mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
stars exploding with a very specific mass ... Options
Reiko07
Posted: Monday, May 31, 2021 4:01:24 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/30/2018
Posts: 1,457
Neurons: 7,368
The mysterious substance known as dark energy thought to be pushing the universe apart at ever greater speeds may be nothing more than an artefact of our acceleration through a local patch of the universe. That is the controversial claim of a group of physicists who reckon they have found flaws in the evidence underpinning the Nobel-prize winning discovery of cosmic acceleration. The dispute centres on exploded stars known as type Ia supernovae, which allow researchers to calculate cosmic distances and rates of expansion.

Type Ia supernovae are known as “standard candles” since they are generated by stars exploding with a very specific mass and therefore known absolute brightness. By observing these objects’ apparent brightness, astronomers can work out how far they are (in space and therefore time), and by combining that information with the red shift in their emitted light can then calculate how fast the universe was expanding at that point in time.

Dark energy debate reignited by controversial analysis of supernovae data

Question: Is exploding a present participle or a gerund?


FounDit
Posted: Monday, May 31, 2021 2:19:16 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 15,996
Neurons: 76,374
Reiko07 wrote:
The mysterious substance known as dark energy thought to be pushing the universe apart at ever greater speeds may be nothing more than an artefact of our acceleration through a local patch of the universe. That is the controversial claim of a group of physicists who reckon they have found flaws in the evidence underpinning the Nobel-prize winning discovery of cosmic acceleration. The dispute centres on exploded stars known as type Ia supernovae, which allow researchers to calculate cosmic distances and rates of expansion.

Type Ia supernovae are known as “standard candles” since they are generated by stars exploding with a very specific mass and therefore known absolute brightness. By observing these objects’ apparent brightness, astronomers can work out how far they are (in space and therefore time), and by combining that information with the red shift in their emitted light can then calculate how fast the universe was expanding at that point in time.

Dark energy debate reignited by controversial analysis of supernovae data

Question: Is exploding a present participle or a gerund?

It looks like a present participle to me.
Russell Oxendine
Posted: Monday, May 31, 2021 4:04:12 PM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 5/15/2021
Posts: 12
Neurons: 11,502
Location: Tallahassee, Florida, United States
FounDit wrote:
Reiko07 wrote:
The mysterious substance known as dark energy thought to be pushing the universe apart at ever greater speeds may be nothing more than an artefact of our acceleration through a local patch of the universe. That is the controversial claim of a group of physicists who reckon they have found flaws in the evidence underpinning the Nobel-prize winning discovery of cosmic acceleration. The dispute centres on exploded stars known as type Ia supernovae, which allow researchers to calculate cosmic distances and rates of expansion.

Type Ia supernovae are known as “standard candles” since they are generated by stars exploding with a very specific mass and therefore known absolute brightness. By observing these objects’ apparent brightness, astronomers can work out how far they are (in space and therefore time), and by combining that information with the red shift in their emitted light can then calculate how fast the universe was expanding at that point in time.

https://physicsworld.com/a/dark-energy-debate-reignited-by-controversial-analysis-of-supernovae-data/

Question: Is exploding a present participle or a gerund?

It looks like a present participle to me.



Ditto!
Reiko07
Posted: Monday, May 31, 2021 5:06:16 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/30/2018
Posts: 1,457
Neurons: 7,368
Thanks, FounDit and Russell.

Bathcoup
Posted: Friday, June 4, 2021 5:49:00 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 2/24/2021
Posts: 115
Neurons: 1,935
Reiko07 wrote:
Thanks, FounDit and Russell.
========================

It is similar to popping in “a loud noise generated by balloon popping”. The author made a few serious mistakes.
If you're interested in, I can go through them with you. Two trivial ones are below.

"astronomers can work out how far they are were (in space and therefore time)"
"That is the controversial claim of by a group of physicists"
A claim is a statemen. In `claim of xyz`, xyz should be the name/summary of the claim or what (nature) the claim is.


Reiko07
Posted: Thursday, June 10, 2021 2:12:02 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/30/2018
Posts: 1,457
Neurons: 7,368
Bathcoup wrote:
It is similar to popping in “a loud noise generated by balloon popping”.


Thanks, Bathcoup.

Is popping a gerund?

Bathcoup
Posted: Friday, June 11, 2021 11:29:30 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 2/24/2021
Posts: 115
Neurons: 1,935
A question to me? Lucky you! I should be the last person that you ask such a question. Looking at an -ing word alone, I can’t tell if it’s a present-participle or gerund (so I call it “geruple”), unless I understand the sentence where it’s used (then do I really need to know which one it is?). So, I usually don’t exercise my brain telling a gerund from present-participle.

Cutting board: A cutting board in use does not cut itself into pieces. cutting = gerund
Burning candle: A burning candle gives off heat, light and a bit smoke, it is burning. burning = p.p.
Popping balloon? He had a lot of balloons for his birthday party, now he’s busy popping balloon (to get rid of them).

The concept of “a popping balloon” is, for me, not easy to grasp. If it means a few flying shreds of balloon skin, then that’s more like “a popped balloon”. A balloon is a balloon or a balloon no longer. Between them there’s an action, a very short process, called “balloon popping”.

“A balloon is popping”, if meaningful at all, can’t be understood in the same way that “He’s jogging” is. Technically, for a very brief moment before the balloon pops, it’s meaningful to say “That balloon is popping”. When you hear a loud snapping noise of balloon popping, the balloon has already popped. Therefore,

Balloon Popping = (the) popping of a balloon, popping = gerund. Likewise, exploding (in OP) = gerund
Audiendus
Posted: Friday, June 11, 2021 9:42:08 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/24/2011
Posts: 7,396
Neurons: 1,372,811
Location: London, England, United Kingdom
The popping of a balloongerund (functions as a noun).

They did a lot of balloon-poppinggerund (functions as a noun).

The sound of a balloon popping (no hyphen)present participle (equivalent to an adjectival phrase). Think of "popping" as meaning "which pops" or "at the moment that it pops". A present participle used in this way does not necessarily imply a continuous tense ("which is popping").
Reiko07
Posted: Saturday, June 12, 2021 12:00:36 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/30/2018
Posts: 1,457
Neurons: 7,368
Thanks, Bathcoup and Audiendus.

Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.