> > > > > In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force into > > > > > context, it’s good to draw upon whatever we objectively know to be the > > > > > case.
> > > > > TNOs like Sedna, multiple thousands of SDOs and even a few of the > > > > > larger OCOs (Ort Cloud Objects) are no longer hard to find within the > > > > > radii of our Oort cloud, that’s reaching way the hell out there at the > > > > > tidal radii of < 3e16 meters and isn’t exactly going anywhere either, > > > > > all because of the weak binding force of gravity (“the Sun's orb of > > > > > physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence”). > > > > > http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro/tnoslist.html
> > > > > Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna; > > > > > current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: > > > > > 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N
> > > > > Whereas Sirius has apparently been holding onto us; > > > > > current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: > > > > > 2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
> > > > > Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5 > > > > > solar masses is quite capable of holding onto, not to mention as of > > > > > prior to Sirius B becoming a white dwarf, and of not too long before > > > > > then of whatever the original molecular cloud of <1.25e7 solar masses > > > > > has to say (even at 500 ly it’s a worthy pull or attractive force of > > > > > 1.528e20 N).
> > > > > As is, that 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force > > > > > represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you > > > > > can always trust the obfuscation from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or > > > > > you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps simply use one of the > > > > > following: > > > > > Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force) > > > > > http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm > > > > > http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
> > > > > Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) > > > > > of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging > > > > > all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9 > > > > > N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius. > > > > > That’s a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on > > > > > us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at > > > > > 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating.
> > > > > In other words, we unavoidably became a Newtonian orbiting part of > > > > > that same Sirius molecular cloud, and having remained associated with > > > > > the Sirius star/solar system ever since. The 99.999% remains of that > > > > > original molecular cloud which gave birth to Sirius is however nowhere > > > > > in sight, which is rather odd in that our instruments having imaged > > > > > the remains of similar or far less robust clouds at millions of light > > > > > years away, suggesting that the Sirius B helium flashover may have > > > > > actually been more like a sustained supernovae that directly affected > > > > > our terrestrial environment and having triggered our most recent > > > > > genetic mutations.
> > > > Is there any further question, as to how much our solar system has > > > > been under the gravitational radii dominance of the Sirius star/solar > > > > system, such as for the past 200~300 millions years?
> > > > > In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force into > > > > > proper context, it’s good to draw upon whatever we objectively know to > > > > > be the case.
> > > > > TNOs like Sedna, multiple thousands of SDOs and even a few of the > > > > > larger OCOs (Ort Cloud Objects) are no longer hard to find within the > > > > > radii of our Oort cloud, that’s reaching way the hell out there at the > > > > > tidal radii of < 3e16 meters and isn’t exactly going anywhere either, > > > > > all because of the weak binding force of gravity (“the Sun's orb of > > > > > physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence”). > > > > > http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro/tnoslist.html
> > > > > Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna; > > > > > current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: > > > > > 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N
> > > > > Whereas Sirius has apparently been holding onto us; > > > > > current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: > > > > > 2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
> > > > > Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5 > > > > > solar masses is quite capable of holding onto, not to mention as of > > > > > prior to Sirius B becoming a white dwarf, and of not too long before > > > > > then of whatever the original molecular cloud of <1.25e7 solar masses > > > > > has to say (even at 500 ly it’s a worthy pull or attractive force of > > > > > 1.528e20 N).
> > > > > As is, that 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force > > > > > represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you > > > > > can always trust the obfuscation from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or > > > > > you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps simply use one of the > > > > > following: > > > > > Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force) > > > > > http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm > > > > > http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
> > > > > Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) > > > > > of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging > > > > > all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9 > > > > > N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius. > > > > > That’s a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on > > > > > us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at > > > > > 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating.
> > > > > In other words, we unavoidably became a Newtonian orbiting part of > > > > > that same Sirius molecular cloud, and having remained associated with > > > > > the Sirius star/solar system ever since. The 99.999% remains of that > > > > > original molecular cloud which gave birth to Sirius is however nowhere > > > > > in sight, which is rather odd in that our instruments having imaged > > > > > the remains of similar or far less robust clouds at millions of light > > > > > years away, suggesting that the Sirius B helium flashover may have > > > > > actually been more like a sustained supernovae that directly affected > > > > > our terrestrial environment and having triggered our most recent > > > > > genetic mutations.
> > > > > As I've said before, you do not have to take my word on this, because > > > > > the laws of physics and the Newtonian force of gravity are entirely in > > > > > charge of this one. Only a religious faith that systematically > > > > > excludes such matters of fact can manage to keep a straight face as > > > > > they publicly obfuscate and otherwise remain in denial.
> > > > Why should we be so deathly afraid of learning the best available > > > > truths pertaining to the what and how we are a part of a much bigger > > > > cosmic picture?
> > > > ~ BG
> > > When will you stop beating this dead horse?
> > > Double-A
> > In other words, you're afraid of the cold hard and irrefutable facts > > that has our solar system clearly under the Newtonian tidal radii > > influence of Sirius.
> > When will you and so many others of your pretend-Atheist kind stop > > being so deathly afraid of this old but sturdy horse that you insist > > upon killing?
> > ~ BG
> There are 8 other stars closer to us than Sirius. How do they fit > into this gravitational influence?
> Double-A
Once knowing their mass and distance, it's a simple matter of running those numbers.
> On Apr 27, 4:47 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Red giant stars are many, and yet still a little hard to come by, as > > only a few public images of whatever is within 1000 light years seem > > to exist that fit within the color saturated eye-candy profiles that > > we’ve been taught to accept. However, the visible spectrum is > > extremely limited as to what is otherwise technically accessible from > > just above and below our genetically limited and thus inferior visual > > spectrum. (seems entirely odd that our human evolution was so careless > > in having discarded so much visual capability, in that other creatures > > seem to have a far wider visual spectrum capability that includes some > > UV and IR)
> > There are many possibilities, as for how Sirius B used to function as > > a truly massive (<9 solarmass)star, thereby extremely hot and fast > > burning prior to becoming a red supergiant, creating an impressive > > planetary nebula phase before ending as the little white dwarf. For > > all we know Sirius B was even a variable kind of red giant and then > > perhaps a slow nova flashover phase prior to finishing off as the > > white dwarf.
> > Betelgeuse has been a massive red giant at 20+ fold themassof our > > sun, and likely worth nearly 3 fold themassof the original Sirius B, > > and currently expanded to 1000 solar radii, and it'll be truly > > impressive nova whenever it transforms into a white dwarf nearly the > > size of Jupiter.
> > The soon to be renewed and improved Hubble should accomplish the > > improved spectrum and resolution of most everything, along with other > > existing and soon to be deployed telescopes should give us even better > > composite examples of what Sirius B used to look like. This may give > > some of us a better interpretation as to what transpired right next > > door to us, as well as having unavoidably contributed to some of what > > our solar system has to offer.
> We seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star > cluster, even though Sirius has been a relatively newish and extremely > vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from another > galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 > million years worth.
> It took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at least 120,000 solar > masses in order to produce such a 12+ mass star system, leaving 99.99% > of that molecular mass blown away and to fend for itself, at a place > and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. > Others might go so far as to suggest a molecular cloud mass of 1.2 > million, and others yet would prefer that this terrific cloud had > emerged from a smaller galaxy that encountered our Milky Way.
> There's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow > directly affected by and otherwise having become somewhat tidal radius > interrelated with such a nearby mass, at least associated with the > mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar > system.
> Lo and behold, it seems the mergers of galactic proportions isn’t > nearly as uncommon as some naysayers might care to think.
> According to several physics and astronomy kinds of observationology > science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy), our Milky Way is made > up of at least two galactic units, with more on their blue-shifted way > towards encountering us. Seems hardly fair considering that > everything was supposedly created via one singular big bang, not to > mention that hundreds to thousands of galaxies seem headed into the > Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth.
> Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other > archives (including those of FAS) depicting “colliding galaxies”, soon > to be ESA enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive > orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and > improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories > should further document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as > massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their > having gown via mergers.
> Where's the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they > seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely. Surely these > brown-nosed clowns, faith-based bigots and closed mindsets of our > Usenet/newsgroup that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much > like my personal Jewish shadow tries to do), are hopefully not > speaking on behalf of FAS.
Between Krakatoa and Yellowstone, if those two geothermal mega vents manage to blow their gasket at the same time is when we’re in deep trouble with that Warhol “lake of fire”, or perhaps there will be two lakes of fire. But at least we can forget about whatever cosmic fireballs and asteroid encounters for a while, because even that of a 10 km asteroid of mostly iron and thorium isn’t going to be all that significant unless it’s a highly suicidal retrograde impact, or something as big as another icy Selene (<8.5e22 kg).
> On Apr 27, 4:47 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Red giant stars are many, and yet still a little hard to come by, as > > only a few public images of whatever is within 1000 light years seem > > to exist that fit within the color saturated eye-candy profiles that > > we’ve been taught to accept. However, the visible spectrum is > > extremely limited as to what is otherwise technically accessible from > > just above and below our genetically limited and thus inferior visual > > spectrum. (seems entirely odd that our human evolution was so careless > > in having discarded so much visual capability, in that other creatures > > seem to have a far wider visual spectrum capability that includes some > > UV and IR)
> > There are many possibilities, as for how Sirius B used to function as > > a truly massive (<9 solarmass)star, thereby extremely hot and fast > > burning prior to becoming a red supergiant, creating an impressive > > planetary nebula phase before ending as the little white dwarf. For > > all we know Sirius B was even a variable kind of red giant and then > > perhaps a slow nova flashover phase prior to finishing off as the > > white dwarf.
> > Betelgeuse has been a massive red giant at 20+ fold themassof our > > sun, and likely worth nearly 3 fold themassof the original Sirius B, > > and currently expanded to 1000 solar radii, and it'll be truly > > impressive nova whenever it transforms into a white dwarf nearly the > > size of Jupiter.
> > The soon to be renewed and improved Hubble should accomplish the > > improved spectrum and resolution of most everything, along with other > > existing and soon to be deployed telescopes should give us even better > > composite examples of what Sirius B used to look like. This may give > > some of us a better interpretation as to what transpired right next > > door to us, as well as having unavoidably contributed to some of what > > our solar system has to offer.
> We seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star > cluster, even though Sirius has been a relatively newish and extremely > vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from another > galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 > million years worth.
> It took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at least 120,000 solar > masses in order to produce such a 12+ mass star system, leaving 99.99% > of that molecular mass blown away and to fend for itself, at a place > and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. > Others might go so far as to suggest a molecular cloud mass of 1.2 > million, and others yet would prefer that this terrific cloud had > emerged from a smaller galaxy that encountered our Milky Way.
> There's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow > directly affected by and otherwise having become somewhat tidal radius > interrelated with such a nearby mass, at least associated with the > mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar > system.
> Lo and behold, it seems the mergers of galactic proportions isn’t > nearly as uncommon as some naysayers might care to think.
> According to several physics and astronomy kinds of observationology > science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy), our Milky Way is made > up of at least two galactic units, with more on their blue-shifted way > towards encountering us. Seems hardly fair considering that > everything was supposedly created via one singular big bang, not to > mention that hundreds to thousands of galaxies seem headed into the > Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth.
> Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other > archives (including those of FAS) depicting “colliding galaxies”, soon > to be ESA enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive > orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and > improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories > should further document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as > massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their > having gown via mergers.
> Where's the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they > seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely. Surely these > brown-nosed clowns, faith-based bigots and closed mindsets of our > Usenet/newsgroup that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much > like my personal Jewish shadow tries to do), are hopefully not > speaking on behalf of FAS.
Between Krakatoa and Yellowstone, if those two geothermal mega vents manage to blow their gasket at roughly the same time (either one of those could trigger the other, as well as causing multiple other secondary trauma) is when we’re in deep trouble with that Warhol “lake of fire”, or perhaps there will become two lakes of fire. But at least we can forget about whatever cosmic fireballs and asteroid encounters for a while, because even that of a 10 km asteroid of mostly iron and thorium isn’t going to be all that significant unless it’s a highly suicidal retrograde impact, or something as big as another icy Selene (<8.5e22 kg).
Guess my tired old idea of relocating our Selene/moon out to Earth L1 is another one of those too little too late sort of things. Sorry about that. Of course there's always obfuscation and mainstream denial that's so much easier to deal with, and a whole lot cheaper. And, lets not waste any talent or resources on understanding the implications of what closing in on the Sirius Star/solar system might represent.
Although, try to imagine what it was like when Sirius-B was in her prime.
> On Jun 20, 6:16 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Apr 27, 4:47 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Red giant stars are many, and yet still a little hard to come by, as > > > only a few public images of whatever is within 1000 light years seem > > > to exist that fit within the color saturated eye-candy profiles that > > > we’ve been taught to accept. However, the visible spectrum is > > > extremely limited as to what is otherwise technically accessible from > > > just above and below our genetically limited and thus inferior visual > > > spectrum. (seems entirely odd that our human evolution was so careless > > > in having discarded so much visual capability, in that other creatures > > > seem to have a far wider visual spectrum capability that includes some > > > UV and IR)
> > > There are many possibilities, as for howSiriusB used to function as > > > a truly massive (<9 solarmass)star, thereby extremely hot and fast > > > burning prior to becoming a red supergiant, creating an impressive > > > planetary nebula phase before ending as the little white dwarf. For > > > all we knowSiriusB was even a variable kind of red giant and then > > > perhaps a slow nova flashover phase prior to finishing off as the > > > white dwarf.
> > > These following examples are probably similar or perhaps representing > > > a slightly smaller version of what the Siriusstar/solar system looked > > > like onceSiriusB had started turning itself from an impressive red > > > supergiant into a white dwarf of perhaps 1/8th its originalmass, > > > taking roughly 64~96,000 years for this explosivemassshedding phase > > > to happen. A few tens of billions of years later is when such a white > > > dwarf eventually becomes a black dwarf, kind of black diamond spentstar, in that our universe may or may not be quite old enough to > > > display such examples. > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_nebula > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix_Nebula > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_Eye_Nebula > > > http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap031207.html > > > http://www.uv.es/jrtorres/index6.html
> > > Betelgeuse has been a massive red giant at 20+ fold themassof our > > > sun, and likely worth nearly 3 fold themassof the originalSiriusB, > > > and currently expanded to 1000 solar radii, and it'll be truly > > > impressive nova whenever it transforms into a white dwarf nearly the > > > size of Jupiter.
> > > The soon to be renewed and improved Hubble should accomplish the > > > improved spectrum and resolution of most everything, along with other > > > existing and soon to be deployed telescopes should give us even better > > > composite examples of whatSiriusB used to look like. This may give > > > some of us a better interpretation as to what transpired right next > > > door to us, as well as having unavoidably contributed to some of what > > > our solar system has to offer.
> > We seem to have become closely associated with theSiriusstar > > cluster, even thoughSiriushas been a relatively newish and extremely > > vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from another > > galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 > > million years worth.
> > It took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at least 120,000 solar > > masses in order to produce such a 12+ mass star system, leaving 99.99% > > of that molecular mass blown away and to fend for itself, at a place > > and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. > > Others might go so far as to suggest a molecular cloud mass of 1.2 > > million, and others yet would prefer that this terrific cloud had > > emerged from a smaller galaxy that encountered our Milky Way.
> > There's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow > > directly affected by and otherwise having become somewhat tidal radius > > interrelated with such a nearby mass, at least associated with the > > mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by theSiriusstar/solar > > system.
> > Lo and behold, it seems the mergers of galactic proportions isn’t > > nearly as uncommon as some naysayers might care to think.
> > According to several physics and astronomy kinds of observationology > > science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy), our Milky Way is made > > up of at least two galactic units, with more on their blue-shifted way > > towards encountering us. Seems hardly fair considering that > > everything was supposedly created via one singular big bang, not to > > mention that hundreds to thousands of galaxies seem headed into the > > Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth.
> > Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other > > archives (including those of FAS) depicting “colliding galaxies”, soon > > to be ESA enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive > > orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and > > improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories > > should further document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as > > massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their > > having gown via mergers.
> > Where's the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they > > seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely. Surely these > > brown-nosed clowns, faith-based bigots and closed mindsets of our > > Usenet/newsgroup that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much > > like my personal Jewish shadow tries to do), are hopefully not > > speaking on behalf of FAS.
> Between Krakatoa and Yellowstone, if those two geothermal mega vents > manage to blow their gasket at roughly the same time (either one of > those could trigger the other, as well as causing multiple other > secondary trauma) is when we’re in deep trouble with that Warhol “lake > of fire”, or perhaps there will become two lakes of fire. But at > least we can forget about whatever cosmic fireballs and asteroid > encounters for a while, because even that of a 10 km asteroid of > mostly iron and thorium isn’t going to be all that significant unless > it’s a highly suicidal retrograde impact, or something as big as > another icy Selene (<8.5e22 kg).
> Guess my tired old idea of relocating our Selene/moon out to Earth L1 > is another one of those too little too late sort of things. Sorry > about that. Of course there's always obfuscation and mainstream > denial that's so much easier to deal with, and a whole lot cheaper. > And, lets not waste any talent or resources on understanding the > implications of what closing in on theSiriusStar/solar system might > represent.
> Although, try to imagine what it was like whenSirius-B was in her > prime.
Mainstream physics and science is not to be lightly discounted or otherwise discarded. However, some items of our solar system seem to have been added after the original formations of our sun and a few planets, while others seem badly skewed because of nearby external forces. It seems +/- 1 degree might be an acceptable standard for being part of the original protoplanetary elliptic plane. However, the more degrees off that plane, the more unlikely they existed from the very start of our solar system.
Like those icy Pluto planetoids and Sedna at near 12 degrees most certainly are not in the same plane. However, supposedly there are a few interesting Kuiper and Oort retrograde orbits, although Sedna isn't one of those. Noteworthy is that Cruithne has been a nearby second moon of Earth, however oddly so and otherwise at nearly 20 degrees inclination is also not within the expected orbital plane, just like our Selene/moon at 5+ degrees isn’t exactly flying within the expected plane of our solar system.
Besides the usual orbital mechanics that can’t quite explain items like Sedna with such minimal velocity and low density, as to why the hell does Sedna bother to turn itself around and head way the hell back out there? (are the Sedna electrons helping to repel it away from those of our solar system electron outflux?)
With Sedna we're talking of an extremely deep elliptical trek of 76 AU out to 976 AU and obviously back again, at an average orbital velocity of 1.04 km/sec (about the same as our Selene/moon), with an overall duration of <12,060 years (also given as >10,000 years by some), as supposedly offering the 0.84 eccentric orbit in relationship
|
