Ganesh

Happy Vinayaka chavithi.Celebrate it grand but Don't use idols of ganesha made by plaster of paris its a request please don't use because its pollute our atmosphere.

These all Idols are going to pollute our atmosphere

Please don't USE these idols try to avoid.

These all idols are made by soil which dissolve esayly in water.These are all eco frendly idols.

So dont use idols made by plaster of paris.

Say no to those idols

Earth

Save water and save EARTH.A new research tells that if we got a world war-III it is because of water only so save water and save EARTH.

SAISRIKANTH: TOP 10

SAISRIKANTH: TOP 10: "these are all habul telescope's top ten images"

HYDERABAD

HYDERABAD DESTROY

WHAT IS A BLUE MOON?

A BLUE MOON is,moon it comes near to earth.And it called a BLUE MOON.
On that day we can also see some another planets also.So it is an opporchunity to see another planets.
So reddy to see another planets.
We can see MARS planet on this day(19-03-2011)on 6:30 to 7:30.
We can also see JUPITER at side of sun and shines.
So keep all watch and enjoy
                                            B.SAISRIKANTH.

BLUE MOON EFFECTS

On ''BLUEMOON'' day, some people are telling on that day our earth is in danger.
How we belive this things,these are not true.We have to don't belive these things.Because we have no resons.
This is a big  wonder.We have to enjoy it.a blue moon not effect earth.
So we don't fear about this.

Introduction to How the Moon Was Born

The moon has been an object of wonder and the subject of art and poetry since people first kept written records or decorated their caves with paintings. Many ancient civilizations based their calendars on the cycles of the moon. Lunar tides in seas and harbors helped determine when ships could set off on journeys or float safely into port. Before the development of electric lights and gas lamps, the moon lit the way for travelers at night. People imagined they saw a "man in the moon" and other shapes in the lunar surface, speculated about what the moon was made of, and wondered if it was inhabited. Scientists, too, have been curious about the moon and have scrutinized its cratered landscape with their telescopes. But for a long time, few of them gave much thought to how the moon came to be.

By 1998, the attitudes of scientists had changed. Not only were more researchers interested in the origin of the moon, but nearly all had come to believe in one particular model of lunar origin—the giant-impact theory. According to this theory, the moon was formed when a body about the size of the planet Mars—or a few times larger—struck the young Earth with cataclysmic force. Much support for this theory has come from the study of rock and soil samples from the moon, brought to Earth by U.S. astronauts. In 1998, a satellite called Lunar Prospector, in orbit around the moon, supplied evidence consistent with the theory, as did computer simulations of the giant impact.

Early Theories

Scientists' interest in the origin of the moon in the mid- and late 1900's stood in sharp contrast to attitudes about the moon during the early days of astronomy. The Italian astronomer and physicist Galileo Galilei first gazed at the moon in 1609 with the newly invented telescope, but he offered no theories about the moon's history, nor did most of the other astronomers who came after him.
It was only in 1879 that the British mathematician George H. Darwin, son of the great naturalist Charles Darwin, proposed one of the first theories of lunar origin. According to Darwin's “fission” theory, the material that became the moon was spun off from the very young, fast-spinning Earth, which was still in a molten state. Darwin's theory had little influence on astronomers for almost 100 years, in large part because they continued to be uninterested in the moon's origin.
Scientists finally started to investigate the question in the 1950's. By 1952, a “capture” theory of the moon's origin, proposed by an American chemist, Harold C. Urey, had become the prevailing view. Urey believed that the moon was a primordial (ancient) body that formed at the dawn of the solar system and was later captured by the Earth and pulled into its present orbit.
Urey's views had great influence on the planning of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Apollo program, the series of manned flights to the moon that took place between 1969 and 1972. Many scientists believed that the moon rock samples that Apollo astronauts were to bring back would reveal the minerals and compounds—incorporated into the primordial, virtually unchanging moon—that were present when the solar system formed. They also expected the samples to help prove or disprove the capture theory. If the moon formed far away from the Earth, they reasoned, it might have a different chemical composition than the Earth.
But long before the lunar samples were gathered, some scientists had doubts about the capture theory. If the moon had formed far away in the solar system, mathematical calculations showed, it would have had to follow a long, looping orbit to reach the Earth, which it would have zipped past at high speed. It would not be possible, the scientists calculated, for a moon captured from such an orbit to end up in its present position, with the Earth and moon spinning at their current rates, once every 24 hours and once every 28 Earth days, respectively.
Some scientists proposed in the early 1960's that the moon formed at roughly the same time and at the same distance from the sun as the Earth, though not alongside it. The infant moon would have been orbiting the sun at nearly the same speed as the Earth and would sometimes move slowly past it. The moon would then have been easy to capture. If this scenario was true, the moon should be made of the same materials as the Earth.

Scientists Meet to Debate Lunar Origins

By 1964, the question of how the moon originated had generated sufficient interest to merit a conference devoted entirely to that subject. At that meeting in New York City, much attention was paid to the fission theory proposed by George Darwin. Darwin's suggestion that the moon was created from molten material spun off by the Earth seemed plausible for a time when our planet rotated much faster than it does now, possibly once every 4 hours instead of once every 24 hours. By the time of the conference, however, calculations had shown that even such a high rotational speed would not have been sufficient to form the moon. Friction in the molten rock would not have permitted a bulge of matter to rise high enough to be flung free of Earth's gravity.
In light of that finding, proponents of the fission theory at the conference suggested another possibility. The material that formed the moon, they said, might have been spun off when the Earth was rotating not once every 4 hours but once every 2.1 hours. If a molten Earth had ever rotated that fast, they pointed out, its mechanical strength and gravity would simply not have been able to hold the planet together. The Earth would have hurled great amounts of matter into space in a process called rotational instability.
Proponents of the modern fission theory calculated exactly how such a process could take place. The birth of the moon would not have occurred as a catastrophic outburst, such as an explosion, but as a progressive change in Earth's shape. First, the Earth's rapid rotation would have flattened the planet at the poles, deforming it into an oblate shape—wider at the equator than across the poles. Next, the spinning, flattened Earth would have produced a neck of material from a point on its equatorial bulge. The neck would have flown off into space as a large blob trailed by smaller blobs that would soon have fused into one. But a major flaw in the fission theory, other scientists noted, was that in order for fission to occur, the Earth would have been spinning so fast that it would still be turning much more rapidly than it is today.

The Coaccretion Theory of the Moon's Origin

Another theory for the origin of the moon discussed at the 1964 conference was that the moon formed together with the Earth at the same time and in the same place. Just as the Earth was believed to have been created by accretion (the accumulation of solid particles and larger objects) about 4.6 billion years ago when the solar system was taking shape, so, according to this theory, was the moon.
But the “coaccretion” theory presented problems as well. Astronomers had calculated the moon's density by using a formula based on the moon's mass, as determined by its distance from the Earth and its orbital velocity, divided by its volume. The moon's density, calculated to be 3.3 times the density of liquid water, is much less than the density of the Earth, which is 5.5 times the density of water. If the Earth and the moon were formed from the same cloud of matter, at the same distance from the sun, how could their composition be so different?
In addition, other doubts plagued scientists as well. If the moon formed near Earth by the same processes that formed the other planets, why don't the other planets of the inner solar system have large satellites like the moon? Mercury and Venus have no moons, and Mars has only two tiny satellites that may be captured asteroids.
For such reasons, some scientists by the time of the 1964 conference were already doubtful about the validity of the coaccretion theory as well as the earlier theory that the moon formed at about the same distance from the sun as the Earth. Instead, most participants at the meeting favored some version of Urey's theory in which the moon was formed elsewhere and then captured by the Earth, or some version of the fission theory. After all, they noted, because fission would take place in the upper layers of the Earth, which are much less dense than its heavy iron core, fission could account for the moon's low density and apparent lack of a significant iron core. Though fission caused by Earth's rapid rotation had been ruled out, the scientists speculated that a portion of the Earth might still have been flung off to form the moon in some other way.

A Revised Capture Scenario

In 1972, Ernst J. Opik, an Estonian-born astrophysicist who worked in Northern Ireland, proposed a totally different theory. Opik suggested that a primordial object may have streaked past the Earth in the early solar system and come within Roche's limit, a boundary located about 18,500 kilometers (11,500 miles) from the center of the Earth. Inside Roche's limit, the Earth's gravity can pull a weak body apart. (Every planet has its own Roche's limit, which varies according to the planet's mass.) Some debris from the disintegrating body may have gone into orbit around the Earth and then coalesced to form the moon.
Scientists agreed that Opik's “disintegrative capture” theory convincingly explained how the moon could have been made from different material than the Earth—material from a distant part of the solar system. And the theory provided an answer to the question of how a large object—or at least part of it—could have been pulled into orbit around the Earth, a test that the previous capture theory had failed. Nonetheless, by 1985, researchers had made detailed calculations showing that a fast-moving object would not have spent enough time within Roche's limit to be pulled apart and leave debris around the Earth before it flew on. Thus, until better calculations might somehow yield contrary results, the disintegrative capture theory was shelved.

New Evidence From the Moon

Even while scientists were evaluating Opik's theory, the first physical evidence from the moon had become available. From 1969 to 1972, Apollo astronauts landed on the moon six times, collecting more than 2,000 rock and soil samples. Researchers who analyzed the samples found that the specimens shared a unique characteristic: The relative amounts of oxygen isotopes (atoms of the same element that differ in atomic weight) in the moon rocks proved to be almost identical to those found in the Earth's mantle, a thick layer of hot rock between the Earth's outer core and its crust. The relative amounts of these isotopes are believed to have varied in different parts of the solar system, so the oxygen-isotope ratios strongly implied that the moon and Earth's mantle had a common origin.
The moon rocks were also extremely dry, whereas a great many rock types and minerals on Earth contain water. Compared with Earth rocks, there were very few other substances in moon rocks that, like water, are volatile (vaporize easily).
Finally, the dating of radioactive isotopes in the lunar samples told the scientists how long it had been since minerals in the samples had solidified from a molten state. (A radioactive isotope is one that decays spontaneously to become another substance. For example, an isotope of hafnium decays to form an isotope of tungsten.) By comparing the relative number of such isotopes, scientists can tell the age of the sample. The dating process showed that all or most of the moon had been molten at one time, solidifying by 4.4 billion years ago. This finding, in particular, convinced most scientists that the moon could not be the primordial body that Urey thought had been captured by the Earth.
Thus, studies of the moon rocks clearly showed that the moon could not be an intact, or nearly intact, remnant from the earliest days of the solar system. The evidence suggested that the moon was born from the Earth's mantle by a process that released enormous heat. The heat would have driven off the volatiles and vaporized the rock.

The Giant-impact Theory

Influenced by the information from the moon rocks, in the mid-1970's two teams of planetary scientists separately proposed what is now called the “giant-impact” theory of the origin of the moon. The groups were led by A. G. W. “Al" Cameron and William R. Ward at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and William K. Hartmann and Donald R. Davis at the Planetary Science Institute in Tucson, Arizona. The researchers suggested that a huge Mars-sized object struck the Earth, blasting away enough of the planet's crust and mantle to create the moon from its debris. According to the theory, the object struck the Earth a glancing blow, rather than hitting it head-on. The blow set the Earth spinning faster than before. This may explain why the angular momentum of the Earth-moon system (a measure of the rate at which both bodies are rotating and orbiting) is unusually high, compared with other planets and moons in the solar system.
At first, many scientists were reluctant to accept the giant-impact theory, because the theory was based on a single event—a catastrophic collision—that most researchers believed had occurred very rarely in the solar system. However, the more that lunar and planetary scientists thought about the theory, the better they liked it. Surveys of lunar geography made with both Earth-based telescopes and telescopes and cameras on spacecraft showed that strikes on the moon by asteroids and meteoroids (metal or rocky objects smaller than asteroids) after it had formed and solidified had produced many huge craters, called impact basins. Why couldn't the impact of an even more massive object on the Earth have made the moon itself?

Collision With A Protoplanet?

At the same time, new findings about the formation of the solar system suggested that large numbers of massive objects, called protoplanets or planetesimals, had been orbiting the sun at the time the Earth formed. Gradually, scientists came to believe, these objects collided with one another and were broken up, or massed together to make the planets, or were flung out of the solar system.
At the second major conference on the origin of the moon, held in Kona, Hawaii, in 1984, the giant-impact theory was the center of attention. It became the prevailing view of most astronomers.
As more researchers tested the giant-impact theory, they had to contend with the fact that many of the early calculations of the theory were relatively crude. Although the calculations showed that an enormous collision could have blown enough matter out of the Earth (and from the vaporized outer layers of the impacting object itself) to make the moon, they did not trace the events in detail. So while the theory was very promising, astronomers did not know how realistic it was.

The Help of Computer Simulations

During the 1990's, a new generation of planetary scientists, including Robin M. Canup, now at the Southwest Research Institute in Boulder, Colorado, developed the theory further. They made improved calculations with better computers and more advanced programs that more realistically simulated cosmic collisions and their consequences. By 1996, Canup and her associate Larry W. Esposito of the University of Colorado in Boulder had demonstrated that the giant-impact theory required a much more massive impacting object than previously suspected. They found that the object had to be at least twice as massive as Mars, or even larger, for the debris from the collision to coalesce into the single moon that we have today. Otherwise, the calculations indicated, there would be several moons circling the Earth.
Though Canup and Esposito's calculations were more sophisticated than those of the past, they still were not precise enough. The team used a simplifying assumption, called gas dynamic theory, that represented the processes in the formation of the moon after the giant impact on Earth as though the debris were all gas. In reality, even though the material hurled up by the collision was so hot that it took the form of vapor, it soon cooled and condensed. So the actual conditions must have been much more complicated than those represented by the gas dynamic calculations, with clumps of rock cooling, solidifying, and colliding. In fact, the various proponents of the giant-impact theory had shown only that an enormous collision could have produced the necessary conditions to form the moon. But they had not proven that such an event had actually occurred.
In 1997, the Japanese geophysicist Shigeru Ida at the Tokyo Institute of Technology, together with Canup and Canup's University of Colorado colleague Glen R. Stewart, presented a more advanced simulation of the impact. They used a mathematical technique called the N-body method. This model recreated the processes inside the impact debris cloud as a series of interactions between a large number (“N”) of individual clumps or objects that collided with one another and were affected by one another's gravitational forces. Thus, the N-body method represented real processes in space much better than the gas dynamic technique or other methods did. The Ida team found that the debris from a giant impact with the Earth would indeed have formed a large moon and that this process might have taken as little as one year. Refined calculations by the team and others showed that the most likely mass for the body that collided with Earth was three times that of Mars.

Further Support For the Giant-impact Theory

Besides conducting computer simulations, researchers pursued other ways of testing the giant-impact theory. During 1998, Lunar Prospector, NASA's first moon mission since Apollo, was launched to gather a variety of data about the moon. As Prospector orbited just 100 kilometers (60 miles) above the moon's surface, researchers used Earth-based radio telescopes to monitor the moon's gravitational pull on the spacecraft. By mapping the results, the scientists were able to get a far more accurate picture of how the moon's mass is distributed than they had had before. The researchers calculated that the moon has a core, most likely composed of iron, with a radius of 220 kilometers to 450 kilometers (135 miles to 280 miles). This is well within the range expected if the moon had formed as the result of a devastating impact on Earth and thus is consistent with the giant-impact theory.
In December 1998, at an origin-of-the-moon conference in Monterey, California, Canup and planetary scientists Craig Aignor of the University of Colorado at Boulder and Harold Levison of the Southwest Research Institute announced further calculations in support of the giant-impact theory. They used a computer method called “symplectic integration,” which allowed them to simulate much greater lengths of time and thousands more sun-orbiting objects than ever before possible. Canup's group found that impacts on Earth, such as the one that may have formed the moon, were almost certainly common during the first 100 million years after the birth of the solar system. This conclusion was among the strongest indications available to astronomers that the giant-impact theory was not based on an unusual accident of nature, a finding that made the theory even more credible.

Not A Trouble-free Theory

Nevertheless, the theory faced the same stumbling block that early theories did. The impact of a body three times the mass of Mars would have set the Earth spinning so rapidly that, even today, it would be turning faster than it is. Cameron and others proposed variations of the theory to get around this problem. One possibility they explored was that another large object might have struck the Earth from the opposite direction after the moon was formed, slowing the planet's spin.
Despite the one remaining difficulty, astronomers in 1999 considered the giant-impact theory the best explanation for the origin of the moon. They think they can now sketch fairly accurately how the moon was born and how it developed over time into the body that today illuminates our night sky.

How Scientists Think the Impact Occurred

Here's the scenario: A little more than 4.5 billion years ago, a young, hot Earth, constantly bombarded by thousands of asteroid-sized objects, had grown to almost its present size. Most of the iron it contained had sunk toward the center, forming a huge iron core that was much denser than the rest of the planet. Surrounding the molten core was a slowly hardening mantle of lighter rock.
Suddenly, a round, fast-moving, fully formed planet the size of Mars or perhaps larger, with its own iron core and rocky mantle, loomed from space. Traveling at a speed of 40,000 kilometers (25,000 miles) per hour, it struck the Earth a glancing blow. The object's kinetic energy (energy of motion) was instantly converted into heat that vaporized much of the object's mantle along with a good part of the Earth's. The collision produced a great, expanding cloud of fiery vapor composed of gasified rock. Thrown to a height of perhaps 22,500 kilometers (14,000 miles), much of the vapor formed a diffuse cloud that orbited the Earth. At the same time, most of the iron core of the body that struck Earth looped around the planet and struck again, this time penetrating and merging with the Earth.
Over the course of about a year, the debris in the cloud condensed into solid particles and formed a ring around the Earth. The particles slowly clumped together, forming tiny rocks, then bigger and bigger ones. For a time there were thousands of these “moonlets” orbiting Earth. But over a period of less than 100 years, the larger moonlets swept up the smaller ones, until they all merged into one large body. The ring was gone, and in its place there was the infant moon. At that point, the Earth-moon system resembled a double planet. The moon circled Earth rapidly at a small fraction of its present distance, and Earth spun rapidly, thanks to the blow it had suffered in the impact.

The Later Development of the Moon

The newborn moon was at first covered by magma (molten rock). This feature, which geologists call the magma ocean, was at least a few hundred kilometers deep. The magma ocean was created by heat from the many large final impacts of moonlets on the by-then largely formed moon. Liquid iron sank to the moon's center, and electrical currents in the molten core generated a magnetic field. As the magma ocean cooled, about 4 billion years ago, it solidified. Heavier minerals sank, while lighter ones rose to form a crust.
Even as the lunar surface hardened, it was being peppered by meteoroids, asteroids, and comets. The largest of these objects produced huge basins up to 2,500 kilometers (1,600 miles) across. Later, heat released by radioactivity deep inside the moon caused magma to well up from the interior, partially filling and leveling many of the basins.

Bodies large enough to carve out basins stopped striking the moon by about 3.2 billion years ago, but smaller objects continued to hit the surface, forming many craters. At the centers of some craters the rebound of surface material after the impact created a mountain. The effects of impacts also produced mountain chains at the boundaries of many basins and craters. No lunar mountains were formed by the folding and upthrust of surface layers, as occurs to form many mountains on Earth. Nor did any large volcanic mountains develop on the moon.

The countless impacts of meteoroids slowly fragmented the lunar surface. This created a regolith (surface layer) of broken rocks and soil particles as deep as 15 meters (50 feet) in some areas.

The Moon As It Is Today

Over 4.4 billion years, lunar tides caused the Earth to slow to its present spin rate of once every 24 hours and the moon to move gradually away from the Earth to its present distance of about 385,000 kilometers (240,000 miles). Even now, the process continues, though more slowly, as the moon recedes from the Earth at 3.75 centimeters (1.5 inches) per year, or about 3.6 meters (4 yards) per century.

The moon has changed little for several billion years. Newer craters have formed atop older ones and the regolith has gradually deepened, but there are no more magma flows–most scientists think the moon long ago became totally cold and solid—and no more huge impacts.
Scientists believe this is probably how the moon was created and how it developed, but even now they aren't certain that they have learned the true history of the moon. The giant-impact theory best fits the evidence we have, but as scientists continue their research, other theories may yet replace it. However, one thing will probably never change—the sense of wonder that people feel when they gaze up at the moon.

Red Giant...And the Earth Burned

this posted by saisrikanth

You Can Help Fight Global Warming

You Can Help Fight Global Warming
Many efforts are being made by various nations to cut down the rate of global warming. One such effort is the Kyoto agreement that has been made between various nations to reduce the emissions of various green house gases. Also many non profit organizations are working for the cause. Al Gore was one of the foremost U.S. politicians to heave an alarm about the hazards of global warming. He has produced a significantly acclaimed documentary movie called "An Inconvenient Truth," and written a book that archives his advice that Earth is dashing toward an immensely warmer future. Al Gore, the former vice president of United States has given various speeches to raise an awareness of global warming. He has warned people about the ill effects of Global warming and its remedies.
But an interesting side of the global warming episode is that there are people who do not consider global warming as something that is creating a problem. Skeptics of global warming think that global warming is not an ecological trouble. According to the global warming skeptics, the recent enhancement in the earth's average temperature is no reason for alarm. According to them earth's coastlines and polar ice caps are not at a risk of vanishing. Global warming skeptics consider that the weather models used to establish global warming and to forecast its impacts are distorted. According to the models, if calculations are made the last few decades must have been much worse as compared to actually happened to be. Most of the global warming skeptics believe that the global warming is not actually occurring. They stress on the fact the climatic conditions vary because of volcanism, the obliquity cycle, changes in solar output, and internal variability. Also the warming can be due to the variation in cloud cover, which in turn is responsible for the temperatures on the earth. The variations are also a result of cosmic ray flux that is modulated by the solar magnetic cycles.
Global Warming Skeptics
The global warming skeptics are of the view that the global warming is a good phenomenon and should not be stopped. There are various benefits of global warming according to them. According to the skeptics, the global warming will increase humidity in tropical deserts. Also the higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere trigger plant growth. As predicted, due to the global warming the sea levels will rise. But this can be readily adapted. Another argument of global warming skeptics is that earth has been warmer than today as seen in its history. The thought is that global warming is nothing to get afraid of because it just takes us back to a more natural set of environment of the past. Animals and plants appeared to do just fine in those eras of warm climate on the earth. According to few skeptics, the present chilly climate on the earth is an abnormality when judged over the geographical scale. Over geologic time, the earth’s mean temperature is 22 degrees C, as compared to today's 15.5 degrees C.

Global Warming Causes

Global Warming Causes As said, the major cause of global warming is the emission of green house gases like carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide etc into the atmosphere. The major source of carbon dioxide is the power plants. These power plants emit large amounts of carbon dioxide produced from burning of fossil fuels for the purpose of electricity generation. About twenty percent of carbon dioxide emitted in the atmosphere comes from burning of gasoline in the engines of the vehicles. This is true for most of the developed countries. Buildings, both commercial and residential represent a larger source of global warming pollution than cars and trucks.
Building of these structures require a lot of fuel to be burnt which emits a large amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Methane is more than 20 times as effectual as CO2 at entrapping heat in the atmosphere. Methane is obtained from resources such as rice paddies, bovine flatulence, bacteria in bogs and fossil fuel manufacture. When fields are flooded, anaerobic situation build up and the organic matter in the soil decays, releasing methane to the atmosphere. The main sources of nitrous oxide include nylon and nitric acid production, cars with catalytic converters, the use of fertilizers in agriculture and the burning of organic matter. Another cause of global warming is deforestation that is caused by cutting and burning of forests for the purpose of residence and industrialization.
Global Warming is Inspiring Scientists to Fight for Awareness
Scientists all over the world are making predictions about the ill effects of Global warming and connecting some of the events that have taken place in the pat few decades as an alarm of global warming. The effect of global warming is increasing the average temperature of the earth. A rise in earth’s temperatures can in turn root to other alterations in the ecology, including an increasing sea level and modifying the quantity and pattern of rainfall. These modifications may boost the occurrence and concentration of severe climate events, such as floods, famines, heat waves, tornados, and twisters. Other consequences may comprise of higher or lower agricultural outputs, glacier melting, lesser summer stream flows, genus extinctions and rise in the ranges of disease vectors. As an effect of global warming species like golden toad, harlequin frog of Costa Rica has already become extinct. There are number of species that have a threat of disappearing soon as an effect of global warming. As an effect of global warming various new diseases have emerged lately. These diseases are occurring frequently due to the increase in earths average temperature since the bacteria can survive better in elevated temperatures and even multiplies faster when the conditions are favorable. The global warming is extending the distribution of mosquitoes due to the increase in humidity levels and their frequent growth in warmer atmosphere. Various diseases due to ebola, hanta and machupo virus are expected due to warmer climates. The marine life is also very sensitive to the increase in temperatures. The effect of global warming will definitely be seen on some species in the water. A survey was made in which the marine life reacted significantly to the changes in water temperatures. It is expected that many species will die off or become extinct due to the increase in the temperatures of the water, whereas various other species, which prefer warmer waters, will increase tremendously. Perhaps the most disturbing changes are expected in the coral reefs that are expected to die off as an effect of global warming. The global warming is expected to cause irreversible changes in the ecosystem and the behavior of animals.
A group of scientists have recently reported on the surprisingly speedy rise in the discharge of carbon and methane release from frozen tundra in Siberia, now starting to melt because of human cause increases in earth’s temperature. The scientists tell us that the tundra is in danger of melting holds an amount of extra global warming pollution that is equivalent to the net amount that is previously in the earth's atmosphere. Likewise, earlier one more team of scientists reported that the in a single year Greenland witnessed 32 glacial earthquakes between 4.6 and 5.1 on the Richter scale. This is a disturbing sign and points that a huge destabilization that may now be in progress deep within the second biggest accretion of ice on the planet. This ice would be enough to raise sea level 20 feet worldwide if it broke up and slipped into the sea. Each day passing brings yet new proof that we are now in front of a global emergency, a climate emergency that needs instant action to piercingly decrease carbon dioxide emissions worldwide in order to turn down the earth's rising temperatures and avoid any catastrophe.
It is not easy to attach any particular events to global warming, but studies prove the fact that human activities are increasing the earth’s temperature. Even though most predictions focus on the epoch up to 2100, even if no further greenhouse gases were discharged after this date, global warming and sea level would be likely to go on to rise for more than a millennium, since carbon dioxide has a long average atmospheric life span.

What is Global Warming?

The average facade temperature of the globe has augmented more than 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1900 and the speed of warming has been almost three folds the century long average since 1970. This increase in earth’s average temperature is called Global warming. More or less all specialists studying the climate record of the earth have the same opinion now that human actions, mainly the discharge of green house gases from smokestacks, vehicles, and burning forests, are perhaps the leading power driving the fashion.
The gases append to the planet's normal greenhouse effect, permitting sunlight in, but stopping some of the ensuing heat from radiating back to space. Based on the study on past climate shifts, notes of current situations, and computer simulations, many climate scientists say that lacking of big curbs in greenhouse gas discharges, the 21st century might see temperatures rise of about 3 to 8 degrees, climate patterns piercingly shift, ice sheets contract and seas rise several feet. With the probable exemption of one more world war, a huge asteroid, or a fatal plague, global warming may be the only most danger to our planet earth.

Hubble Space-Shattering Discoveries

one of

Hubble Space-Shattering Discoveries

7 Reasons Why the World Will End in 2012

7 Reasons Why the World Will End in 2012 is it true or not

December 21st, 2012! The real truth of what's to happen!

December 21st, 2012! The real truth of what's to happen! or not?

Planetary Alignment on December 21 2012

However, there are others who contend that the end of the world 2012 prophesy actually refers to a very rare planetary alignment that will occur during the winter solstice on december 21 2012. At this time the entire Milky Way (including the earth and the sun) will align at a point that is known as the galactic equator. This alignment is so rare that it only happens every twenty five thousand years. It is thought that this rare planetary alignment could signal a shift in the magnetic poles. This polar shift has happened before in the distant past, and if it were to happen now it would cause massive destruction across the globe. Some claim that the reason the Mayan long calendar ends on this exact date is that something is going to happen in combination with this alignment, the introduction of Nibiru, and the solar flares. It can’t be a coincidence that all of these things are scheduled to happen at the same time that the Mayan calendar is set to come to its conclusion, can it?

If nothing else the 2012 end of the world prophesy that is brought about by the Mayan calendar does bring with it several questions about this culture’s knowledge of celestial events and happenings that they could not have possibly understood, let alone have mapped out to the extent that they did. Their understanding of the solar system, the planetary alignments, and other important events is something that cannot be easily explained or understood by most people who have studied this rare Mayan philosophy.

The end of the world 2012 scenario is one that frightens many people, but this does not have to be the case. If you are interested in finding out more about the theories and philosophies that the 2012 doomsday prophesy is founded on, then you visit the link below to find out more about the end of the world and what you can do to help your family survive any number of disasters. On top of this you can get a complete three hundred and sixty degree view of the processes of the 2012 countdown, including a special bulletin that will keep you up to date on everything that is related to this upcoming date and the disastrous implications it brings with it. So, if you are someone who is looking to make sure that they stay ahead of the danger and keep on top of new developments on the end of the world 2012, then this site is the perfect thing to keep you informed and prepared to december 21 2012.

The Truth About Planet X – Nibiru

Something else that has been considered is the belief that the 2012 end of the world will come to Earth not through some planetary force outside of our galaxy, but through the power of our own sun. Some who have studied the timing of the 2012 prophesy and combined this knowledge with an understanding of the solar system believe that the end will come via a large solar flare. This flare will come about because of the infiltration of the orbits of the planets in our solar system by an outside orbiting planet that the Sumerians and the Babylonians referred to as Nibiru, and is sometimes referred to by modern scientists as Planet X. Those who subscribe to this theory believe that Nibiru only orbits through our system once every three thousand six hundred years.

In addition to this, these cultures believed that there were a race of people who lived on Nibiru that were known as the Anunnaki. According to their creation mythology this superior race of beings came to Earth and genetically engineered human beings. They did this because they needed to get gold ore from our planet in order to help save their own environment. The humans that they created helped them by mining the gold from Africa. The basis for this mythology was found in ancient writings that were recently uncovered in relation to the ancient Sumerians, and they documented this creation in detail in their writings. If they are correct, then the end of the world 2012 that is depicted in the Mayan calendar will also coincide with the return of the Anunnaki. In essence, it would be the return of our creators, and this is also something that is closely linked in with the belief that the Mayan calendar signals the forthcoming Apocalypse.

According to this 2012 end of world philosophy, when this planetary body re-enters our system it will cause massive disruptions in the orbits of Jupiter, Uranus, Venus, and Earth. When Nibiru crosses our orbit they believe that it will cause the gases in Jupiter to ignite because it will get too close to the sun and the precarious balance that keeps its gas structure in check will be lost, therefore causing Jupiter to turn into a secondary sun. In combination with this, the solar flares that are released from the sun on a naturally reoccurring cycle are set to peak during the year 2012. It is believed that this occurrence in combination with the cycle of Nibiru will cause a massive amount of damage to the planet on a level that has never been seen before.

December 21 2012 Predictions – The End of The World 2012?

Until a couple of years ago there were not that many people who were acquainted with the end of the world 2012 prophecy that was put forward by many scholars who studied the end of the Mayan long calendar. This Long Count calendar has lasted for five thousand one hundred and twenty five years, and although the end of the calendar leads to many different interpretations, one of the most popular is the belief that at the end of this cycle the world (or humanity’s existence) will come to an abrupt end on December 21 2012. Is the world going to end in 2012?

In order to fully understand the 2012 end of the world predications, then you should first understand the calendar that is at the center of this controversy. The current cycle, or baktun, of this calendar began on August 13th, 3114 B.C. This marked the end of the last period and the beginning of the current one. The baktun that we are currently living in is the thirteenth, and the end of this cycle is one that has been considered to have a large level of importance to the Mayan people, which is why so many people have come to the conclusion that this cycle’s end is one that will mean the end of the world as we know it.

While there is no definite proclamation of how the end of the world 2012 predictions will happen, those who have studied this calendar claim that the long calendar was created in order to correspond with a long term astronomical prediction by the Mayan people. This has led some to believe that this end of the world scenario will play out in a manner that has something to do with something from beyond this world. While this correlation to something that is going on in outer space is not a definite thing, for some it comes from a basic understanding of Mayan culture and their unique understanding of astronomical phenomena and planetary alignments.

Hubble Space Telescope History

In 1962, the USA's National Academy of Sciences recommends building a large space telescope. In 1977, Congress votes to fund the project and construction of Hubble Space Telescope begins.
Construction of Hubble Space Telescope was completed in 1985. The launch of Hubble was delayed due to the 1986 Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. Hubble was launched on the space shuttle on April 25, 1990. It was named after Edwin Hubble.

Within days Hubble was sending back pictures that were out of focus. NASA discovered a major flaw in the giant mirror. The giant mirror was too flat on one edge by 1 / 50^th of the width of a single human hair.
In December, 1993, the Space Shuttle Endeavor captured and modified the Hubble Space Telescope by adding a camera to correct problems with the telescope's primary mirror.The second servicing mission was in february 1997. Astronauts exchanged some of Hubble's instruments and added new blankets to keep Hubble warm.
On October 1997, NASA decided to extend Hubble's operations from 2005 to 2010.On November 13, 1999, a fourth gyroscope on Hubble fails. The Hubble shuts down to await a repair mission since it can no longer aim. Space Shuttle mission repairs the Hubble and upgrades it.

Most distant object in universe

You will be amaze to watch tis video

Hubble captures colliding galaxies

Hubble captures colliding galaxies

THE MOST BEAUTIFUL SPACE PICTURES (Hubble Telescope)

These video is a THE MOST BEAUTIFUL SPACE PICTURES from Hubble Telescope

Hubble Space Telescope - Chapter 2

These is a video about hubble telescope

Hubble telescope discoveries 2010

These images are hubble telescope discoveries 2010

TOP 10

these are all habul telescope's top ten images

this is habul images about space

hi iam sai