are fully stripped of electrons so that the particle density is 10^26 protons per cubic centimeter. That means that the typical distance between protons or electrons is about (10^26)^1/3 = 2 x 10^-9 centimeters. The actual 'mean free path' for radiation is closer to 1 centimeter after electromagnetic effects are included. Light travels this distance in about 3 x 10^-11 seconds. Very approximately, this means that to travel the radius of the Sun, a photon will have to take (696,000 kilometers/1 centimeter)^2 = 5 x 10^21 steps. This will take, 5x10^21 x 3 x10^-11 = 1.5 x 10^11 seconds or since there are 3.1 x 10^7 seconds in a year, you get about 4,000 years. Some textbooks refer to 'hundreds of thousands of years' or even 'several million years' depending on what is assumed for the mean free patch. Also, the interior of the sun is not at constant density so that the steps taken in the outer half of the sun are much larger than in the deep interior where the densities are highest. Note that if you estimate a value for the mean free path that is a factor of three smaller than 1 centimeter, the time increases a factor of 10!

Typical uncertainties based on 'order of magnitude' estimation can lead to travel times 100 times longer or more. Most astronomers are not too interested in this number and forgo trying to pin it down exactly because it does not impact any phenomena we measure with the exception of the properties of the core region right now. These estimates show that the emission of light at the surface can lag the production of light at the core by up to 1 million years.

The point of all this is that it takes a LONG time for light to leave the sun's interior!!

Infringing the IP

No, it's the narrator: "Could it be, that "(random bullshit)? "And if so..." (even more bullshit)? <<shocking music>>

Another win for the shop-vac.

And from the pixels, and having seen a few houses in my time.

This jumps right to doing. Unrealistic without the dreading and procrastinating.

Macadam is now used for the buildup of support below the surfacing.

There are specific bulbs for universal (runs in fat T12 magnetic OR T8 electronic ballast), and for electronic only. The voltage for florescent bulbs is many times higher than wall power, and also includes a starter circuit.

Direct-wire bulbs will specifically state that they are not for use in existing fixtures. They can be more efficient without ballast, but need re-wiring according to the directions included.

Sounds like you are putting retrofit bulbs (not direct wire) in a fixture with a failing or magnetic ballast, or trying to connect them to AC directly. Don't do that.

And what the hell is the little LED thing hanging by the wires?

https://www.mylondon.news/news/zone-1-news/london-dogging-most-popular-locations-15454993

The telescope doesn't find asteroids. People do.

There's observatories that specifically monitor for small bodies. JWST takes science observations that have been designed long before.

I saw this pixel art and called it spam.

aka. Here's my almost-daily spam, and here's where to send money.

Pubic library

This is reporting on Yan et al, which is a paper using data of one of the first-release JWST publicity images planned by the telescope institute, and has already been called out as with issues. It is of SMACS 0723-27, one of the most significant gravitational lenses yet discovered, so yes, the warping of space-time is problematic, as galaxies are indeed amplified, stretched, multiplied by this distortion, and given in some cases a significantly deeper view than direct observation.

This should be first a study in further mapping the gravitational gradient, the nature of dark matter, and not jump right to finding redshifts from imaging. JWST's NIRCam imaging is actually a bit wrong for Lyman break astronomy at the (unexcitingly not-so-deep) redshifts being found, as the coarse transition from 200W to 277W is across two different instruments of different resolution and still faltering calibration and backgrounding even across adjacent sensors, along with cosmic ray flux and algorithmic removal that makes almost nothing pristine light.

Also it is clear that the nature of what is found early, but closer and actually resolvable, is going to create biases. Various radiance of active galactic nuclei, early formation of globular clusters, mergers, etc skew the spectra, and we still don't have spectral observations deep enough to show emission lines (Arizona paper).

Another repost? https://www.reddit.com/r/Music/comments/10936n1/demi_lovato_poster_banned_in_uk_for_being/

Considering a total of six posters were removed, by the advertising industry's own standards group, and it was August 2022, this "news" is more ad.

Article tells you about the songs you'll hear, with no mention of the damage to juvenile brain development that will occur from exposure.

That's a fantastical story, but one only needs to look at the film to see what's on it.

For your light-emitting screen, I dumped the background down to complete black, and also gave you some stars taken by Cassini (although needing a much longer exposure) https://i.imgur.com/N8LBnzv.jpg

Going back to the nine-layer oversampled composition, here is 2048x2048 (double the source resolution) with no sharpening, but craters of the rotating moon aligned instead of the eclipse edge. https://i.imgur.com/trbuGZc.png

I tried an AI upsampler and it turned this into space junk. Titan's atmosphere IS blurry. https://i.imgur.com/xx3CJA1.png

I could put multiple high-res elements together to make a fake occultation, or even do a re-assembly of the transit in original moon colors, but I'm not a McCarthy. This is light right out of the telescope.

This is the native resolution of the spacecraft's 1024x1024 imager.

The small moon has been captured in more detail by closer approaches, and even mosaic-composed into a map.

I used raw data from NASA's Cassini spacecraft, which traveled to and orbited Saturn from 2004 to 2017 (retired by crashing into Saturn). This imagery from December 2011 was taken by Imaging Science Subsystem's narrow-field camera, an 8" telescope.

Not even James Webb Space Telescope can capture Saturn's moons with this much detail - one must go there.

I sell nothing. Print it out and frame it! Here's more traditional imagery from the probe : NASA link.

Correct! Dione is the half-cratered small moon in the foreground (it has distinct geography in each hemisphere), while the large moon Titan with it's dense near-uniform atmosphere is moving in the background. You can also see the haze of Titan's high level atmosphere on the left. The visual color of Titan (when it is not evading capture) is like the orange-yellow at the dark edge of Dione.

Here instead, an animation of the monochrome source frames, where we see the alternating color filters instead changing the yellow atmosphere of Titan in to different levels of brightness in each exposure.

https://i.redd.it/glxpxisnopaa1.gif

As you can see from the gif's jitter, although Cassini was tracking Dione, I had to tweak each frame to line up Dione for this composite image (and moons are also rotating).

(yes, I know its/it's)...

It has only three of six all-new gyros installed in 2009 still working (and one of those with some issues) - the minimum required for full operations.