What happened to the respectful discussions in physics?

[JeTSpice]

message taken out because people are too immature to dialog without baiting for an argument.

 

[phinds]

How do you have a star of ANY magnitude in the atmosphere of a planet? Doesn't make sense.

WHAT event horizon are you talking about?

 

[JeTSpice]

message deleted

 

[cepheid]

I don't think this thread belongs in the technical forums, so I've moved it to the Sci Fi section. Just as a warning, if the purpose of the thread is to say, "what are the laws of physics in my hypothetical universe that doesn't exist?", then this may or may not be appropriate for PF. We try to avoid overly speculative threads that don't have a foundation in the actual laws of physics here.

 

[phinds]

A star is a body that is big enough that gravity balances the internal reactions that produce light and heat. Gravity keeps the whole thing from just vaporizing. Something the size of a small moon would be too small. A "star" the size of a house is just ridiculous.

Given your apparent lack of understanding of basic physics, I suggest that you just make up whatever "science" you want/need and focus on your characters and the storyline.

Also, if you plan to be a writer, you would do well to learn the basic tool of the trade, which is language. "It's" is a contraction of "it is", NEVER the possessive of the neutral pronoun.

 

[ImaLooser]

Yes, to be clear I don't mean to ask about putting stars the size of what exist in our universe inside the atmosphere of a planet. With my nose to close to the details I didn't paint a very good "big picture" in the original post.

The "stars" in the story don't have a lot of mass nor size. They might be the size of a car or a house. I'm considering that they would be something like the antithesis of black holes: not very dense and exuding a lot of light, a bit like "perpetual light machines". They rotate around the planet like clouds might do. They're not in orbit. (If it helps to visualize, the setting is actually a virtual reality that a guy creates)

All that aside, I'm wondering what the physics of the rest of the world might be like because of having all the matter of it's universe in such close proximity. What kind of observations would a person on the planet's surface have, compared to a person flying in a plane, compared to a person who went outside of the furthest particle?

By "event horizon" I mean to say the altitude past which there are no particles.

If it's virtual reality then you can do whatever you like. Go wild. There is no need to be concerned with physical laws or with internal consistency.

That's a very peculiar use of the term event horizon.

 

[JeTSpice]

I can't believe what a bunch of jerks physics people have become. When I went to school, they were always self composed and up for theoretical discussions. Instead, here we get nitpicky aptitude defamations, warnings that a thread was misposted, and no help or guidance as to the actual question posed. Gud by, and know loss uv mine.

 

[cepheid]

I can't believe what a bunch of jerks physics people have become. When I went to school, they were always self composed and up for theoretical discussions. Instead, here we get nitpicky aptitude defamations, warnings that a thread was misposted, and no help or guidance as to the actual question posed. Gud by, and know loss uv mine.

Warnings from a moderator of this site, who was merely reminding you of the rules that you agreed to when you signed up.

EDIT: Since the OP deleted his posts, this thread serves no useful purpose and is locked.