Asteroid belt
SagaLore
Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
Blackguard
struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
Nearest to what?
I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
Centauri. Is that any better?
>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
>straight line for a brief period in time,
Please tell us how long this "brief" period in time would be? I'm
guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
talking about.
>would it pull any of those
>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun?
Why towards the sun? Why not further out into space? And would the
resulting miniscule shift in gravity really affect anything? Would
there be a shift in gravity? Would we even notice it?
>If any of these
>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
Assuming of course that they do "change course", why would you care?
Could you do anything to prevent it?
Could you somehow stop it?
Would knowing the exact time allow you to do anything you normally
wouldn't do?
No.
So don't worry about it. If it happens there ain't Jack Shitt you can
do to change the outcome. You'll die, and so will everybody else on
the planet.
---
# 3.14159 Most Holy Blackguard, High Priest of the Church of
Iconoclasts
aa #869
Surveillance and Black Helicopter Division EAC
BAAWA!
to e-mail just use the appropriate numbers or letters, but beware, my
spamblock is up and running.
why you won for ate ate won three <at> yorku.ca
SagaLore
Blackguard wrote in message <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>...
>On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
>struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>
>>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
>Nearest to what?
Earth.
>
>I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
>ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
>your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
>millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
>Centauri. Is that any better?
I don't know anything about asteroid belts, that is why I was asking. How
close is it to the nearest point in the earth's path?
>
>>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in
one
>>straight line for a brief period in time,
>
>Please tell us how long this "brief" period in time would be? I'm
>guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
>talking about.
OF COURSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!!! THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING!
You don't get much fiber in your diet do you.
>
>>would it pull any of those
>>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun?
>
>Why towards the sun? Why not further out into space? And would the
>resulting miniscule shift in gravity really affect anything? Would
>there be a shift in gravity? Would we even notice it?
<throws arms in air> That is why I'm asking. I _don't_ know.
>
>>If any of these
>>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it
reach
>>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
>Assuming of course that they do "change course", why would you care?
Who cares why I care? I just wanted to know.
>
>Could you do anything to prevent it?
What, you think I have a nuclear rocket in my backyard?
>
>Could you somehow stop it?
Apparently not!
>
>Would knowing the exact time allow you to do anything you normally
>wouldn't do?
It was a "theoretical" question. You know, like science fiction - it isn't
real.
>
>No.
>
>So don't worry about it. If it happens there ain't Jack Shitt you can
>do to change the outcome. You'll die, and so will everybody else on
>the planet.
!? Are you suggesting this is actually going to occur? Jeez body... if I
asked how light works would you get on my case about that too?
Roy Fulmer
SagaLore wrote:
> Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
> Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
> I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
Sorry, I'm not an astronomer, so I can't give exact figures, but if memory
serves, the distance of the vast majority of solar asteroids is about 180
million kilometers from Earth's orbit, between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter.
As for the mystical "alignment" of the planets, the effects would be nil, as the
gravitational force of Jupiter, one of the belts 2 nearest neighbors, is so
great that all the rest of the planets gravitational forces combined wouldn't
amount to a fraction of a percent of Jupiter's effect. To understand this you
need to learn about basic physics, and more specifically, the inverse-square law
as it relates to gravity. The Asteroids are being jiggled constantly by the
passage of Jupiter, and every so often some are "knocked" out of their regular
orbits and fall into more elliptical orbits that may cross Earth's orbit. There
are, IIRC, several hundred, or perhaps thousands of so called "Earth crossing"
asteroids known at this time. Space is REALLY big, and the chances of a large
enough asteroid to "destroy all life" striking Earth is very, very small. Heck,
it hasn't happened in 65 million years. Here's a little experiment you can try
to give you an idea of how rare such an occurance might be. Get a weight, a
fishing weight will do, about 2 or 3 ounces, attach it to a string or fishing
line 10 or 12 feet long, and start spinning it around. Each revolution
constitutes a year. Now have a friend try to hit the weight from say 25 feet
away with a BB, thrown at about the speed of the weight. Any luck? Now, have
your friend close his eyes. Keep it up for a couple hundred million orbits, and
he'll eventually hit the weight, but it won't be soon.
Does this answer your question? Keep in mind, the vast majority of asteroids are
too small to do any damage at all, as they'd burn up in our atmosphere. By the
way, did you see the Leonid meteor shower? Similar stuff, although they were
comet debris, not asteroids.
Any scientists out there? Please correct me if I'm mistaken. You won't hurt my
feelings.
Rumpelstiltskin
>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
>straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
>I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
>
>
I suggest you use a search engine to look up "asteroids" and
"earth-crossing asteroids". I got 247 hits with INFOSEEK
looking up the latter (with the hyphen).
Please remove the capital X's from my e-mail address.
They are meant to thwart unsolicited commercial mail.
Carl Funk
>
> Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
> Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
Mars and Jupiter. Some asteroids have already supposedly been kicked
out of that orbit, into a more erratic orbit. I think some scientists
believe that is how Jupiter and Saturn got their moons: they are
asteroids that were "stolen" from the asteroid belt.
Some asteroids do have orbits that cross the Earth's orbit, and could
possibly collide with the Earth. We know of approximately 200 of these
objects. For more information, you might want to point your browser to:
http://neo.planetary.org/ABCsOfNEOs/ABCsNEOs.html
Wander around the site, it should answer most of your questions.
> I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
Don't get too excited. The problem is way too large to even attempt to
solve yet. There are just too many variables, too many unknowns.
--
Carl Funk "nil illegitimi carborundum" ICQ#16282427
a.a atheist #1229 member, EAC Decryption Squad
to bypass my SPAM-deflector, it helps if you realize I am
asthmatic. i.e. no SMOKING please!
David Shipley
>
> Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
> Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
Between Mars and Jupiter IIRC.
No, the gravity is not altered - all the objects have the same mass and
therefore exert the same pull.
The spaces between them are so big (relative to their size) that their
is very little effect.
--
---------------
Anla'Shok Dave
We Live for the Cats
We Die for the Cats
---------------
May his merciful paw fall upon you
David Shipley
>
> Blackguard wrote in message <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>...
> >On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
> >struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
> >
> >
>
> Earth.
>
> >
> >I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
> >ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
> >your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
> >millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
> >Centauri. Is that any better?
>
> I don't know anything about asteroid belts, that is why I was asking. How
> close is it to the nearest point in the earth's path?
>
Star Wars type things, it's caused by the intense gravitational pull
between Jupiter and Mars which prevents a planet forming in that region
of space.
maff91
>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
>straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
>I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
Try http://www.es.ucsc.edu/~asphaug/
http://adams.dm.unipi.it/asteroid.html
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/text/faq/usenet/astronomy/faq/part5/faq-doc-10.html
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/text/faq/usenet/astronomy/faq/part5/faq-doc-24.html
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/text/faq/usenet/astronomy/faq/part5/faq-doc-25.html
http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/text/faq/usenet/astronomy/faq/part5/faq-doc-26.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spacewatch/textindex.html
http://windows.ivv.nasa.gov/our_solar_system/asteroids.html
*****************************************************
"Science is the true theology" -- Thomas Paine
(as quoted in Emerson: The Mind on Fire page 153)
"The Age of Paine" by Jon Katz
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.05/paine.html
*****************************************************
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
>
>Blackguard wrote in message <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>...
>>On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
>>struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>>
>>
>
>Earth.
>
>>
>>I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
>>ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
>>your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
>>millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
>>Centauri. Is that any better?
>
>I don't know anything about asteroid belts, that is why I was asking. How
>close is it to the nearest point in the earth's path?
i would say 240 million km. "240 million km."
>>
>>>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in
>one
>>>straight line for a brief period in time,
>>
>>Please tell us how long this "brief" period in time would be? I'm
>>guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
>>talking about.
>
>OF COURSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!!! THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING!
>You don't get much fiber in your diet do you.
first, i don't know the likeliness of planets aranging in a straight line,
but, since the earth has been around for billions of years, i'll assume its
happened before. i think the planets in a line would have no affect
whatsoever on the astroids. the only way it would affect them, was if all
the planets were pulled together to form one giant planet, with all the
gravity in one point.
>>
>>>would it pull any of those
>>>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun?
>>
>>Why towards the sun? Why not further out into space? And would the
>>resulting miniscule shift in gravity really affect anything? Would
>>there be a shift in gravity? Would we even notice it?
>
><throws arms in air> That is why I'm asking. I _don't_ know.
no.
>>
>>>If any of these
>>>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it
>reach
>>>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>>
>>Assuming of course that they do "change course", why would you care?
>
>Who cares why I care? I just wanted to know.
>
>>
>>Could you do anything to prevent it?
>
>What, you think I have a nuclear rocket in my backyard?
even a nuke rocket isn't likely to do anything. it would be like shooting a
man, using a regular bullet, in asia, from america. not only would you need
perfectly accurate shots, but, in the case of the nuke, it would have to
explode at the exact moment - right BEFORE it hits the astroid - were it to
hit the astroid it would simply destroy itself.
>
>>
>>Could you somehow stop it?
>
>Apparently not!
>
>>
>>Would knowing the exact time allow you to do anything you normally
>>wouldn't do?
>
>It was a "theoretical" question. You know, like science fiction - it isn't
>real.
>
>>
>>No.
>>
>>So don't worry about it. If it happens there ain't Jack Shitt you can
>>do to change the outcome. You'll die, and so will everybody else on
>>the planet.
>
>
>!? Are you suggesting this is actually going to occur? Jeez body... if I
>asked how light works would you get on my case about that too?
no and no. why, do you want to know how light works? and btw, tell again
why this was posted to alt.atheism? and even christian teens and
sci.skeptic for that matter?
YOELK
> Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
The asteroid belt is between Mars (227000000 KM from Sun) andJupiter
(778000000 Km from Sun) . Earth is 150000000 Km from Sun.
However , there are many asteroids outside the asteroid belt which come close
to Earth (Earth grazing asteroids).
>
>
> Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
The planets affect asteroid orbits in complex ways. It isn't necessary nor
sufficient
for planets to align in order the cause them to approach earth.
You forgot to mention the comets that are not part of the asteroid belt which
can
impact earth.
By the way, those impacts are not theoretical.
In the 20th century, two comments hit earth.
One in Siberia (1908), the other in Brazil in the late 30s.
There are several impact craters found by geologists around the globe.
>
>
> I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
psssssshshshsh BANG!!!!
Now are you satisfied ?
------
YOELK
SagaLore
rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message
<1oe82.598$P5....@newsfeed.slurp.net>...
>SagaLore wrote in message ...
>>
>>Blackguard wrote in message <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>...
>>>On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
>>>struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Earth.
>>
>>>
>>>I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
>>>ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
>>>your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
>>>millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
>>>Centauri. Is that any better?
>>
>>I don't know anything about asteroid belts, that is why I was asking. How
>>close is it to the nearest point in the earth's path?
>
>
>i would say 240 million km. "240 million km."
>
>
>>>
>>one
>>>>straight line for a brief period in time,
>>>
>>>guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
>>>talking about.
>>
>>OF COURSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!!! THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING!
>>You don't get much fiber in your diet do you.
>
>
>first, i don't know the likeliness of planets aranging in a straight line,
>but, since the earth has been around for billions of years, i'll assume its
>happened before. i think the planets in a line would have no affect
>whatsoever on the astroids. the only way it would affect them, was if all
>the planets were pulled together to form one giant planet, with all the
>gravity in one point.
Has the earth really been here for billions of years?
Giant planet... hmm... I doubt that would even be possible, but who knows -
make for a great movie. ;0)
>
>>>
>>>>would it pull any of those
>>>>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun?
>>>
>>>Why towards the sun? Why not further out into space? And would the
>>>resulting miniscule shift in gravity really affect anything? Would
>>>there be a shift in gravity? Would we even notice it?
>>
>><throws arms in air> That is why I'm asking. I _don't_ know.
>
>
>no.
>
>>>
>>>>If any of these
>>>>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it
>>reach
>>>>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>>>
>>>Assuming of course that they do "change course", why would you care?
>>
>>Who cares why I care? I just wanted to know.
>>
>>>
>>>Could you do anything to prevent it?
>>
>>What, you think I have a nuclear rocket in my backyard?
>
>even a nuke rocket isn't likely to do anything. it would be like shooting
a
>man, using a regular bullet, in asia, from america. not only would you
need
>perfectly accurate shots, but, in the case of the nuke, it would have to
>explode at the exact moment - right BEFORE it hits the astroid - were it to
>hit the astroid it would simply destroy itself.
<shrugs> I know. Just being sarcastic. You see Armageddon? :0)
>
>>
>>>
>>>Could you somehow stop it?
>>
>>Apparently not!
>>
>>>
>>>Would knowing the exact time allow you to do anything you normally
>>>wouldn't do?
>>
>>It was a "theoretical" question. You know, like science fiction - it
isn't
>>real.
>>
>>>
>>>No.
>>>
>>>So don't worry about it. If it happens there ain't Jack Shitt you can
>>>do to change the outcome. You'll die, and so will everybody else on
>>>the planet.
>>
>>
>>!? Are you suggesting this is actually going to occur? Jeez body... if I
>>asked how light works would you get on my case about that too?
>
>
>no and no. why, do you want to know how light works?
Knowledge. I learn for the fun of it.
>and btw, tell again
>why this was posted to alt.atheism? and even christian teens and
>sci.skeptic for that matter?
Well, since atheists are generally very intelligent people, and they know
everything (no cheap shot there, honest) I thought it would be a good place
to ask. Since atheists/evolutionists believe what they believe, they would
also know something about astronomy and such. (which is vital to the
belief) I posted in christian teens because that is the newsgroup I am part
of, and I posted in skeptics because I've been around there too, and I know
there'd be a few in there that know physics...
Blackguard
to the wrong newsgroups and decided to sputter:
>
>Blackguard wrote in message <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>...
>>On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
>>struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>>
>>>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>>
>>Nearest to what?
>
>Earth.
Very good. The asteroid belt (being that one between Jupiter and Mars)
is roughly some 240 million Km away from the Earth.
>>
>>I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
>>ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
>>your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
>>millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
>>Centauri. Is that any better?
>
>I don't know anything about asteroid belts, that is why I was asking. How
>close is it to the nearest point in the earth's path?
Obviously you don't know, like the obvious thing to do would have been
to actually, I don't know, do a SEARCH on ASTEROIDS? To read a
freaking book on the solar system? How about get a nice book on
astromomy and look up "asteroids" or "asteroid belt" in the index. But
no, you have to come to four NGs that really have nothing to do with
this, which automatically makes me wonder why you would be asking this
question in these NGs. </rant>
But to answer the question, I'm guessing anywhere between 200 million
Km and 239 million Km at thier closest point. This of course is taking
the idea of an elipitcal orbit, the fact that the asteroid belt isn't
uniform, the fact that I'm in the northern hemishere, I've had a nice
cup of coffee this morning and that 200 million Km is such a nice
round number.
In other words, I'm guessing at this point.
>>
>>>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in
>one
>>>straight line for a brief period in time,
>>
>>Please tell us how long this "brief" period in time would be? I'm
>>guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
>>talking about.
>
>OF COURSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!!! THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING!
THEN WHY NOT ASK IT IN NEWSGROUP THAT DEALS WITH THAT?
>You don't get much fiber in your diet do you.
What would that have to do with the fact that you're an idiot? And
besides, I do get a lot of fibre. But I'm astonished that you would be
able to get that from the tone of my post. I mean really, WOW! You
could tell that somebody didn't have a lot of fibre in thier diet just
from the way they posted. Of course, you got it wrong, so I'm really
that impressed.
>
>>
>>>would it pull any of those
>>>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun?
>>
>>Why towards the sun? Why not further out into space? And would the
>>resulting miniscule shift in gravity really affect anything? Would
>>there be a shift in gravity? Would we even notice it?
>
><throws arms in air> That is why I'm asking. I _don't_ know.
Very good, but there would be absolutely no shift. Or if there was it
would be on a such a tiny scale to almost be imperceptible.
Now, first off, I want you to imagine this:
The gravitational force of Jupiter is enough to keep the asteroid belt
"in check". Meaning, it's because of Jupiter that the asteroids never
became a planet, since it's gravity constantly shakes them up. (or
something like that). Now occasionally it will "knock" one loose and
it will continue in a more eliptical orbit that may actually cross
Earth's path. And there are roughly 1000 asteroids that do so, or at
least come really close.
But with space being the size it is, the chances of one hitting us is
literally astronomical. Hell, 65 million years later, we have not had
a planet killer strike us.
Now, Jupiter is 778 million Km from the Sun, the asteroids go about as
far as 495 million Km.
The remaining planets are even further out
Saturn 1 427 million Km
Uranus 2 870 million Km
Neptune 4 500 million Km
Pluto 5 900 million Km.
Now, the gravity these planets exert on each other is minimal, yes
there is an effect (after all that was how we found Neptune), but it's
not enough to cause any great problems.
When the conjunction (junction, what's your function) happens it'll be
real pretty, and really cool, but that's it.
>>
>>>If any of these
>>>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it
>reach
>>>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>>
>>Assuming of course that they do "change course", why would you care?
>
>Who cares why I care? I just wanted to know.
Some thing to do with a Xtain doomsday prophecy or something?
I've heard this crap before, and it makes about as much sense now as
it did then. The only difference is that they're looking at a
different demise for the Earth. Trust me, the year 2000 will come and
go and the only "end of the world" that will happen is the massive
hangover that most people will suffer on January 1.
>>
>>Could you do anything to prevent it?
>
>What, you think I have a nuclear rocket in my backyard?
A nuke wouldn't do much good. First off, in order for it to be
effective it would have to explode just before it hit the asteroid.
Then it would have to vaporise the asteroid, otherwise instead of one
massive rock hitting the planet we would have a whole bunch of little
ones doing the same thing. And this of course is not taking the
accuracy of it into play. That would be like hitting a single rock,
with a bullet from a gun several (hundred? thousand?) miles away.
>>
>>Could you somehow stop it?
>
>Apparently not!
Good, at least you're not deluding yourself into thinking you could.
>>
>>Would knowing the exact time allow you to do anything you normally
>>wouldn't do?
>
>It was a "theoretical" question. You know, like science fiction - it isn't
>real.
Sounded like you were looking for a doomsday prophecy actually.
>>
>>No.
>>
>>So don't worry about it. If it happens there ain't Jack Shitt you can
>>do to change the outcome. You'll die, and so will everybody else on
>>the planet.
>
>
>!? Are you suggesting this is actually going to occur? Jeez body... if I
>asked how light works would you get on my case about that too?
>
At what point did I say it was going to occur? I seem to have said, IF
it happens. That IF implies "in the event of". Meaning it MIGHT
happen, but it just as well may not. And no, I wasn't saying that it
would happen, you were.
And sure "body" (I'm thinking you were wanting to say "BUDDY" there),
if you asked me how light worked, in an atheist newsgroup, then yes I
would get on your case since it has nothing to do with atheism.
But since you asked, I'll give you the Reader's Digest version:
Light is made of photons. Light is both particle and wave. Fastest
thing in universe. And enables us to see.
There you go. Hope that helps.
LFU Lord
Check it out! It has an AWESOME! book for free. I am reading it. It also has a
couple pamplets that are VERY informative.
You may really like it. Just check it out. Order the free book. (Not
advertising. Just informing)
If you want to visit the site, it's
www.wake-up.org.
In Christ,
Christopher
LFU...@AOL.com
Michelle Malkin
>SagaLore wrote in message ...
>>
the Earth if all the planets aligned at the same time and caused some
kind of gravity disturbance in the asteroid belt.
>>
>>!? Are you suggesting this is actually going to occur? Jeez body... if I
>>asked how light works would you get on my case about that too?
>
>
>why this was posted to alt.atheism? and even christian teens and
>sci.skeptic for that matter?
>
him the idea that there are some scientifically knowledgeable people
in alt.atheism and sci.skeptic and thought that he might get a
friendly answer to his questions in one of these newsgroups. He
doesn't seem to be trolling here; just looking for answers to
something that obviously has him worried.
By the way, thanks for all the websites you posted in your messages
back to him. I printed the entire message to save them all to check
out myself.
Mickey (Michelle Malkin) BAAWA knight
High Priestess Bastet of the Non-Church Temple of Si & Am
send e-mail to:moc.gnirpsdnim@7bniklam
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
The man who worships a tyrant in heaven naturally submits his neck to
the yoke of tyrants on earth. - George W. Foot, Flowers of Freethought
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Rumpelstiltskin
>By the way, those impacts are not theoretical.
>In the 20th century, two comments hit earth.
>One in Siberia (1908), the other in Brazil in the late 30s.
In 1974 (I think) an asteroid or similar hard object the
size of a house skipped along the earth's atmosphere the
way a flung stone skips along a pond. If it had hit, it
would have made a crater as big as the one in Arizona.
The trail was seen from New Mexico to Alberta.
In the 15th century or so, there are reports of a bright
spot suddenly appearing on the moon, after which a
pall radiated from that point across the entire moon, as
the moon appeared to shimmer. I read lately that
scientists think they may have located the crater that
was made by that event.
Nemo
<saga...@ptd.net> wrote:
> Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
> Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
> I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
Oh boy, an astronomy question! I LOVE astronomy questions! I've been
studying astronomy ever since I was a little kid, and I know the answers
to these questions! Oh thank you for asking! You made my weekend!
**************************************************
It ain't the parts of the Bible that I can't understand
that bothers me - it's the parts that I do understand-
Mark Twain
**************************************************
Nemo
> Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
> Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
> I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
I'm sorry, I got carried away. You wanted answers. Silly me.
First of all, the thing about asteroids is not quite so simple as "There's
a belt of asteroids between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter, say 70 million
miles further away from the Sun than we are.
There are asteroids in all sorts of different orbits, many of which pass
either close to Earth's orbit, or actually intersect the orbit. The fact
is that many objects of considerable size have hit the earth in the past,
and there are several impact craters to be found that haven't been eroded
away.
The other question has to be answered "no." An alignment of all the
planets would have virtually no effect on asteroids in general. The most
effect occurs when Jupiter comes close (in astronomical terms), and they
get briefly pulled away. This happens all the time.
The main part of the misconceptions people have about the asteroid belt is
that they think it's crowded - it ain't. It has thousands of little rocks
spread through billions of cubic miles of space, with an occasional
boulder and a few items of serios size - like Ceres, Juno, and so forth.
Aligments of planets look cool, but they don't have any meaning beyond that.
Nemo
(Blackguard) wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
> struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>
> >Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
> Nearest to what?
>
> I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
> ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
> your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
> millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
> Centauri. Is that any better?
>
> >Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> >straight line for a brief period in time,
>
> Please tell us how long this "brief" period in time would be? I'm
> guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
> talking about.
Why bust someone's chops over this? Isn't the quest for knowledge a noble
one, regardless of the starting point of the quest?
Nemo
<saga...@ptd.net> wrote:
> Well, since atheists are generally very intelligent people, and they know
> everything (no cheap shot there, honest) I thought it would be a good place
> to ask. Since atheists/evolutionists believe what they believe, they would
> also know something about astronomy and such. (which is vital to the
> belief) I posted in christian teens because that is the newsgroup I am part
> of, and I posted in skeptics because I've been around there too, and I know
> there'd be a few in there that know physics...
Huh huh huh...
Sagalore likes us here in alt.atheism. That is sooooo coool. And we're
smart too. Kinda makes you want to stand a little taller, don't it? (Saga
- I'm noy being sarcastic, I just looove the attention ;) )
Lewis Sellers
SagaLore wrote in message <6I582.5382$Cy....@nnrp2.ptd.net>...
>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
one
>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it
reach
>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
>I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
I don't know the figures, but there are three major debri fields in our
solar system: The asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter, the Kuiper Ring
starting at and including Pluto and the Oort cloud which is roughly between
1 and 2 light years out or up to about half way between here and the nearest
star system.
Kuiper objects are the most dangerous in some ways simply because they're
far enough out that we have trouble cataloguing and tracking them. The
largest of them is Pluto... that's big. :) They are influenced mostly by
planetary motions and each other.
Oort cloud objects are typically small (if the Kuiper and Asteroid belt
objects are considered rocks and boulders, they would be considered sand).
They are disturbed by interplanetary motions more than the others.
Davidson
>
> rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message
> <1oe82.598$P5....@newsfeed.slurp.net>...
> >>
> >>>struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>Earth.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
> >>>ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
> >>>your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
> >>>millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
> >>>Centauri. Is that any better?
> >>
> >>close is it to the nearest point in the earth's path?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>>
> >>one
> >>>>straight line for a brief period in time,
> >>>
> >>>guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
> >>>talking about.
> >>
> >
> >
> >but, since the earth has been around for billions of years, i'll assume its
> >happened before. i think the planets in a line would have no affect
> >whatsoever on the astroids. the only way it would affect them, was if all
> >the planets were pulled together to form one giant planet, with all the
> >gravity in one point.
>
> Has the earth really been here for billions of years?
>
> Giant planet... hmm... I doubt that would even be possible, but who knows -
> make for a great movie. ;0)
>
Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
in Jupiter,
so the planets lining up would make no difference.
My recommendation to you is to go to your public library and get some
fairly basic books on astronomy. I'm sure there are some by Isaac
Asimov.
Reading lots of books is how atheists got so smart - reading only one
is how theists got so dumb!
Good luck and happy reading.
Scott #1045
>
Blackguard
inspiration and wrote:
>In article <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>, N...@spam.com
>(Blackguard) wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
>> struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>>
>> >Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>>
>> Nearest to what?
>>
>> I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
>> ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
>> your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
>> millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
>> Centauri. Is that any better?
>>
>> >Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
>> >straight line for a brief period in time,
>>
>> Please tell us how long this "brief" period in time would be? I'm
>> guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
>> talking about.
>
>Why bust someone's chops over this? Isn't the quest for knowledge a noble
>one, regardless of the starting point of the quest?
Mainly because I smelled troll. First off, he's going on about the
possibilites of an asteroid hitting Earth. Now this is typical garbage
from the doomsday patrol. Supposedly when this conjunction happens,
there'll be this real big shift in gravity and one of several things
are supposed to happen:
1) the asteroids in the belt will be flung towards Earth.
2) the crust of the Earth will literally go "off it's axis". (This one
is really wierd, supposedly the entire crust of the Earth will be
moved so that the poles are now on the equator.
3) massive earthquakes that will destroy the west coast of North
America
4) really nasty stuff.
Now, he may or may not be a troll. But I am just wondering why he
would post to these 4 NGs. With the exception of sci.skeptic, none of
the others really deal with pure science.
That's why.
---
# 3.14159 Most Holy Blackguard, High Priest of the Church of
Iconoclasts
aa #869
Surveillance and Black Helicopter Division EAC
BAAWA!
to e-mail just use the appropriate numbers or letters, but beware, my
spamblock is up and running.
why you won for ate ate won three <at> yorku.ca
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
cohorts in alt.christianity etc share your feelings. I won't even begin
debated the young earth theory again, however, you should read some of the
threads on alt.atheism that discuss that topic. btw, I wasn't asking you
why you wanted to know how light works, I was asking IF you wanted to know
how light works ;-). and yea, I saw Armageddon.
--
Randomseed A.A #1366
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
SagaLore wrote in message <6xf82.5479$Cy....@nnrp2.ptd.net>...
>
>rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message
><1oe82.598$P5....@newsfeed.slurp.net>...
>>SagaLore wrote in message ...
>>>
>>>Blackguard wrote in message <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>...
>>>>On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
>>>>struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>>>>
>>>>>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>>>>
>>>>Nearest to what?
>>>
>>>Earth.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I'm guessing it's the one between Jupiter and Mars, since that's the
>>>>ONLY asteroid belt we can detect in this solar system, but to answer
>>>>your question it's roughly 330 million Km away from the Sun, 102
>>>>millon Km away from Mars and about 4.2 light years away from Proxima
>>>>Centauri. Is that any better?
>>>
>>>I don't know anything about asteroid belts, that is why I was asking.
How
>>>close is it to the nearest point in the earth's path?
>>
>>
>>i would say 240 million km. "240 million km."
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align
in
>>>one
>>>>>straight line for a brief period in time,
>>>>
>>>>Please tell us how long this "brief" period in time would be? I'm
>>>>guessing that it's just "brief" since you have no idea what you're
>>>>talking about.
>>>
>>>OF COURSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT!!! THAT IS WHY I'M ASKING!
>>>You don't get much fiber in your diet do you.
>>
>>
>>first, i don't know the likeliness of planets aranging in a straight line,
>>but, since the earth has been around for billions of years, i'll assume
its
>>happened before. i think the planets in a line would have no affect
>>whatsoever on the astroids. the only way it would affect them, was if all
>>the planets were pulled together to form one giant planet, with all the
>>gravity in one point.
>
>Has the earth really been here for billions of years?
>
>Giant planet... hmm... I doubt that would even be possible, but who knows -
>make for a great movie. ;0)
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>>would it pull any of those
>>>>>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun?
>>>>
>>>>Why towards the sun? Why not further out into space? And would the
>>>>resulting miniscule shift in gravity really affect anything? Would
>>>>there be a shift in gravity? Would we even notice it?
>>>
>>><throws arms in air> That is why I'm asking. I _don't_ know.
>>
>>
>>no.
>>
>>>>
>>>>>If any of these
>>>>>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it
>>>reach
>>>>>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>>>>
>>>>Assuming of course that they do "change course", why would you care?
>>>
>>>Who cares why I care? I just wanted to know.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Could you do anything to prevent it?
>>>
>>>What, you think I have a nuclear rocket in my backyard?
>>
>>even a nuke rocket isn't likely to do anything. it would be like shooting
>a
>>man, using a regular bullet, in asia, from america. not only would you
>need
>>perfectly accurate shots, but, in the case of the nuke, it would have to
>>explode at the exact moment - right BEFORE it hits the astroid - were it
to
>>hit the astroid it would simply destroy itself.
>
><shrugs> I know. Just being sarcastic. You see Armageddon? :0)
>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Could you somehow stop it?
>>>
>>>Apparently not!
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Would knowing the exact time allow you to do anything you normally
>>>>wouldn't do?
>>>
>>>It was a "theoretical" question. You know, like science fiction - it
>isn't
>>>real.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>No.
>>>>
>>>>So don't worry about it. If it happens there ain't Jack Shitt you can
>>>>do to change the outcome. You'll die, and so will everybody else on
>>>>the planet.
>>>
>>>
>>>!? Are you suggesting this is actually going to occur? Jeez body... if
I
>>>asked how light works would you get on my case about that too?
>>
>>
>>no and no. why, do you want to know how light works?
>
>Knowledge. I learn for the fun of it.
>
>>and btw, tell again
>>why this was posted to alt.atheism? and even christian teens and
>>sci.skeptic for that matter?
>
>
Rev Chuck
>
> Bill Thacker wrote in message <73v125$5...@nntpb.cb.lucent.com>...
> >>
> one
> >>straight line for a brief period in time
> >
> >a conjuction (the term we use when planets align) between even three
> >planets is a huge rarity.
Not at all rare, if one of those planets is the Earth.
> >For all nine to align (even ignoring
> >Pluto's bizarre orbit) is an event that may well have never occurred
> >in the history of our solar system. Call the astro dept. at your
> >local university - they ought to be able to give you the exact date of
> >such a conjunction.
I think we just had that very event five years ago. But it doesn't
happen very often.
> I've been reading the many posts that are responding to mine - and everyone
> seems to agree that a planetary alignment wouldn't happen, but if it did it
> would be rare. Well, to my knowledge, it happens every 10,000 years. The
> next occurance is suppose to occur May 5, 2000. But that doesn't really
> matter - I just wanted to know what effect a gravitational dipole alignment
> would have. (Of course a few of the planets are in retrograde, so their
> poles would be opposite). I agree that asteroids and such would be
> insignificantly influenced. I just wanted to see if anyone had any
> credibility.
>
> Okay, now that I've got everyone riled up - what effect would a planetary
> alignment have on the SUN?
Very little, since it has no solid surface. What insignificant bulge
would be created would subside after the conjunction.
--
Creationism -- because the words are easier to spell.
Rev Chuck, Alt.Atheism #203, Ordained Reverend, ULC, 17 March, 1997.
Remove -REMOVE_THIS- from address to respond.
SkArcher
>Reading lots of books is how atheists got so smart - reading only one
>is how theists got so dumb!
>
>Good luck and happy reading.
>
>Scott #1045
>
>>
Nominated for AQOTM, seconds, anyone?
SkArcher
SkArcher/Jesthrian
AA#593
When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity.
When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion.
-R.M.Pirsig
John Q. Dumm
Why do the planets need to align? The damned things get bumped out of
their orbit
all of the time.
SagaLore <saga...@ptd.net> wrote in article
<6I582.5382$Cy....@nnrp2.ptd.net>...
> Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
> Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in
one
> straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
SkArcher
>On 29 Nov 1998 22:00:38 GMT ne...@nowhere.com (Nemo), was struck by
>inspiration and wrote:
>
>>In article <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>, N...@spam.com
>>(Blackguard) wrote:
>>
>>> struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
<SNIP>
>>Why bust someone's chops over this? Isn't the quest for knowledge a noble
>>one, regardless of the starting point of the quest?
The quest for knowledge and the quest for understanding are two very different
things. Remember the trouble we had when Bloatwrong got his hands on that tiny
smidgen of science after Schumacher-Levy 9 hit Jupiter? We had months of
"Jupiter is Solid, Goddidit!!!" posts.... If you want to understand anything
about the solar system you have to understand the basics, cos otherwise you'll
misinterpret
Thats the difference between Data and information.
Information has been interpreted correctly
>
>Mainly because I smelled troll. First off, he's going on about the
>possibilites of an asteroid hitting Earth. Now this is typical garbage
>from the doomsday patrol. Supposedly when this conjunction happens,
>there'll be this real big shift in gravity and one of several things
>are supposed to happen:
>
>1) the asteroids in the belt will be flung towards Earth.
It is possible, if somewhat unlikely, that an asteroid could come towards
earth (Question : Does anyone know what percentage of the visible cosmos is
covered by the earth when viewed from the asteroid belt? From that it should
be possible to predict the chances of an asteroid going in earths direction.)
Oh, and anyway, pretty paterns of planets count for nothing.... The planets
could be in any arrangement and it might happen, its all down to gravity
>2) the crust of the Earth will literally go "off it's axis". (This one
>is really wierd, supposedly the entire crust of the Earth will be
>moved so that the poles are now on the equator.
The whole crust of the earth _can_ slip around the entire inner layers, and
this has happened before (what used to be the poles are now near, but not on,
the equator - the north one is about 9 degrees north, IIRC, in africa
somewhere) The evidence for it happening before is in some old rock layers
with magnetic allignments diffent from more modern ones
Theres no evidence that its anything to do with bizare arrangements of planets
tho....
>3) massive earthquakes that will destroy the west coast of North
>America
No loss there then :)
>4) really nasty stuff.
Asteroid falls on Cult of Scientology HQ? Please????
>
>Now, he may or may not be a troll. But I am just wondering why he
>would post to these 4 NGs. With the exception of sci.skeptic, none of
>the others really deal with pure science.
Welcome to the Web, 50% Spam, 45% Porn and 5% Wrong
>
>That's why.
SagaLore
rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message ...
>interesting, that you respect us here on alt.atheism...not many of your
>cohorts in alt.christianity etc share your feelings. I won't even begin
>debated the young earth theory again, however, you should read some of the
>threads on alt.atheism that discuss that topic. btw, I wasn't asking you
>why you wanted to know how light works, I was asking IF you wanted to know
>how light works ;-). and yea, I saw Armageddon.
I already studied the complexity of light dynamics. Which lead me to the
complexity of gravity, which lead me to the complexity of time, which lead
me to time travel, which lead me to worm-hole/hyperspace, which... etc. I
would love to know how light works, but the smartest of the smart can't
figure that one out yet. ;0) Are you a Quantum theorist, or are you a
Relativist?
Blackguard
(SkArcher), was struck by inspiration and wrote:
>In article <3661d264...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>, N...@spam.com (Blackguard) wrote:
>>On 29 Nov 1998 22:00:38 GMT ne...@nowhere.com (Nemo), was struck by
>>inspiration and wrote:
>>
>>>In article <3660f666...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>, N...@spam.com
>>>(Blackguard) wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net>, was
>>>> struck in the head by an asteroid and said:
>
><SNIP>
>
>>>Why bust someone's chops over this? Isn't the quest for knowledge a noble
>>>one, regardless of the starting point of the quest?
>
>The quest for knowledge and the quest for understanding are two very different
>things. Remember the trouble we had when Bloatwrong got his hands on that tiny
>smidgen of science after Schumacher-Levy 9 hit Jupiter? We had months of
>"Jupiter is Solid, Goddidit!!!" posts.... If you want to understand anything
>about the solar system you have to understand the basics, cos otherwise you'll
>misinterpret
>
>Thats the difference between Data and information.
>
>Information has been interpreted correctly
And Bloatwrong is possibly the worst example of a "scientist". He
examines everything from a Biblical point of view first off, and then
fits the facts to the prophecies.
>>
>>Mainly because I smelled troll. First off, he's going on about the
>>possibilites of an asteroid hitting Earth. Now this is typical garbage
>>from the doomsday patrol. Supposedly when this conjunction happens,
>>there'll be this real big shift in gravity and one of several things
>>are supposed to happen:
>>
>>1) the asteroids in the belt will be flung towards Earth.
>
>It is possible, if somewhat unlikely, that an asteroid could come towards
>earth (Question : Does anyone know what percentage of the visible cosmos is
>covered by the earth when viewed from the asteroid belt? From that it should
>be possible to predict the chances of an asteroid going in earths direction.)
I never said it wasn't possible that one would be flung this way, hell
it happens all the time, but it's not the doomsday scenario that lots
of people make it out to be.
I'm just wondering how many of these people saw, and were influenced
by Armageddon and Deep Impact?
>Oh, and anyway, pretty paterns of planets count for nothing.... The planets
>could be in any arrangement and it might happen, its all down to gravity
True, the pretty pattern was just a joke. However people think that
this grand conjunction will throw gravity out of whack.
>>2) the crust of the Earth will literally go "off it's axis". (This one
>>is really wierd, supposedly the entire crust of the Earth will be
>>moved so that the poles are now on the equator.
>
>The whole crust of the earth _can_ slip around the entire inner layers, and
>this has happened before (what used to be the poles are now near, but not on,
>the equator - the north one is about 9 degrees north, IIRC, in africa
>somewhere) The evidence for it happening before is in some old rock layers
>with magnetic allignments diffent from more modern ones
Never heard of this. I have heard that the magnetic field has
"flipped" in the past (North becomming South and vice versa), but
nothing about the entire crust just sliding.
Unless this is just a massive case of plate tectonics, and the plates
themselves were originally in a completely different place.
>Theres no evidence that its anything to do with bizare arrangements of planets
>tho....
Again, I was just repeating what a lot of doomsday "prophets" have
said.
>>3) massive earthquakes that will destroy the west coast of North
>>America
>
>No loss there then :)
>
>>4) really nasty stuff.
>
>Asteroid falls on Cult of Scientology HQ? Please????
Sounds good to me. Maybe we can direct a few to land in strategic
places.
What do you say EAC labs? Can it be done?
>>
>>Now, he may or may not be a troll. But I am just wondering why he
>>would post to these 4 NGs. With the exception of sci.skeptic, none of
>>the others really deal with pure science.
>
>Welcome to the Web, 50% Spam, 45% Porn and 5% Wrong
---
Therion T. Ware
>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
>straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
>I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
Just as a matter of interest the alignment of planets happens every
300 years or so.
The problem with predicting changes in asteroid movements is that
there is no general theory for predicting the orbital elements of
bodies where n > 2. That said, one can come very close with iterative
techniques and big computers (or a lot of patience).
--
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"
- attrib: Pauline Reage.
<http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6671/entry/hell.html>
Oldguyteck
SkArcher wrote in message <73svh3$b21$4...@squire.cen.brad.ac.uk>...
>In article <3661CA...@worldnet.att.net>, davi...@worldnet.att.net
wrote:
>
>>Reading lots of books is how atheists got so smart - reading only one
>>is how theists got so dumb!
>>
>>Good luck and happy reading.
>>
>>Scott #1045
>>
>>>
What makes YOU think theist only read the bible, and no other books.
Looks as though you'r not as smart as you claim to be !
However smart you think you are, you'r certainly full of misinformation.
Ed.........................(Oldguyteck) †
>
>Nominated for AQOTM, seconds, anyone?
>
>
>
>
>
YOELK
> SagaLore wrote:
>
> > Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>
> The asteroid belt is between Mars (227000000 KM from Sun) andJupiter
> (778000000 Km from Sun) . Earth is 150000000 Km from Sun.
>
> However , there are many asteroids outside the asteroid belt which come close
> to Earth (Earth grazing asteroids).
>
> >
> >
> > Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> > straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> > asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> > theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> > the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
>
> The planets affect asteroid orbits in complex ways. It isn't necessary nor
> sufficient
> for planets to align in order the cause them to approach earth.
>
> You forgot to mention the comets that are not part of the asteroid belt which
> can
> impact earth.
>
> By the way, those impacts are not theoretical.
> In the 20th century, two comments hit earth.
> One in Siberia (1908), the other in Brazil in the late 30s.
>
> There are several impact craters found by geologists around the globe.
>
> >
> >
> > I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
>
> psssssshshshsh BANG!!!!
>
> Now are you satisfied ?
>
> ------
> YOELK
Another comment :
Every object in the solar system is subject to perturbation in its orbit by
the gravitational field of the other objects.
The planets and asteroids seem to be in pretty stable orbits since the
perturbation are damped
over time.
This can be confirmed by calculations and computer simulations.
Check "Classical Mechanics" by Herbert Goldstein, chapter 11.
------
YOELK
Bill Thacker
An astronomer can answer this better than I. I do know, however, that
a conjuction (the term we use when planets align) between even three
planets is a huge rarity. For all nine to align (even ignoring
Pluto's bizarre orbit) is an event that may well have never occurred
in the history of our solar system. Call the astro dept. at your
local university - they ought to be able to give you the exact date of
such a conjunction.
But it hardly matters, since gravity drops with the square of the
distance between the objects. Neptune's effect on the asteroid belt
is negligible compared to that of Jupiter and Mars, which routinely
kick asteroids out of their stable orbits into Earth-threatening
orbits.
> would it pull any of those
>asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun?
Sure.
>If any of these
>theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
>the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
That's hard to say, because it depends on what exact orbit they're
pulled into. Understand, the asteroids don't just spiral into the
sun. Rather, they take on a new orbit, very eccentric (that is, an
elongated ellipse rather than one that's nearly a circle). The
Earth-crossing asteroids we know of today typically go out past
Jupiter, dive in toward the sun, turn around somewhere between the
Earth's orbit and the sun's surface, and return. Assuming this orbit
lies in the same plane as the Earth's, it's almost inevitable that
the two will eventually collide. Whether that happens on the first
crossing or the billionth crossing is just random luck.
If the asteroid were to hit us in the first crossing, I'd guess it
would happen within a month or two of being perturbed out of orbit.
The odds against that are literally astronomical, about like the odds
of you flying to a random city, dropping a softball out the window of
your plane while blindfolded, and hitting your grandmother with it,
on the fly. Only smaller.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Bill Thacker Atheist #1363 gun...@ds.net
Bill's Rail Buggy Page: http://www.ds.net/~gunner/buggy/buggy.html
"Faith is when you believe in something
a crazy person wouldn't believe." - Archie Bunker
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
--
Randomseed A.A #1366
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
SkArcher wrote in message <73svh3$b21$4...@squire.cen.brad.ac.uk>...
>In article <3661CA...@worldnet.att.net>, davi...@worldnet.att.net
wrote:
>
>>Reading lots of books is how atheists got so smart - reading only one
>>is how theists got so dumb!
>>
>>Good luck and happy reading.
>>
>>Scott #1045
>>
>>>
>
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
relativity, as well as quantum mechanics...relativity however makes more
sense than what i've seen from quantum mechanics. now, wormholes and
hyperspace is a cool subject - check out www.stardrive.com (if its up....)
and nasa's break through propulsion physics page if you're still
interested... http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp ...i just tried going to both
those places but couldn't, maybe by the time you read this they'll work...
--
Randomseed A.A #1366
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
SagaLore wrote in message ...
>
Philip Plait
> Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
> Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
Basically, the planets do affect the asteroids, but Jupiter
is overwhelmingly the largest effect, and the other planets
are pretty minor in comparison. Jupiter is massive and close
to the main belt; Mars is also close but perhaps 500 times
less massive. It is thought that Jupiter does indeed
affect the orbits of asteroids; over long periods of time changing
them a lot.
For more info on planets' gravity and alignments, check out
my web page on it:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planets.html
* * * * * The Bad Astronomer * * * *
Phil Plait bada...@badastronomy.com
The Bad Astronomy Web Page: http://www.badastronomy.com
David B. Greene
>Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
>in Jupiter,
Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
book.
>so the planets lining up would make no difference.
They can't line up in any case.
>My recommendation to you is to go to your public library and get some
>fairly basic books on astronomy. I'm sure there are some by Isaac
>Asimov.
They probably even have some by Isaac Newton. Maybe even a few by
Fred Hoyle, Robert Jastrow, Francis Crick and Fritjof Capra.
>Reading lots of books is how atheists got so smart - reading only one
>is how theists got so dumb!
So, Scott, please list every book you've ever read so we can asses how
smart you are.
Cheers,
Dave Greene
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
be too many
--
Randomseed A.A #1366
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
David B. Greene wrote in message <36631e45.5782851@newshost>...
David Shipley
>
> SkArcher wrote in message <73svh3$b21$4...@squire.cen.brad.ac.uk>...
> >In article <3661CA...@worldnet.att.net>, davi...@worldnet.att.net
> wrote:
> >
> >>is how theists got so dumb!
> >>
> >>
> >>Scott #1045
> >>
> >>>
>
> Looks as though you'r not as smart as you claim to be !
>
> However smart you think you are, you'r certainly full of misinformation.
>
> Ed.........................(Oldguyteck) †
> >
> >
--
---------------
Anla'Shok Dave
We Live for the Cats
We Die for the Cats
---------------
May his merciful paw fall upon you
SagaLore
Bill Thacker wrote in message <73v125$5...@nntpb.cb.lucent.com>...
>In article <6I582.5382$Cy....@nnrp2.ptd.net>,
>>Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
>>
>>Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in
one
>
>An astronomer can answer this better than I. I do know, however, that
>a conjuction (the term we use when planets align) between even three
>planets is a huge rarity. For all nine to align (even ignoring
>Pluto's bizarre orbit) is an event that may well have never occurred
>in the history of our solar system. Call the astro dept. at your
>local university - they ought to be able to give you the exact date of
>such a conjunction.
jdra...@my-dejanews.com
tw...@geocities.com (Therion T. Ware) wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:19:46 GMT, "SagaLore" <saga...@ptd.net> wrote:
>
> >Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
> >
> >Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> >asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> >theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> >the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
> >
>
> 300 years or so.
>
> The problem with predicting changes in asteroid movements is that
> there is no general theory for predicting the orbital elements of
> bodies where n > 2. That said, one can come very close with iterative
> techniques and big computers (or a lot of patience).
I vaguely recalled some "doomsday" predictions a while back relating to the
planets of the solar system lining up, and the phrase "The Jupiter Effect"
came to mind. A search for this phrase found a number of sites, most of them
wierd Christian Armageddon related.
Two interesting sites were ...
http://griffithobs.org/SkyAlignments.html
With astronomical information regarding planetary alignments in 2000
http://www.be-ready.org/report.html
Which is a web page set up by a Christian, berating Christians for believing
and repeating silly rumours! A quote from this site:
"Unfortunately, in the things they say and do, and in some things they
believe, Christians all too often are as wise as doves and as harmless
as serpents! Christians should recognize lack of wisdom as a chronic,
pervasive problem from which they suffer, and should strive to
overcome it."
> --
> "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"
> - attrib: Pauline Reage.
> <http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/6671/entry/hell.html>
--
John Drayton
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
YOELK
> YOELK wrote:
>
> > SagaLore wrote:
> >
> > > Question: how close is the nearest asteroid belt?
> >
> > The asteroid belt is between Mars (227000000 KM from Sun) andJupiter
> > (778000000 Km from Sun) . Earth is 150000000 Km from Sun.
> >
> > However , there are many asteroids outside the asteroid belt which come close
> > to Earth (Earth grazing asteroids).
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Also, if let's say, all the planets in our solar system were to align in one
> > > straight line for a brief period in time, would it pull any of those
> > > asteroids out of their orbit and toward the sun? If any of these
> > > theoretical asteroids did change course, how long would it take for it reach
> > > the distance of that belt to earth's orbit?
> >
> > The planets affect asteroid orbits in complex ways. It isn't necessary nor
> > sufficient
> > for planets to align in order the cause them to approach earth.
> >
> > You forgot to mention the comets that are not part of the asteroid belt which
> > can
> > impact earth.
> >
> > By the way, those impacts are not theoretical.
> > In the 20th century, two comments hit earth.
> > One in Siberia (1908), the other in Brazil in the late 30s.
> >
> > There are several impact craters found by geologists around the globe.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm waiting anxiously for the figures. :0)
> >
> > psssssshshshsh BANG!!!!
> >
> > Now are you satisfied ?
> >
> > ------
> > YOELK
>
> Another comment :
>
> Every object in the solar system is subject to perturbation in its orbit by
> the gravitational field of the other objects.
>
> The planets and asteroids seem to be in pretty stable orbits since the
> perturbation are damped
> over time.
>
> This can be confirmed by calculations and computer simulations.
> Check "Classical Mechanics" by Herbert Goldstein, chapter 11.
>
> ------
> YOELK
The word "damp" is not accurate. What I meant to say is that the perturbation
tend
to cancle out over time (with high probability).
------
YOELK
SagaLore
rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message ...
>hey, maybe as a theist you can list em all, but he's atheist recall,
there'd
>be too many
>
>--
>Randomseed A.A #1366
>http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
>David B. Greene wrote in message <36631e45.5782851@newshost>...
>>Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
>>>in Jupiter,
>>
>>Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
>>book.
>>
>>>so the planets lining up would make no difference.
>>
>>They can't line up in any case.
>>
>>>My recommendation to you is to go to your public library and get some
>>>fairly basic books on astronomy. I'm sure there are some by Isaac
>>>Asimov.
>>
>>They probably even have some by Isaac Newton. Maybe even a few by
>>Fred Hoyle, Robert Jastrow, Francis Crick and Fritjof Capra.
>>
>>>Reading lots of books is how atheists got so smart - reading only one
>>>is how theists got so dumb!
>>
Bill Thacker
Blackguard <N...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>A nuke wouldn't do much good. First off, in order for it to be
>effective it would have to explode just before it hit the asteroid.
That's not so difficult. We had radar-fused warheads in 1945 for
anti-aircraft work, and our nukes now are designed to explode at
pre-set altitudes. I don't see much difficulty here, even given the
tremendous velocities.
>Then it would have to vaporise the asteroid, otherwise instead of one
>massive rock hitting the planet we would have a whole bunch of little
>ones doing the same thing.
Well, we'd probably be better off with several small ones than one
large one. Make 'em small enough and we might just live through it.
Anyway, we needn't vaporize the whole asteroid; just enough of it to
push the asteroid into a different course that won't hit us. (Of
course, that requires a longer-ranged missile that will engage the
asteroid far enough out to make this course correction. )
>And this of course is not taking the
>accuracy of it into play. That would be like hitting a single rock,
>with a bullet from a gun several (hundred? thousand?) miles away.
But you're thinking ballistically. This would probably be a guided
weapon, correcting itself during flight.
We've demonstrated this level of accuracy with our ICBMs and space
probes, and even greater accuracy with gizmos like cruise missiles
(whose terrain-following guidance, admittedly, wouldn't work in space).
And why a single bullet? We'd launch as many as we could. Right now
that's zero as we haven't a suitable vehicle, but if you're going to
pretend there's a vehicle, I get to pretend there's a bunch of them.
:-)
David J. Devejian
says...
> Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
> >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
> >in Jupiter,
>
> Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
> book.
Actually, that may be correct. Jupiter, at 317.8 earth masses
contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
--
regards,
David J. Devejian
widsith <at> panix <dot> com
daveg...@my-dejanews.com
> hey, maybe as a theist you can list em all, but he's atheist recall, there'd
> be too many
Well if atheists can't even remember what they read then that is a tradgedy.
Senility is a terrible thing.
> >So, Scott, please list every book you've ever read so we can asses how
> >smart you are.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Dave Greene
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Eric Gunnerson
>In article <3661819...@newshub.ccs.yorku.ca>,
>Blackguard <N...@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>A nuke wouldn't do much good. First off, in order for it to be
>>effective it would have to explode just before it hit the asteroid.
>
>That's not so difficult. We had radar-fused warheads in 1945 for
>anti-aircraft work, and our nukes now are designed to explode at
>pre-set altitudes. I don't see much difficulty here, even given the
>tremendous velocities.
>
>>Then it would have to vaporise the asteroid, otherwise instead of one
>>massive rock hitting the planet we would have a whole bunch of little
>>ones doing the same thing.
>
>Well, we'd probably be better off with several small ones than one
>large one. Make 'em small enough and we might just live through it.
>Anyway, we needn't vaporize the whole asteroid; just enough of it to
>push the asteroid into a different course that won't hit us. (Of
>course, that requires a longer-ranged missile that will engage the
>asteroid far enough out to make this course correction. )
>
>>And this of course is not taking the
>>accuracy of it into play. That would be like hitting a single rock,
>>with a bullet from a gun several (hundred? thousand?) miles away.
>
>But you're thinking ballistically. This would probably be a guided
>weapon, correcting itself during flight.
I agree; it seems unlikely that we could precompute the path with enough
precision to forgo active guidance. Or at least, to be sure that we wouldn't
need it.
But course correction is cheap; you're only talking a small delta-V to
account for any uncertainties.
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
was fucking 3? like i said, maybe you can do it, but i'd probably get lost
at around 100.
--
Randomseed A.A #1366
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
daveg...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<7415jv$kv3$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
about it, its just theoretical though...
--
Randomseed A.A #1366
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
David J. Devejian wrote in message ...
David B. Greene
>da...@XOUT.u.washington.edu says...
>> Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
>> >in Jupiter,
>>
>> Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
>> book.
>
>Actually, that may be correct. Jupiter, at 317.8 earth masses
>contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
>most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
OTOH the mass of the Oort cloud may exceed that of Jupiter. But what
do I know, I only read that in a book.
Dave Greene
Fin Fahey
<73vts3$ked$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>I vaguely recalled some "doomsday" predictions a while back relating to the
>planets of the solar system lining up, and the phrase "The Jupiter Effect"
>came to mind. A search for this phrase found a number of sites, most of
them
>wierd Christian Armageddon related.
Lurking on this thread, I was wondering if anyone would remember 'The
Jupiter Effect'. It wasn't originally a Xian thing, but the title of a book
by John Gribbin (respected science writer). In it he predicted that the
alignment of the outer gas giants in the 1970s would cause a sufficient
wobble in the Sun (in its self quite reasonable - we look for just such
wobbles when searching for Extra-Solar Planets) to create (IIRC) tidal
effects in the Earth's crust. Such effects, in turn, would set off the
stored-up energy in many of the world's major fault lines leading to
mega-earthquakes (including the San Andreas - goodbye CA (as a sideline,
what happens to Silicon Valley - goodbye PCs, maybe)).
I seem to remember that the science looked OKish, but the problem is that an
unusual incidence of earthquakes just didn't happen - so predictive value,
nil. I wouldn't want to be cynical enough to suggest that apocalyptic themes
are a great way to sell books... Anyway, It's a little sad that the Xians
are now feeding off the idea.
Finally, on the planetary theme - the alignment of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus
and Neptune was decidedly *not* a straight line. Space is 3D and all the
orbits are tilted at different angles to the Sun, so it's 'the best
approximation to a straight line', if you like. IIRC, this happens for these
four planets every 160 years or so - NASA originally planned an ambitious
mission called The Grand Tour to make use of the alignment to slingshot past
all the gas giants - although this got canned, as we know, the scaled-down
Voyager 2 did the job, passing Neptune in 1989.
___________________________
Fin Fahey
Albedo Systems
f...@albedo.demon.no-spam.co.uk
___________________________
SagaLore
rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message ...
>you want me to list the fucking thousands of books that i've read since i
>was fucking 3? like i said, maybe you can do it, but i'd probably get lost
>at around 100.
>
>--
>Randomseed A.A #1366
>http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
Davidson
>
> jdra...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
> <73vts3$ked$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>
> >I vaguely recalled some "doomsday" predictions a while back relating to the
> >planets of the solar system lining up, and the phrase "The Jupiter Effect"
> >came to mind. A search for this phrase found a number of sites, most of
> them
> >wierd Christian Armageddon related.
>
> Lurking on this thread, I was wondering if anyone would remember 'The
> Jupiter Effect'. It wasn't originally a Xian thing, but the title of a book
> by John Gribbin (respected science writer). In it he predicted that the
> alignment of the outer gas giants in the 1970s would cause a sufficient
> wobble in the Sun (in its self quite reasonable - we look for just such
> wobbles when searching for Extra-Solar Planets) to create (IIRC) tidal
> effects in the Earth's crust. Such effects, in turn, would set off the
> stored-up energy in many of the world's major fault lines leading to
> mega-earthquakes (including the San Andreas - goodbye CA (as a sideline,
> what happens to Silicon Valley - goodbye PCs, maybe)).
>
> I seem to remember that the science looked OKish, but the problem is that an
> unusual incidence of earthquakes just didn't happen - so predictive value,
> nil. I wouldn't want to be cynical enough to suggest that apocalyptic themes
> are a great way to sell books... Anyway, It's a little sad that the Xians
> are now feeding off the idea.
>
A lot of people were pretty doubtful about the concept even when the
book came
out.
> Finally, on the planetary theme - the alignment of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus
> and Neptune was decidedly *not* a straight line. Space is 3D and all the
> orbits are tilted at different angles to the Sun, so it's 'the best
> approximation to a straight line', if you like. IIRC, this happens for these
> four planets every 160 years or so - NASA originally planned an ambitious
> mission called The Grand Tour to make use of the alignment to slingshot past
> all the gas giants - although this got canned, as we know, the scaled-down
> Voyager 2 did the job, passing Neptune in 1989.
> ___________________________
Considering the amount of time it took to get from Jupiter to Saturn,
for
instance, the planets were not aligned for the grand tour. They were in
position to make gravitational assist possible.
I remember reading about this long before it happened, and now it's
past. I feel old sometimes.
Scott #1045
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
want me to start? i was reading adult level books by 5th grade, so that
would still leave me with a few hundred books. so lol your ass. <g> hrmf.
but no, i won't count child level books. i'll still win i will!
i'm too tired i'll leave now. shit, its 1:40 and i have to be up at 6:40
for school tomorrow. by reorx's balls (reorx - character in a science
fiction novel i read. do those count or no?)
--
Randomseed A.A #1366
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
SagaLore wrote in message ...
Fin Fahey
>Considering the amount of time it took to get from Jupiter to Saturn,
>for
>instance, the planets were not aligned for the grand tour. They were in
>position to make gravitational assist possible.
>
>I remember reading about this long before it happened, and now it's
>past. I feel old sometimes.
>
>Scott #1045
...and my memory grows dim - agreed, optimum for gravitational assist is not
when they 'line up' exactly - but it must be close to it in time. When was
the best alignment? Can't find my old copy of Gribbin.
But no need to feel old - there's plenty of future left, including a lot of
fun to be had watching Xians, other cultists and Y2K survivalists winding
themselves up to a foaming frenzy next year (hopefully they'll start
shooting at each other). And lots of Mars missions, comet/asteroid probes
and an (admittedly rather dubious) space station up ahead. Good times are on
the way. (Hey, why *can't* atheist space cadets start handing out the Good
News?).
___________________________
Stanley L. Moore
David J. Devejian wrote in message ...
>>
>> book.
>
>Actually, that may be correct. Jupiter, at 317.8 earth masses
>contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
>most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
>
but when an above poster said it 'may not be correct' I wondered where
this mass (if it exists) might be? I believe the asteroids are not
enough mass to make up even a lunar sized body, but what about the Oort
Cloud? Are there any mass estimates of it? Its extend is huge but I
bet the density is very low. BTW I still will go with Jupiter being
the site of most non solar mass. Take care.
Stanley L. Moore
--"The eye strays not while under
the guidance of reason." Publius Syrius
www.imagephysique.com
Photography is my passion
Stanley L. Moore
rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message ...
hearing
>about it, its just theoretical though...
>
Surely if there were anything like Jupiter's mass contained as dark
matter in our solar system we would have seen evidence of it by now?
After all its existence was deduced from the change of rotational
velocity as radial distance increases for galaxies. Would not this same
effect be seen if dark matter was in our solar system? Take care.
Fred Stone
> you want me to list the fucking thousands of books that i've read since i
> was fucking 3? like i said, maybe you can do it, but i'd probably get lost
> at around 100.
Hell, I'm with you on this. I'd probably get lost just trying to name all the
authors, much less titles...
--
Fred
aa # 1369
EAC Microbiologist - Saccharomyces division
Fred Stone
> possibly.... have you heard of dark matter? from what i remember hearing
> about it, its just theoretical though...
The Dark Matter hypotheses (there's more than one...) generally refer to
galaxies and larger, to account for sufficient gravitional attraction to drive
their orbits. We've "found" enough mass in the Solar System to account for the
orbits of the planets.
It's interesting though, since the experimental confirmation of neutrino mass,
some astrophysicists think they're onto the Dark Matter thing.
Gully Foyle
<edward....@the-spa.com> wrote:
>
>SkArcher wrote in message <73svh3$b21$4...@squire.cen.brad.ac.uk>...
>>In article <3661CA...@worldnet.att.net>, davi...@worldnet.att.net
>wrote:
>>
>>>Reading lots of books is how atheists got so smart - reading only one
>>>is how theists got so dumb!
>>>
>>>Good luck and happy reading.
>>>
>>>Scott #1045
>>>
>>>>
>
>What makes YOU think theist only read the bible, and no other books.
>Looks as though you'r not as smart as you claim to be !
>
>However smart you think you are, you'r certainly full of misinformation.
>
Read much do you Ed? What sort of books does an erudite person such as
yourself deign worthy of your time?
Will you answer this post considering you avoid answers wherever
possible?
XXIII
_________________________________________________________________
To email me remove the Z after the @ in my email address.
_________________________________________________________________
IDIOT, n.
A member of a large and powerful tribe whose
influence in human affairs has always been dominant
and controlling. The Idiot's activity is not confined to
any special field of thought or action, but "pervades
and regulates the whole." He has the last word in
everything; his decision is unappealable. He sets the
fashions and opinion of taste, dictates the limitations
of speech and circumscribes conduct with a
dead-line.
Ambrose Bierce
_________________________________________________________________
David J. Devejian
rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME says...
> possibly.... have you heard of dark matter? from what i remember hearing
> about it, its just theoretical though...
>
Yes, I am familiar with it. As far as I know, no one has proposed
that there exists any significant amount as part of our solar system.
Perhaps in the periphery of the galaxy, or in the center, or in inter-
galactic space, but not within our solar system.
Even if there is, it cannot be much. We would need over 200
additional earth masses to result in Jupiter being less than a
majority of non-solar mass. Dont you think that much additional mass
would affect the orbits of other bodies in the solar system?
David J. Devejian
>
> David J. Devejian wrote in message ...
> >>
> >> Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
> >> book.
> >
> >Actually, that may be correct. Jupiter, at 317.8 earth masses
> >contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
> >most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
> >
> I have naturally assumed that most of the non solar mass was in Jupiter
> but when an above poster said it 'may not be correct' I wondered where
> this mass (if it exists) might be? I believe the asteroids are not
> enough mass to make up even a lunar sized body, but what about the Oort
> Cloud? Are there any mass estimates of it? Its extend is huge but I
> bet the density is very low. BTW I still will go with Jupiter being
> the site of most non solar mass. Take care.
I do not have ready access to any mass estimates of the Oort Cloud.
However, I have generally assumed that it is quite low, as its effects
are not considered in most orbital studies I have seen. The presence
of a Jupiter sized mass would produce significant perturbations on the
other bodies.
Philip Plait
> jdra...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
> <73vts3$ked$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> >I vaguely recalled some "doomsday" predictions a while back relating to the
> >planets of the solar system lining up, and the phrase "The Jupiter Effect"
> >came to mind. A search for this phrase found a number of sites, most of
> them
> >wierd Christian Armageddon related.
> Lurking on this thread, I was wondering if anyone would remember 'The
> Jupiter Effect'. It wasn't originally a Xian thing, but the title of a book
> by John Gribbin (respected science writer). In it he predicted that the
> alignment of the outer gas giants in the 1970s would cause a sufficient
> wobble in the Sun (in its self quite reasonable - we look for just such
> wobbles when searching for Extra-Solar Planets) to create (IIRC) tidal
> effects in the Earth's crust. Such effects, in turn, would set off the
> stored-up energy in many of the world's major fault lines leading to
> mega-earthquakes (including the San Andreas - goodbye CA (as a sideline,
> what happens to Silicon Valley - goodbye PCs, maybe)).
> I seem to remember that the science looked OKish, but the problem is that an
> unusual incidence of earthquakes just didn't happen - so predictive value,
> nil.
Actually, the scince is *not* okay; it's awful. The combined gravity
of all the planets is a small fraction of the Moon's. If you worry
about tidal effects, the prospect is even smaller for any measurable effect.
I have all this documented, including numbers, on my web page about
the May 5 2000 'alignment':
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planets.html
* * * * * The Bad Astronomer * * * *
Phil Plait bada...@badastronomy.com
The Bad Astronomy Web Page: http://www.badastronomy.com
Oldguyteck
Gully Foyle wrote in message <36654859....@news.techno.net.au>...
>On Mon, 30 Nov 1998 11:18:58 -0000, "Oldguyteck"
><edward....@the-spa.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>SkArcher wrote in message <73svh3$b21$4...@squire.cen.brad.ac.uk>...
>>>In article <3661CA...@worldnet.att.net>, davi...@worldnet.att.net
>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Reading lots of books is how atheists got so smart - reading only one
>>>>is how theists got so dumb!
>>>>
>>>>Good luck and happy reading.
>>>>
>>>>Scott #1045
>>>>
>>>>>
>>
>>What makes YOU think theist only read the bible, and no other books.
>>Looks as though you'r not as smart as you claim to be !
>>
>>However smart you think you are, you'r certainly full of misinformation.
>>
>
>Read much do you Ed? What sort of books does an erudite person such as
>yourself deign worthy of your time?
>
>Will you answer this post considering you avoid answers wherever
>possible?
>
>
publications and I like reading the science journals (asst'd)
A good novel, now and then, the news and so on and so forth.
Ed...........................(Oldguyteck) †
Ken Cox
> Well, we'd probably be better off with several small ones than one
> large one.
It depends when you blow up the asteroid. If it's far enough out
that the debris scatters, then we benefit by whatever portion of
the debris misses the Earth. If it's close enough that most of
it hits us anyway, there's little net benefit -- we don't get a
hole punched through the crust, but everyone dies anyway when the
kinetic energy is transferred into the atmosphere and heats it to
above the boiling point of water.
--
Ken Cox k...@research.bell-labs.com
Andrew Lias
That's a rather big asteroid that you are talking about. Please bear in
mind that it's not only the size of the asteroid that matters, but where
it lands.
A comparitively small asteroid (say 1km^3) can cause a whole bunch of
havok if it lands in the ocean. The movie _Deep Impact_ actually had a
very good representation of the effects of a mid-size tidal impact. The
same asteroid, if it hit land, would cause a nice, big crater, throw up
some dust (making for pretty sunsets and cold winters for a few years),
and radiate most of its energy right back out into space again. Turn the
same one into a compact dust cloud, and you'll get a pretty light show and
some *microscopic* impact on the overall temperature in the atmosphere.
By and large, unless you have a dino-killer, it actually it better to
blow it up into itsy-bitsy pieces. Remember, it's not just the energy,
it's how you distribute it.
--
Please direct all replies to anrwlias AT hotmail.com | Siste viator
*-----------*------------------*-----------------------*------------*
Christian Fundamentalism: The doctrine that there is an absolutely
powerful, infinitely knowledgeable, universe spanning entity that is
deeply and personally concerned about my sex life.
*-----------*------------------*-----------------------*------------*
http://www.wco.com/~anrwlias
Ken Cox
> A comparitively small asteroid (say 1km^3) [snip] Turn the
> same one into a compact dust cloud, and you'll get a pretty light show and
> some *microscopic* impact on the overall temperature in the atmosphere.
Are you sure? This subject came up when the summer asteroid
movies were out, and the results from powdering the asteroid
were much worse IIRC. Though it was probably a bigger asteroid
that was being considered, as you noted.
I suppose we can work it out. Assuming the asteroid is 1 km^3,
and about 3 g/cc (crust-like), that would be about 3e12 kg. If
it hits at about Earth's orbital speed, v=3e4 m/s and the kinetic
energy is about 1.5e21 J. As powder stopping in the atmosphere,
we have nearly perfect transfer of kinetic energy into thermal
energy of the atmosphere, so we're adding 1.5e21 J.
I don't have a figure for the mass of the atmosphere, but most
of it is within 10 km of the surface. Assuming that's all at
STP, the volume affected by the impact (half the atmosphere)
is about 2.5e9 km^3, or about 1e20 moles.
I don't have the heat capacity of air; nitrogen is 29.4 J/K-mol.
So raising the target atmosphere volume by 1 K will take about
3e21 J, meaning a 1 km^3 asteroid with 1.5e21 J energy will raise
the temperature half a degree K. Negligible, as you note.
I guess those earlier calculations were using larger asteroids,
or perhaps assuming a smaller target area. I think the "Deep
Impact" asteroid that was "safely" blown to powder was about a
10 km diameter sphere, for example, or about 200 km^3 which
would indeed raise the temperature to above boiling.
It was also depicted as being blown up quite close to the Earth,
and I think one of the calculations I saw assumed only an area
of a million km^2 was affected. That's 1/250 of the previous
area, so even the 1 km^3 asteroid would suffice to boil the
million km^2 right underneath.
Anyway, thanks for making me work all this out. If anyone
notices that I'm slipped a decimal somewhere, let me know.
--
Ken Cox k...@research.bell-labs.com
Andrew Lias
>> A comparitively small asteroid (say 1km^3) [snip] Turn the
>> same one into a compact dust cloud, and you'll get a pretty light show and
>> some *microscopic* impact on the overall temperature in the atmosphere.
>Are you sure? This subject came up when the summer asteroid
>movies were out, and the results from powdering the asteroid
>were much worse IIRC. Though it was probably a bigger asteroid
>that was being considered, as you noted.
To quote the tag for a VERY bad movie, "Size does matter". Certainly the
asteroid for Armaggedon was ridiculously large. As I recal, the segment
of the asteroid from Deep Impact that was blown up was 7 KM in diameter.
[...]
>I don't have the heat capacity of air; nitrogen is 29.4 J/K-mol.
>So raising the target atmosphere volume by 1 K will take about
>3e21 J, meaning a 1 km^3 asteroid with 1.5e21 J energy will raise
>the temperature half a degree K. Negligible, as you note.
It's always nice to see vindication in calculations. :-)
>I guess those earlier calculations were using larger asteroids,
>or perhaps assuming a smaller target area.
Those are both possibilities. When looking at any calculation, you always
need to pay careful attention to the initial assumptions.
>I think the "Deep
>Impact" asteroid that was "safely" blown to powder was about a
>10 km diameter sphere, for example, or about 200 km^3 which
>would indeed raise the temperature to above boiling.
Please don't mistake me for asserting that *that* portion of the movie was
realistic. It was not. The part that was done well was the water impact,
which was *very* nicely modeled.
>Anyway, thanks for making me work all this out. If anyone
>notices that I'm slipped a decimal somewhere, let me know.
Thanks for going to the trouble.
David B. Greene
>you want me to list the fucking thousands of books that i've read since i
>was fucking 3? like i said, maybe you can do it, but i'd probably get lost
>at around 100.
Well first I want you to take a valium. Then you can give me the top
ten that influenced tou the most.
Thanks in advance,
Dave Greene
David B. Greene
>da...@XOUT.u.washington.edu says...
>> Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
>> >in Jupiter,
>>
>> book.
>
>Actually, that may be correct. Jupiter, at 317.8 earth masses
>contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
>most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
OTOH the mass of the Oort cloud may exceed that of Jupiter. But what
David B. Greene
Jeff K
Ken Cox wrote in message <3665C8...@research.bell-labs.com>...
>Andrew Lias wrote:
>> A comparitively small asteroid (say 1km^3) [snip] Turn the
>> same one into a compact dust cloud, and you'll get a pretty light show
and
>> some *microscopic* impact on the overall temperature in the atmosphere.
>
>Are you sure? This subject came up when the summer asteroid
>movies were out, and the results from powdering the asteroid
>were much worse IIRC. Though it was probably a bigger asteroid
>that was being considered, as you noted.
>
>and about 3 g/cc (crust-like), that would be about 3e12 kg. If
>it hits at about Earth's orbital speed, v=3e4 m/s and the kinetic
>energy is about 1.5e21 J. As powder stopping in the atmosphere,
>we have nearly perfect transfer of kinetic energy into thermal
>energy of the atmosphere, so we're adding 1.5e21 J.
G'day,
I've no problems with your numbers. One question though, how do you "powder
an asteroid"?
Jeff K
Fin Fahey
>Actually, the scince is *not* okay; it's awful. The combined gravity
>of all the planets is a small fraction of the Moon's. If you worry
>about tidal effects, the prospect is even smaller for any measurable
effect.
>
>I have all this documented, including numbers, on my web page about
>the May 5 2000 'alignment':
>
>http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planets.html
Your site is cool and noble, and I've glad you told me about it - it's full
of great stuff I'll read later. Unfortunately, 'The Jupiter Effect' was not
a crazy New Age Harmonic Convergence thing. It was wrong, true, and we're
entitled to ask why the authors were so keen to rush into print, true - but
it has nothing to do with 5 May 2000. Instead, the authors relied mostly on
lots of statistical correlations to prove that the 70-80s were open season
for earthquakes. It didn't rely on the effects of the outer planets on the
Earth, but on the wobble that the alignment caused in the position of the
Sun (shifting the mass centre of the solar system), followed by the effect
*that* had on the Earth. It didn't have the planet split apart or whatever,
just earthquakes that were on the point of triggering triggered. (IMO,
Gribbin has always been a little too much in love with the Butterfly Effect)
I'm not defending the book. I'd just love to know at what point in their
long train of logic Gribbin and Stephen Plagemann (his fellow author) went
wrong. I don't have to time to re-read it right now, I'm certain it's crap,
but I don't know where. (Hey, Asimov loved it!)
Fin Fahey
>In the 20th century, two comments hit earth.
IIRC: 'Harmless' ... and 'mostly harmless'.
Carl Funk
>
> In article <Lab92.12421$uH1.627@insync>, slmm...@bigcity.net says...
> >
> > David J. Devejian wrote in message ...
> > >>
> > >> book.
> > >
> > >Actually, that may be correct. Jupiter, at 317.8 earth masses
> > >contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
> > >most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
> > >
> > but when an above poster said it 'may not be correct' I wondered where
> > this mass (if it exists) might be? I believe the asteroids are not
> > enough mass to make up even a lunar sized body, but what about the Oort
> > Cloud? Are there any mass estimates of it? Its extend is huge but I
> > bet the density is very low. BTW I still will go with Jupiter being
> > the site of most non solar mass. Take care.
>
> I do not have ready access to any mass estimates of the Oort Cloud.
> However, I have generally assumed that it is quite low, as its effects
> are not considered in most orbital studies I have seen. The presence
> of a Jupiter sized mass would produce significant perturbations on the
> other bodies.
>
gravitational pulls from different parts of the cloud will cancel out.
--
Carl Funk "nil illegitimi carborundum" ICQ#16282427
a.a atheist #1229 member, EAC Decryption Squad
to bypass my SPAM-deflector, it helps if you realize I am
asthmatic. i.e. no SMOKING please!
Stanley L. Moore
Carl Funk wrote in message <36667B...@SMOKINGameritech.net>...
>>
>If the Oort Cloud is anything close to spherically symmetric, the
>gravitational pulls from different parts of the cloud will cancel out.
>
thinking about other evidence. As I understand it Dark Matter halos
were deduced from the fall off of rotation from the center of galaxies.
It is not individual pulls we are concerned with but rather the mass
distribution of the solar system.
I STILL think that most of the non solar mass of our system is confined
to Jupiter. The fact that there would be no significant gravity effects
due to the Oort Cloud is irrelevant to the issue of whether most of the
non solar mass is in Jupiter. After all it is conceivable that 10
Jupiter masses are floating around the sun in a spherical halo. [I do
NOT believe this to be the case, because there would probably be other
effects we could measure.]
My knowledge of astronomy is pretty limited...it comes from reading
Astronomy magazine for the last several years, I had no formal training
so correct me if I am mistaken. Take care.
anrw...@wco.com
"Jeff K" <nonijeff<nospam>@pcug.org.au> wrote:
>
> Ken Cox wrote in message <3665C8...@research.bell-labs.com>...
> >I suppose we can work it out. Assuming the asteroid is 1 km^3,
> >and about 3 g/cc (crust-like), that would be about 3e12 kg. If
> >it hits at about Earth's orbital speed, v=3e4 m/s and the kinetic
> >energy is about 1.5e21 J. As powder stopping in the atmosphere,
> >we have nearly perfect transfer of kinetic energy into thermal
> >energy of the atmosphere, so we're adding 1.5e21 J.
> <snip>
>
> G'day,
>
> I've no problems with your numbers. One question though, how do you "powder
> an asteroid"?
First you take a giant flour sifter and a rolling pin the size of the Iberian
penninsula...
-- Andrew Lias, sans sig
Philip Plait
> wid...@panix.goaway.com (David J. Devejian) wrote:
> >da...@XOUT.u.washington.edu says...
> >> Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
> >> >in Jupiter,
> >>
> >> book.
> >
> >Actually, that may be correct. Jupiter, at 317.8 earth masses
> >contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
> >most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
> OTOH the mass of the Oort cloud may exceed that of Jupiter. But what
> do I know, I only read that in a book.
A quick-and-dirty estimate:
There are maybe 1 trillion (1 x 10^12) comets in the Oort cloud.
Assume they are all 10 km in diameter. If you lump them all together,
you get a sphere with a diameter of about 40,000 kilometers. For
comparison, the Earth is 10,000 kilometers across. However, a
comet has a density of about 1 compared to 5.5 for the Earth,
so the "comet planet" would have a mass of about (40000/10000)^3 / 5.5 =
12 times the Earth. Jupiter masses 300 times the Earth. And
remember, the Oort cloud is *BIG*. That much mass is VERY VERY spread
out over trillions of cublic kilometers of space.
I have a similar calculation involving the asteroid bbelt
on my web site: http://www.badastronomy.com/bitesize/asteroid.html
Ken Cox
> >Are you sure? This subject came up when the summer asteroid
> >movies were out, and the results from powdering the asteroid
> >were much worse IIRC.
> an asteroid"?
Well, in the movies you just blow up a standard 100 megaton nuke
a few hundred meters inside the asteroid. As I recall, this was
*also* one of the parts of the movie that was later computed to
be wrong.
--
Ken Cox k...@research.bell-labs.com
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
gaurdian" and the 3 "mag force seven" books (margaret weiss, sci fi) almost
michael crichton (an atheist) book - particularly andromeda strain and
jurrassic park/lost world (which were TOTALLY different from the movies -
especially lost world. he describes in detail a lot of cool stuff about
dna.) lets see...51 dragon lance books (cool series of fantasy) ...four
stargate books (now thats a cool movie, series, and book set...i was
thinking of mentioning how stargate treats the issue of gods in a new
thread-maybe i will later) lets see...robert heinlein puppet masters was
cool...there was this book called grid by phillip kerr that was cool...an
awesome book was snowcrash - forgot who wrote it...then you've got about 15
of the original series star trek books...ooh, how could i forget the wheel
of time by robert jordan? he just released his 8th novel. as you may be
able to tell i like science fiction...lets see that was about 96...wow, and
i thought i was exaggerating when i said i would probably get lost at around
100. however these are only the books that were influential enough for me
to remember the title and authors, i have read books from friends,
libraries, and other places such that i can't recall the titles. i have
also read countless text files about computers, unix, programming, dna and
genetic engineering, and atheism even. oh, i have in front of me a linux
book, a c++ book, and a vb book. and oh yea, who can forget william gibson?
--
Randomseed A.A #1366
http://wwp.mirabilis.com/8562260
David B. Greene wrote in message <366485da.31056602@newshost>...
SagaLore
rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message ...
Dune was an interesting movie. A bit confusing however...
>the four "star of the
>gaurdian" and the 3 "mag force seven" books (margaret weiss, sci fi) almost
>michael crichton
He's a good writer.
>(an atheist) book
And that means... ?
> - particularly andromeda strain
That was a good movie. They should do a remake.
>and
>jurrassic park/lost world (which were TOTALLY different from the movies -
>especially lost world.
I agree. After watching Jurassic Park, I read the book and found the book
to make not only a lot more sense, but to have a better plot. They really
hosed up Lost World (I didn't read that book) - especially since that gray
haired guy died in the first one. I didn't like Lost World... the plot
wasn't all that exciting, and it really made me lost interest when they
brought one of the Rexes into a city (typical action plot - totally uncalled
for).
> he describes in detail a lot of cool stuff about
>dna.) lets see...51 dragon lance books (cool series of fantasy) ...four
>stargate books (now thats a cool movie, series, and book set...
I liked the movie. It could have been a little more dramatic - but for the
most part okay. The series is interesting... but I don't find it
satisfying. (Only saw a few episodes)
>i was
>thinking of mentioning how stargate treats the issue of gods in a new
>thread-maybe i will later)
Yea I've thought about that. But then... where did _they_ come from? ;0)
>lets see...robert heinlein puppet masters
I saw parts of that movie... it was wierd (but quite fascinating).
>was
>cool...there was this book called grid by phillip kerr that was cool...an
>awesome book was snowcrash - forgot who wrote it...then you've got about 15
>of the original series star trek books...
Star Trek is the best. :0) I think they have done a good job with the
movies and series... except Star Trek 5, which was totally screwed up, and
Star Trek Generations which had a fatal script flaw. ST5 had an
overexagerated emotion script for the characters. STG's flaw was that not
only did Kirk really have a stupid part in the whole thing (what a waste),
but if Piccard could have gone _anywhere_ in time and space, you would think
he would be smart enough to go back before the whole plot even started.
(Therefore avoiding many of the problems that occur throughout the movie,
and keeping Kird from pointlessly getting involved.) Each series is well
done, except I think Voyager has messed up some of the whole Borg concept.
Nothing was the same after Roddenbery died. :*(
>ooh, how could i forget the wheel
>of time by robert jordan? he just released his 8th novel. as you may be
>able to tell i like science fiction...lets see that was about 96...wow, and
>i thought i was exaggerating when i said i would probably get lost at
around
>100. however these are only the books that were influential enough for me
>to remember the title and authors,
So you're basing your whole atheistic philosophy on science fiction. How
fitting ;D lol Actually I like science fiction too. But I always try to
remember it's just fiction. :P
>i have read books from friends,
>libraries, and other places such that i can't recall the titles. i have
>also read countless text files about computers, unix, programming, dna and
>genetic engineering, and atheism even. oh, i have in front of me a linux
>book, a c++ book, and a vb book. and oh yea, who can forget william
gibson?
I'm taking a Computer Science course right now. The c++ they gave us is the
worse book I have ever seen. You have any suggestions? I have read up on
DNA and such... not just internet speculation, but I read articles out of
science journals and magazine articles. If you follow the pattern
established by life itself - wouldn't it be more efficient if computers
processed information with a 4 bit analog matrix? I'm working on the logic
design right now... (any ideas?)
Andrew Wood
>
> Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
> >in Jupiter,
>
> Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
> book.
>
Depends what he meant by 'most'.
The mass of Jupiter is 318 times that of Earth, and consitutes 71% of
the sum of the masses of the planets, excluding moons, asteroids, Kuiper
belt objects etc.
The mass of Jupiter+Saturn constitutes 92% of the sum. So if you're
inclined to worry about such things a Jupiter Saturn alignment would be
the one to watch for.
Add in Uranus and Neptune and you're up to 99.5%.
>
> Dave Greene
--
...Andrew...
From time to time I might take part in discussions in this forum in
which there are points of disagreement. Potential protagonists in those
discussions should note that lack of a response on my part in respect of
any or all of the points raised does not imply a realignment of my
position or opinions to those of said protagonist.
Opinions expressed here are my own, not those of my employer.
David J. Devejian
> I STILL think that most of the non solar mass of our system is confined
> to Jupiter. The fact that there would be no significant gravity effects
> due to the Oort Cloud is irrelevant to the issue of whether most of the
> non solar mass is in Jupiter.
Well, it is very relevant to the original point, which was regarding
perturbations of the asteroid belt. That is how the proportion of
jovian mass to the rest of our system came into discussion.
Also note that a spherical shell would not have an effect only in the
Newtonian limit. Under GR, a mass at the center of a rotating
spherical shell would rotate under the effects of gravity.
> After all it is conceivable that 10
> Jupiter masses are floating around the sun in a spherical halo. [I do
> NOT believe this to be the case, because there would probably be other
> effects we could measure.]
The point is that the Oort cloud, if it exists (as far as I can
discern all mass estimates of it are pretty speculative, ranging from
approx 1/2 jovian mass, to approx 10 jovian masses.) is substantially
further away than other bodies in our system. One paper, (Dar, astro-
ph/9708160) which investigated a similar body observed via Hubble in
the Helix system, estimates approx 1 ly, which is roughly equivelent
with Oort's own estimates of the distance being on the order of 10^5 -
10^6 AU. (One ly is approx 65,000 AU)
Also, it is not concentrated as 10 jovian masses, but rather as
thousands of masses on the order of mars.
Paul J. Koeck
Fred Stone wrote:
>
> rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote:
>
> > you want me to list the fucking thousands of books that i've read since i
> > was fucking 3? like i said, maybe you can do it, but i'd probably get lost
> > at around 100.
>
> Hell, I'm with you on this. I'd probably get lost just trying to name all the
> authors, much less titles...
>
> --
> Fred
> aa # 1369
> EAC Microbiologist - Saccharomyces division
Same with me. I have somewhere between 1500 and 2000 books stored
in my basement right now. Many SF, Fantasy, and Science books
and magazines. Some woodworking stuff too (now if I could just
figure out how to cut wood, I'd be in great shap.)
They've all influenced me in some ways. When it comes to my
personal philosophies and the way I approach life in terms of
knowledge and learning, probably the science books have influenced
me the most.
But, there's also my family, friends, school, co-workers, etc.
that have influenced me as well. Unlike many xians, I don't
draw my entire life experience out of a single book, nor do
I adhere to the dictates of a group dictator (pastor).
--
Paul J. Koeck, #360
EAC MindControl Beam(tm) Operator #34529085783828-4875
EAC Tech - Personal Mind Control at a great price!
Volume discounts available.
Don't let reality hit you in the ass on your way out.
Only an idiot or a dishonest PromiseKeeper cult member would
think that my opinions necessarily reflect those of my employer.
To reply, change Byte.Me to Primavera
David J. Devejian
says...
> >>
> >>
> >> >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
> >> >in Jupiter,
> >>
> >> Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
> >> book.
> >
> >contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
> >most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
>
> OTOH the mass of the Oort cloud may exceed that of Jupiter. But what
> do I know, I only read that in a book.
At approx 1 ly distance, and a nearly uniform spherical configuration,
which would result in gravitational effects on the asteroid belt (the
original point) that are far less than even that of Pluto. Also, all
the current mass estimates of the Oort cloud are currently highly
speculative. (Which I assume is why you used 'may.') Hey, what do you
know, I can read too. (BTW, which book did you read this in?)
Paul J. Koeck
And has been wrong in every single "Big Rock Hits The Earth"
movie ever made. Anyone remember the NBC movie where they
blew up a 10km diameter nickel-iron with a pair of "lasers"
fired from fighter jets?
It blowed up real good.
Phil Plait has some good reviews and critiques of the various
asteroid movies on his page. http://www.badastronomy.com/
David J. Devejian
> > >da...@XOUT.u.washington.edu says...
> > >> Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
> > >> >in Jupiter,
> > >>
> > >> Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
> > >> book.
> > >
> > >Actually, that may be correct. Jupiter, at 317.8 earth masses
> > >contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
> > >most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
>
> > OTOH the mass of the Oort cloud may exceed that of Jupiter. But what
> > do I know, I only read that in a book.
>
>
> There are maybe 1 trillion (1 x 10^12) comets in the Oort cloud.
> Assume they are all 10 km in diameter. If you lump them all together,
> you get a sphere with a diameter of about 40,000 kilometers. For
> comparison, the Earth is 10,000 kilometers across. However, a
> comet has a density of about 1 compared to 5.5 for the Earth,
> so the "comet planet" would have a mass of about (40000/10000)^3 / 5.5 =
> 12 times the Earth. Jupiter masses 300 times the Earth. And
> remember, the Oort cloud is *BIG*. That much mass is VERY VERY spread
> out over trillions of cublic kilometers of space.
Id guess more than that. Assuming the Oort cloud is 1000 km thick, it
is also placed at 1ly distance. 1ly = 3e7 sec/year * 3e8m/s = 1e13
km. (Alternative, use Oort's estimate of tens of thousands of AU, 2e5
AU * 1e8 mi/AU * 5/8mi/km = 1.25e13 km) Thats a spherical surface of
4e26 km^2, giving the shell a volume of 4e29 km^3, or 4e17 trillion
(american useage) cubic km. Now that is BIG!
David J. Devejian
cf...@SMOKINGameritech.net says...
> If the Oort Cloud is anything close to spherically symmetric, the
> gravitational pulls from different parts of the cloud will cancel out.
True, for the most part, see my post further down along this thread.
However, if so, then its effects on the asteroid belt would be quite
small.
On the other hand, the distance to the Oort Cloud (approx 1 ly) which,
IMHO, makes it only 'a part of the solar system' in a rather trivial
sense, when discussing gravitation effects on intra-Pluto bodies.
David Shipley
>
> David B. Greene wrote:
> >
> > Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
> > >in Jupiter,
> >
> > Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
> > book.
> >
>
> The mass of Jupiter is 318 times that of Earth, and consitutes 71% of
> the sum of the masses of the planets, excluding moons, asteroids, Kuiper
> belt objects etc.
> The mass of Jupiter+Saturn constitutes 92% of the sum. So if you're
> inclined to worry about such things a Jupiter Saturn alignment would be
> the one to watch for.
> Add in Uranus and Neptune and you're up to 99.5%.
>
mass of the solar system...
--
---------------
Anla'Shok Dave
We Live for the Cats
We Die for the Cats
---------------
May his merciful paw fall upon you
David J. Devejian
Da...@dshipley.demon.co.uk says...
> Andrew Wood wrote:
> >
> > David B. Greene wrote:
> > >
> > > Davidson <davi...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
> > > >in Jupiter,
> > >
> > > Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
> > > book.
> > >
> >
> > Depends what he meant by 'most'.
> > The mass of Jupiter is 318 times that of Earth, and consitutes 71% of
> > the sum of the masses of the planets, excluding moons, asteroids, Kuiper
> > belt objects etc.
> > The mass of Jupiter+Saturn constitutes 92% of the sum. So if you're
> > inclined to worry about such things a Jupiter Saturn alignment would be
> > the one to watch for.
> > Add in Uranus and Neptune and you're up to 99.5%.
> >
> Are you sure about that one? I thought that Sol made up 99% of the total
> mass of the solar system...
Yes, approx 1000 times the mass of Jupiter.
But notice above, "most of the mass of teh solar system (not counting
the Sun" and later, "the sum of the masses of the planets, excluding .
. ." We were talking of non-solar mass.
rando...@baawa.orgdontspamme
>>(an atheist) book
>And that means... ?
it means michael crichton is an atheist. you read it wrong.
>
>> - particularly andromeda strain
>
>That was a good movie. They should do a remake.
we are talking about books here not movies
>>and
>>jurrassic park/lost world (which were TOTALLY different from the movies -
>>especially lost world.
>
>I agree. After watching Jurassic Park, I read the book and found the book
>to make not only a lot more sense, but to have a better plot. They really
>hosed up Lost World (I didn't read that book) - especially since that gray
>haired guy died in the first one. I didn't like Lost World... the plot
>wasn't all that exciting, and it really made me lost interest when they
>brought one of the Rexes into a city (typical action plot - totally
uncalled
>for).
the lost world was NOTHING like the book. I mean NOTHING (except maybe the
title.) in the book they were on the island to study extinction. they were
interrupted because a biotech company wanted to breed the dinosaurs so that
they could own the rights to them, in order to do drug testing etc on them.
this was the same company that hired nedry in the original Jurassic park.
but there was less then like, 10% similarity between the two. the book was
much better.
>> he describes in detail a lot of cool stuff about
>>dna.) lets see...51 dragon lance books (cool series of fantasy) ...four
>>stargate books (now thats a cool movie, series, and book set...
>
>I liked the movie. It could have been a little more dramatic - but for the
>most part okay. The series is interesting... but I don't find it
>satisfying. (Only saw a few episodes)
they get better, but you have to know what is going on.
>>i was
>>thinking of mentioning how stargate treats the issue of gods in a new
>>thread-maybe i will later)
>
>Yea I've thought about that. But then... where did _they_ come from? ;0)
hello, moron? they aren't really gods. they are aleins who are superior
and enslave the humans and make them think that they are gods.
>>lets see...robert heinlein puppet masters
>
>I saw parts of that movie... it was wierd (but quite fascinating).
again we are talking about books.
>>was
>>cool...there was this book called grid by phillip kerr that was cool...an
>>awesome book was snowcrash - forgot who wrote it...then you've got about
15
>>of the original series star trek books...
>
>Star Trek is the best. :0) I think they have done a good job with the
>movies and series... except Star Trek 5, which was totally screwed up, and
>Star Trek Generations which had a fatal script flaw. ST5 had an
>overexagerated emotion script for the characters. STG's flaw was that not
>only did Kirk really have a stupid part in the whole thing (what a waste),
>but if Piccard could have gone _anywhere_ in time and space, you would
think
>he would be smart enough to go back before the whole plot even started.
>(Therefore avoiding many of the problems that occur throughout the movie,
>and keeping Kird from pointlessly getting involved.) Each series is well
>done, except I think Voyager has messed up some of the whole Borg concept.
>Nothing was the same after Roddenbery died. :*(
true. they totally have no idea what they are talking about in voyager,
especially when it comes to computers and science, however deepspace nine is
cool.
>>ooh, how could i forget the wheel
>>of time by robert jordan? he just released his 8th novel. as you may be
>>able to tell i like science fiction...lets see that was about 96...wow,
and
>>i thought i was exaggerating when i said i would probably get lost at
>around
>>100. however these are only the books that were influential enough for me
>>to remember the title and authors,
>
>So you're basing your whole atheistic philosophy on science fiction. How
>fitting ;D lol Actually I like science fiction too. But I always try to
>remember it's just fiction. :P
not at all. i base my "atheistic philosophy" on things that happen in real
life, not words in a book. you guys simply asked what books i've read
lately.
>>i have read books from friends,
>>libraries, and other places such that i can't recall the titles. i have
>>also read countless text files about computers, unix, programming, dna and
>>genetic engineering, and atheism even. oh, i have in front of me a linux
>>book, a c++ book, and a vb book. and oh yea, who can forget william
>gibson?
>
>
>I'm taking a Computer Science course right now. The c++ they gave us is
the
>worse book I have ever seen. You have any suggestions? I have read up on
>DNA and such... not just internet speculation, but I read articles out of
>science journals and magazine articles. If you follow the pattern
>established by life itself - wouldn't it be more efficient if computers
>processed information with a 4 bit analog matrix? I'm working on the logic
>design right now... (any ideas?)
>
I like AI, but I'm more interested in Unix and c. a 4 bit analog matrix for
what, CPUs? the os? why would analog be more efficient? I know more about
software and OSs then hardware. I like science articles about DNA as well.
as for suggestions for books, heres a cool website that lets you "borrow"
books in an html format. you give them a login/password and you can read
any book they have, and they have quite a few on c and c++. if you don't
like reading it in the online format, you can use that to preview it and go
out and buy the real thing.
Jim Meritt
f...@albedo.demon.co.uk says...
>I'm not defending the book. I'd just love to know at what point in their
>long train of logic Gribbin and Stephen Plagemann (his fellow author) went
>wrong. I don't have to time to re-read it right now, I'm certain it's crap,
>but I don't know where. (Hey, Asimov loved it!)
Inverse square law? Heck, there is more of a gravitational attraction
between my desk and my chair than between Jupiter and my chair.
I thought that the "alignment" was a visual one (you could see it in the sky)
but wasn't even remotely "physically" in line.
I remember it when it came out and thought it absurd then...
--
James W. Meritt, CISSP
Senior Security Systems Engineer employeed by Wang Global
The opinions expressed above are my own. The facts simply are and belong to
none.
David Shipley
Please excuse me, my cat's caught a dragon.
--
---------------
Anla'Shok Dave
We Live for the Cats
We Die for the Cats
---------------
David J. Devejian
> In article <912647200.22237.0...@news.demon.co.uk>,
> f...@albedo.demon.co.uk says...
>
> >I'm not defending the book. I'd just love to know at what point in their
> >long train of logic Gribbin and Stephen Plagemann (his fellow author) went
> >wrong. I don't have to time to re-read it right now, I'm certain it's crap,
> >but I don't know where. (Hey, Asimov loved it!)
>
>
> Inverse square law? Heck, there is more of a gravitational attraction
> between my desk and my chair than between Jupiter and my chair.
That, I dont believe is correct:
F = F * m1 * m2 / r^2
Assume a desk of mass 50 kg, chair of 10 kg, seperation of 1 m
F= 6e-11 * 50 * 10 /(1)^2 = 3e-8 N
Now between your chair an Jupiter,
F = 6e-11 * (3e2 * 6e26) * 10 / ((5 - 1) * 1.5e11) ^ 2
~ 1e20/ (6e11^2) = 1e20 / 3.6e22 ~ 3e-3 N
So the force between Jupiter and your chair is approx 5 orders of
magnitude larger than that between your desk and chair.
(Do let me know if I screwed the calculation up)
David B. Greene
>da...@XOUT.u.washington.edu says...
>> wid...@panix.goaway.com (David J. Devejian) wrote:
>> >da...@XOUT.u.washington.edu says...
>> >>
>> >> >Actually most of the mass in the solar system (not counting the Sun) is
>> >> >in Jupiter,
>> >>
>> >> Actually that may not be correct. Maybe you should read a second
>> >> book.
>> >
>> >contains approx 71% of our solar systems non-solar mass. The next
>> >most massive body is Saturn, at 95.2 earth masses, containing 21%.
>>
>> OTOH the mass of the Oort cloud may exceed that of Jupiter. But what
>> do I know, I only read that in a book.
>
>which would result in gravitational effects on the asteroid belt (the
>original point) that are far less than even that of Pluto. Also, all
>the current mass estimates of the Oort cloud are currently highly
>speculative. (Which I assume is why you used 'may.') Hey, what do you
>know, I can read too. (BTW, which book did you read this in?)
I was arguing mass only. Granted the gravitational disturbance would
be of no consequence with the possible exception of comets jolted out
of the cloud and sent hurling towards some fate near the center of the
solar system. But even so, the Jupiter effect is minimal compared to
the gravitational pull of our own moon and the sun of course. I doubt
we can even measure Jovian caused tides here on Earth. You are right
about the speculation and that is indeed why I used "may."
I can't remember the book but I did see it on a web page recently.
http://www.tased.edu.au/nineplanets/kboc.html
Dave Greene
SagaLore
rando...@baawa.orgDONTSPAMME wrote in message ...
>
>
>>And that means... ?
>
>it means michael crichton is an atheist. you read it wrong.
I know what you meant. I'm just wondering what conclusion you can draw from
it...
>
>>
>>> - particularly andromeda strain
>>
>>That was a good movie. They should do a remake.
>
>
>we are talking about books here not movies
Yea I know.
Hey, dispense with the name calling. Yes I KNOW they go around parading
like gods around the primitives. What I was asking, was where did the
aliens come from?
>
>>>lets see...robert heinlein puppet masters
>>
>>I saw parts of that movie... it was wierd (but quite fascinating).
>
>
>again we are talking about books.
I'm librophobic
>
>>>was
>>>cool...there was this book called grid by phillip kerr that was cool...an
>>>awesome book was snowcrash - forgot who wrote it...then you've got about
>15
>>>of the original series star trek books...
>>
>>Star Trek is the best. :0) I think they have done a good job with the
>>movies and series... except Star Trek 5, which was totally screwed up, and
>>Star Trek Generations which had a fatal script flaw. ST5 had an
>>overexagerated emotion script for the characters. STG's flaw was that not
>>only did Kirk really have a stupid part in the whole thing (what a waste),
>>but if Piccard could have gone _anywhere_ in time and space, you would
>think
>>he would be smart enough to go back before the whole plot even started.
>>(Therefore avoiding many of the problems that occur throughout the movie,
>>and keeping Kird from pointlessly getting involved.) Each series is well
>>done, except I think Voyager has messed up some of the whole Borg concept.
>>Nothing was the same after Roddenbery died. :*(
>
>
>true. they totally have no idea what they are talking about in voyager,
>especially when it comes to computers and science, however deepspace nine
is
>cool.
Yea deepspace nine is good - although they must have changed script writers
or something because it seems to have gotten off track. When I first saw
Voyager, the ship did not impress me at all. A huge triangular saucer
section, and a neural-fiber grid. Woopie. And what is with this Captain
Janeway? I don't mind that they had the captain a woman, but they could
have picked someone better. (I heard she almost quit during the second
episode) She talks like a psychologist most of the time. The cast isn't
all that great... but I like the Doc. He's cool. He's the only reason I
even watch the show. 7of9 (that's her name, right?) She is okay - it would
have been better if they left a few more borg gadgets on her - you know, so
she could hook into the ship's computer and stuff? ;0) Here is a few
things I didn't like: the episdoe where they find the Q, and when the Q was
made human, he should have stayed as part of the crew. And the episode
where what's his face goes pass warp 10 and then rapidly goes through some
kind of evolutionary change (that was a terrible episode).
I wonder why the Doc doesn't just download the entire ship's database into
his algorithms. He would be so much more useful - and I think that patch on
his arm should be placed inside his body so it can't be damaged - if you
think about it, since he's a hologram, he pretty much has an invincible
body. :P (except for high-energy discharge) Oh well... leave that up to
the writers.
The whole system would be based on it down to the hardware level.
>why would analog be more efficient?
If you use an analog consistent with a multi-dimensional boolean matrix, you
could hold more information within a given transistor. Not only is it space
efficient, but any mathematical operations performed would be faster and
could also be more precise.
smay...@infoave.net
(Rumpelstiltskin) wrote:
>On Sun, 29 Nov 1998 19:09:22 +0200, YOELK <jk...@shani.net> wrote:
>
>
>>By the way, those impacts are not theoretical.
>>In the 20th century, two comments hit earth.
>>One in Siberia (1908), the other in Brazil in the late 30s.
>
>
>
> In 1974 (I think) an asteroid or similar hard object the
>size of a house skipped along the earth's atmosphere the
>way a flung stone skips along a pond. If it had hit, it
>would have made a crater as big as the one in Arizona.
>The trail was seen from New Mexico to Alberta.
>
> In the 15th century or so, there are reports of a bright
>spot suddenly appearing on the moon, after which a
>pall radiated from that point across the entire moon, as
>the moon appeared to shimmer. I read lately that
>scientists think they may have located the crater that
>was made by that event.
>
>
>Please remove the capital X's from my e-mail address.
>They are meant to thwart unsolicited commercial mail.
You may be talking about the Canterbury event in 1178. The crater is
Giordano Bruno. With a radius of 13 miles, the asteroid that produced
it is estimated to have been 2 miles in diameter. If it had hit the
Earth instead of the moon, civilization would porobably have been
wiped out.
cz...@ecn.ab.ca
: And has been wrong in every single "Big Rock Hits The Earth"
: movie ever made. Anyone remember the NBC movie where they
: blew up a 10km diameter nickel-iron with a pair of "lasers"
: fired from fighter jets?
: It blowed up real good.
: Phil Plait has some good reviews and critiques of the various
: asteroid movies on his page. http://www.badastronomy.com/
...And the only two good novels on said "'lil rock hits big Earth"
are _Lucifer's Hammer_ and _Footfall_, both by Larry Niven and
Jerry Pournelle.
--
*************************************************************
In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a
degree that it would be perverse to withold provisional
assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise
tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time
in physics classrooms.
-Stephen Jay Gould
*************************************************************
Carl Funk
>
> Paul J. Koeck (PKo...@Byte.Me.Com) wrote:
>
> : And has been wrong in every single "Big Rock Hits The Earth"
> : movie ever made. Anyone remember the NBC movie where they
> : blew up a 10km diameter nickel-iron with a pair of "lasers"
> : fired from fighter jets?
>
> : It blowed up real good.
>
> : Phil Plait has some good reviews and critiques of the various
> : asteroid movies on his page. http://www.badastronomy.com/
>
> ...And the only two good novels on said "'lil rock hits big Earth"
> are _Lucifer's Hammer_ and _Footfall_, both by Larry Niven and
> Jerry Pournelle.
>
the colonists on the Moon bomb Earth by "throwing rocks".