 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2004What do you call someone who studies meteors?
If meteorologists don't study meteors, who does? I know astronomers do, but is there a name for the specialty? > If meteorologists don't study meteors, who does? I know astronomers > do, but is there a name for the specialty? I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' or 'meteor experts', don't you?  SignatureChristopher (Change 3032 to 3232 to reply by private e-mail) > I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' > or 'meteor experts', don't you? Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars photos meteors that have crashed into the surface over millions of years? If so, would the Earth look just like it if we didn't have an atmosphere? > > I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' > > or 'meteor experts', don't you? > > Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars photos meteors > that have crashed into the surface over millions of years? If so, would > the Earth look just like it if we didn't have an atmosphere? Speaking of meteor experts, shouldn't hemorrhoids be called asteroids? tomcatpolka@NyOaShPoAoM.com spake thus: > > I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' > > or 'meteor experts', don't you? > > Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars photos meteors > that have crashed into the surface over millions of years? If so, would > the Earth look just like it if we didn't have an atmosphere? Mars has a significant atmosphere - you and I can't breathe it but you wouldn't die straight away from being exposed to it as we would with empty space. There is also weather on Mars - winds, cyclones, the lot. But no rain. SignatureDavid ===== "David": > Mars has a significant atmosphere - Significant in some respects, but this... > you and I can't breathe it but you wouldn't die straight away from > being exposed to it as we would with empty space. ...is nonsense. The atmospheric pressure on Mars is less than 1% of that on the Earth. For purposes of how a person would "die straight away" in it, that *is* equivalent to a vacuum. The victim would be unconscious in about 10-20 seconds and dead in minutes, either way. David may have been misled by science fiction written before the true atmospheric pressure on Mars was learned; it wasn't known for sure until the Viking landings in 1976, I think. It often used to be assumed in older fiction that people wouldn't need a full spacesuit on Mars, but just an oxygen supply to breathe from. SignatureMark Brader, Toronto, msb@vex.net MARTIANS BUILD TWO IMMENSE CANALS IN TWO YEARS. Vast Engineering Works Accomplished in an Incredibly Short Time by Our Planetary Neighbors. --N.Y.Times headline, August 27, 1911 My text in this article is in the public domain. msb@vex.net spake thus: > "David": > > Mars has a significant atmosphere - [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > assumed in older fiction that people wouldn't need a full spacesuit > on Mars, but just an oxygen supply to breathe from. Fair enough - I hesitated before posting as I didn't have time to check, but I figured somebody would correct me if I was wrong. SignatureDavid ===== > Fair enough - I hesitated before posting as I didn't have time to > check, but I figured somebody would correct me if I was wrong. May I borrow that for a .sig? :-) -- Colin > > Fair enough - I hesitated before posting as I didn't have time to > > check, but I figured somebody would correct me if I was wrong. > > May I borrow that for a .sig? Who are you asking? You didn't include the name. Is bass.c.voice David56? Is your post supposed to be a self-referential example of posting wrongly and trusting in the patience and astuteness of others? -- Donna Richoux > Who are you asking? You didn't include the name. Is bass.c.voice > David56? Yes. > Is your post supposed to be a self-referential example of posting > wrongly and trusting in the patience and astuteness of others? Wow. That seems a bit harsh, Donna. Some people's software only cite the email address. In fact, David56's software does that. In any case, David would know who Colin was addressing. Anyone reading the posts in order would know who Colin was addressing. Some of us even reading the post out of context knew who Colin was addressing. SignatureDena Jo Delete "delete.this.for.email" for email. > > Who are you asking? You didn't include the name. Is bass.c.voice > > David56? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > addressing. Some of us even reading the post out of context knew who > Colin was addressing. Thanks for the stout defence. If I were being really picky I might also take issue with Donna for snipping the smiley from my reply! This is actually the first time I've noticed this default behaviour from Gravity - I must see if I can fix it. -- Colin > > > Who are you asking? You didn't include the name. Is bass.c.voice > > > David56? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > > > Wow. That seems a bit harsh, Donna. He'll cope. > > Some people's software only cite the email address. In fact, David56's > > software does that. In any case, David would know who Colin was [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Thanks for the stout defence. If I were being really picky I might also > take issue with Donna for snipping the smiley from my reply! The what? You mean those squiggles by your name? >This is > actually the first time I've noticed this default behaviour from Gravity > - I must see if I can fix it. Good. I'm practicing up to be Truly Donovan. Unfortately, I definitely lack her impervious skin. I'll buckle and go back to nicey-nice within days, I know it. SignaturePaper tiger -- Donna Richoux [...] > I'm practicing up to be Truly Donovan. You'll *never* be as snide as AUE's Queen Cobra. > Unfortately, I definitely lack her impervious skin. Mrs. Donovan's skin is quite penetrable, trust me. Even the most puffed-up poison-fanged snake bleeds when bitten by a mongoose. > I'll buckle and go back to nicey-nice within days, I know it. Good. In three or four days? [wink-wink] > -- > Paper tiger -- Donna Richoux Paper cobra, perhaps? SignatureReinhold (Rey) Aman Mongoose colinandmarianne@adslhome.dk spake thus: > This is > actually the first time I've noticed this default behaviour from Gravity > - I must see if I can fix it. Ditto - I also use Gravity. Let me know if you work out how to add in the name as well as the email address of the person to whom you are responding. SignatureDavid ===== david56 spake thus: > colinandmarianne@adslhome.dk spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > in the name as well as the email address of the person to whom you > are responding. Got it. Not difficult. View | Global Options | Replying - change Follow Up to: %n (%a) spake thus: %b or %n spake thus: %b or similar. SignatureDavid ===== << [David] Ditto - I also use Gravity. Let me know if you work out how to add in the name as well as the email address of the person to whom you are responding. [end quote] >> I am astounded. I thought I was using a contender for the most ancient newsreader contest. Is Gravity even more ancient -- enough that it does not support cut-and-paste? -- --------------------------------------------- Richard Maurer To reply, remove half Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Richard Maurer spake thus: > << [David] > Ditto - I also use Gravity. Let me know if you work out how to add [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > ancient newsreader contest. Is Gravity even more ancient -- > enough that it does not support cut-and-paste? Hardly. I simply hadn't modified the default setting, which noted the email address of the person you're replying to, but not the display name. As you can see I've now changed my settings. SignatureDavid ===== > > Who are you asking? You didn't include the name. Is bass.c.voice > > David56? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > addressing. Some of us even reading the post out of context knew who > Colin was addressing. Ah, that's better! -- Colin colinandmarianne@adslhome.dk spake thus: > > Fair enough - I hesitated before posting as I didn't have time to > > check, but I figured somebody would correct me if I was wrong. > > May I borrow that for a .sig? Feel free. I think there's a Usenet law relating to this. SignatureDavid ===== > tomcatpolka@NyOaShPoAoM.com spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > with empty space. There is also weather on Mars - winds, cyclones, > the lot. But no rain. Are you sure about that? What gases is it composed of? Anyway, you would die of radiation pretty quickly. SignatureRob Bannister > Are you sure about that? What gases is it composed of? Anyway, you would > die of radiation pretty quickly. And if you know that one, then where did all the nitrogen in Earth's atmosphere come from? I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our lives would be different. > ... I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our > lives would be different. We would speak with higher-pitched voices, for one thing. I know this is true, having watched a TV documentary about deep-sea divers who breathe a mixture of oxygen and helium in place of standard air. I also dimly recall a few laboratory pranks from high school. Incidentally it probably does not make much difference that the divers' helium/oxygen mixture does _not_ contain the trace amounts of other gases that typically constitute air, so at least the situation isn't overly complex. SignatureGood luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://kerrydeare.tripod.com > > ... I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our > > lives would be different. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > that typically constitute air, so at least the situation isn't overly > complex. Isn't the Mickey-Mouse effect because of the presence of helium rather than the absence of nitrogen? After all, it works when you breathe in the contents of one of those balloons, which are, I think, filled with a helium-air mixture. (OT: we are in danger of running out of helium. Unless that was just a rumour put about by futures traders.) Mike. >>> ... I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our >>> lives would be different. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Isn't the Mickey-Mouse effect because of the presence of helium > rather than the absence of nitrogen? Indeed. I was funning, but it looks as though I'm getting off to a wobbly start new-years-humor-wise. I am almost certain my heart's in the right place. SignatureGood luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://kerrydeare.tripod.com > > ... I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our > > lives would be different. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > that typically constitute air, so at least the situation isn't overly > complex. It's the helium (or, in some exotic diving-gas formulas, hydrogen) that gives the Donald Duck effect. Helium is used to avoid nitrogen narcosis (nitrogen at high pressure is narcotic enough to be dangerous). The lower density of helium-rich gases raises the resonant frequencies of the throat and mouth. Sometimes "trimix" (helium/nitrogen/oxygen) formulas are used when it is important to avoid this. SignatureChris Green A weatherman? >> ... I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our >> lives would be different. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >mixture of oxygen and helium in place of standard air. I also dimly recall >a few laboratory pranks from high school. When I used to calibrate gas flow instruments in my technician days, we'd sometimes breathe in a lung-full of helium to have some gas with some unsuspecting visitor or the secretary. I wonder how a soprano sounds after she breathes it in? Her voice might become ultrasonic, based what helium did to mine and my coworkers', all male. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net >>> ... I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our >>> lives would be different. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > might become ultrasonic, based what helium did to mine and my > coworkers', all male. When I was a student there were few women studying chemistry. However in graduate school one of the top students was a woman. She may even have been the brightest person in the class, despite the fact that one of the men later won a Nobel Prize. In those days you would have had trouble finding a soprano to test the helium gas trick. Nowadays of course it would be easier ... especially in North Jersey (upper case "s"). SignatureGood luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://kerrydeare.tripod.com >>> ... I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our >>> lives would be different. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > we'd sometimes breathe in a lung-full of helium to have some gas with > some unsuspecting visitor or the secretary. My son and son-in-law and their buddies like to do that, too. It's funny. (Not being a science-guy type, I thought they were kidding at first.) > I wonder how a soprano sounds after she breathes it in? Her voice > might become ultrasonic, based what helium did to mine and my > coworkers', all male. If I ever try this, I'll let you know. That's a big "if," by the way. SignatureMaria Conlon Please send any email to the Hot Mail address. >>Are you sure about that? What gases is it composed of? Anyway, you would >>die of radiation pretty quickly. > > And if you know that one, then where did all the nitrogen in Earth's > atmosphere come from? I suppose if the nitrogen were all gone our lives > would be different. Well, we wouldn't live too long breathing pure oxygen. SignatureRob Bannister >>>Are you sure about that? What gases is it composed of? Anyway, you would >>>die of radiation pretty quickly. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Well, we wouldn't live too long breathing pure oxygen. Why's that? I'd think we'd do fine; we'd simply not have to breathe as often. When in the hospital, I know I've breathed pure oxygen for some time with no ill effects. Quite the reverse, in fact. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > > I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' > > or 'meteor experts', don't you? > > Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars photos meteors > that have crashed into the surface over millions of years? If so, would > the Earth look just like it if we didn't have an atmosphere? I was wondering the exact same thing. How the hell did all those rocks get strewn about like that? >> > I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' >> > or 'meteor experts', don't you? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I was wondering the exact same thing. How the hell did all those rocks get >strewn about like that? They're obviously the remains of skyscrapers that Percy Lovell's canals used to supply with water, before that last Martian war c 41,562 BC. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England > Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars photos meteors > that have crashed into the surface over millions of years? If so, would > the Earth look just like it if we didn't have an atmosphere? More like the surface of the Moon. It has no appreciable atmosphere and at the same distance from the Sun. Mars does have some atmosphere, but it is in turn closer to the asteroid region and probably gets a heavier bombardment. Note that the Moon has some heavily cratered areas and some less so (the maria) due to lava flows. The Earth would doubtlessly have had lava flows as well, with its more active core probably more than the Moon. Brian Rodenborn >> I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' >> or 'meteor experts', don't you? > >Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars photos meteors >that have crashed into the surface over millions of years? If so, would >the Earth look just like it if we didn't have an atmosphere? Portions of the Earth's surface do look much like that. What we're seeing from the Mars' photos are simply rocks, not meteorites. As on Earth, meteors striking Mars leave a crater, or at least an impression. Mars has weather even today; at one time, wind, water, or Marsquakes caused big rocks to break into smaller rocks, much as on Earth. SignatureCharles Riggs Email address: chriggs¦at¦eircom¦dot¦net > Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars > photos meteors that have crashed into the surface over millions of > years? No, they are not. They are simply rocks at the surface, just like you see in a lot of rocky desert areas on Earth. (Well, possibly one in a billion of them might be a meteor.) -- Regards John > > I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' > > or 'meteor experts', don't you? > > Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars photos meteors > that have crashed into the surface over millions of years? If so, would > the Earth look just like it if we didn't have an atmosphere? Trust me, that's Libya. Mike. > > > I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' > > > or 'meteor experts', don't you? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Trust me, that's Libya. In a local newspaper, a caption for one such photo pointed out that the rocks have been smoothed by being blasted by wind-carried sand over the years. This would, of course, not have happened unless there *was* an atmosphere on Mars. SignatureRaymond S. Wise Minneapolis, Minnesota USA E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com >>I think you just have to call them 'meteor specialists' >>or 'meteor experts', don't you? > > Speaking of meteors, are all those little rocks on the new Mars photos meteors > that have crashed into the surface over millions of years? If so, would > the Earth look just like it if we didn't have an atmosphere? Most of Australia and parts of SW USA already look exactly like those photos. Of course, I'm not a CTist. SignatureRob Bannister > If meteorologists don't study meteors Oh, but we do. We study hydrometeors, electrometeors, lithometeors, usw. Philip Eden > who does? I know astronomers > do, but is there a name for the specialty? >> If meteorologists don't study meteors > > Oh, but we do. We study hydrometeors, electrometeors, > lithometeors, usw. I read that second word as electricity meters and had visions of you turning up at my front door in a peaked hat with a clipboard. -- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply > If meteorologists don't study meteors, who does? I know astronomers > do, but is there a name for the specialty? I know at least 2 meteorologists who like to study meteors. I suppose they do other things during the day, but frankly I never asked. SignatureGood luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://kerrydeare.tripod.com On 09 Jan 2004, commendowa wrote > If meteorologists don't study meteors, who does? I know astronomers > do, but is there a name for the specialty? There's a discussion about this on a board at www.meteorobs.com -- http://www.meteorobs.org/maillist/msg17327.html -- which basically comes up with "meteoricist" for one who studies meteors (the field of study being "meteorics"), and "meteoriticist" for one who studies meteorites (the field of study being "meteoritics"). SignatureCheers, Harvey Ottawa/Toronto/Edmonton for 30 years; Southern England for the past 21 years. (for e-mail, change harvey to whhvs) Harvey Van Sickle filted: >On 09 Jan 2004, commendowa wrote > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >of study being "meteorics"), and "meteoriticist" for one who studies >meteorites (the field of study being "meteoritics"). Never one to miss a chance to insinuate a language other than Greek, Latin and Old Norse into technical terminology, I propose "moroboshist", derived from the Japanese for "falling star" (accent, such as it is, on the "bo")....r In article <6sctvv00583qvnmjdt0ai56ealrjb485nk@4ax.com>, commendowa <lester@dialon.org> posted: > If meteorologists don't study meteors, who does? I know astronomers > do, but is there a name for the specialty? The real meteorologists do study meteors. However, English is Munglish. Jai Maharaj http://www.mantra.com/jai Om Shanti > In article <6sctvv00583qvnmjdt0ai56ealrjb485nk@4ax.com>, > commendowa <lester@dialon.org> posted: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > The real meteorologists do study meteors. They do, of course. Main Entry: me·te·or 1 : an atmospheric phenomenon (as lightning or a snowfall) SignatureEvan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Now and then an innocent man is sent 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |to the legislature. Palo Alto, CA 94304 | Kim Hubbard kirshenbaum@hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ The alleged Dr. Jai Maharunglish wrote: > > If meteorologists don't study meteors, who does? I know astronomers > > do, but is there a name for the specialty? > > The real meteorologists do study meteors. Your anal orifice aside, where can one find support for this statement? I find none such in any online dictionary. Didn't you say just the other day that usage determines what is and is not English? > However, English is Munglish. Saying doesn't make it so. SignatureBob Lieblich If ignorance is bliss, you must be a very happy fella > If meteorologists don't study meteors, who does? I know astronomers > do, but is there a name for the specialty? A meteorite. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. Speaking of astronomy, I just came across a Whitman poem: When I heard the learnd astronomer; When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me; When I was shown the charts and the diagrams, to add, divide, and measure them; When I, sitting, heard the astronomer, where he lectured with much applause in the lecture-room, How soon, unaccountable, I became tired and sick; 5 Till rising and gliding out, I wanderd off by myself, In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time, Lookd up in perfect silence at the stars. ... the poets never seem to *approve* of the sciences do they? Jim Ward filted: >Speaking of astronomy, I just came across a Whitman poem: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >... the poets never seem to *approve* of the sciences do they? THE MIRACLE OF SPRING We glibly talk of Nature's laws, but do things have a natural cause? Black earth becoming yellow crocus is undiluted hocus-pocus. --Piet Hein ....r > THE MIRACLE OF SPRING > We glibly talk of Nature's laws, > but do things have a natural cause? > Black earth becoming yellow crocus > is undiluted hocus-pocus. --Piet Hein Old Euclid drew a circle On a sand-beach long ago. He bounded and enclosed it With angles thus and so. His set of solemn greybeards Nodded and argued much Of arc and circumference, Diameter and such. A silent child stood by them From morning until noon Because they drew such charming Round pictures of the moon. - Vachel Lindsey > If meteorologists don't study meteors, who does? I know astronomers > do, but is there a name for the specialty? I have a client who studies meteors as a branch of astrophysics. He refers to himself and to his colleagues as "meteoriticists". The Oxford English Dictionary, second edition, volume IX, page 685 agrees. "meteoritics ... The scientific study of meteors and meteorites. ... Hence meteoriticist, an expert in meteoritics." Some other posts on this subject have been examples of meteorism. A |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.