The Cosmological Thaw from Sirius
Brad Guth
works for Henry Kroll and myself. It seems long period double/triple
stars are not that uncommon nor without their ability of capturing
another nearby star, especially while in their proto-star molecular/
nebula cloud phase that can last a million plus years.
Sirius Escape Velocity (did our solar system always have enough escape
velocity?)
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
As offering a direct analogy of a stable elliptical orbit that’s
captured within our solar system, is that of Sedna/90377 ~ 3e21 kg of
an exotic reddish mineral saturated icy planetoid that can’t seem to
get away from the past any better than our solar system is keeping
itself away from Sirius.
Orbital velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
942 AU 374 m/sec (escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
76 AU 4640 m/sec (escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Obviously Sedna is moving itself along at better than 150 fold faster
than the required escape velocity at its furthest elliptical
trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550 fold faster
escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why doesn’t Sedna
just sail off into the wild black yonder?
Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was worth
considerably more than Sedna, and it only gets much worse as we go
back in time.
Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
m/sec.
Sirius at <3e37 kg and 64 ly, escape velocity becomes worth 81.3 km/
sec.
As you can plainly see there’s supposedly no problem as of our solar
system nowadays that’s supposedly closing in at the radial velocity of
7.6 km/sec, thereby we’re supposedly escaping whatever Sirius has to
offer unless those trajectory estimates of proper motion are way the
hell off. However, in the beginning when all things Sirius for more
than a million years represented a molecular/nebula cloud worth <3e37
kg, is when our rogue solar system independence or freedom from all
things Sirius should have been technically impossible (even at 128
light years = 57.5 km/sec, or if you like 1024 ly = 20+ km/sec).
Of course it would be nice if we had been at least running parallel or
ideally somewhat away from Sirius, but sadly that hasn’t been the
case. Instead we have two orbital trajectories getting modified as
each closes in on one another, and that’s pretty much exactly as the
Sedna elliptical path manages to survive its multiple encounters
within 76 AU of our sun, somehow never losing its tidal bound
association in spite of having more than sufficient escape velocity.
Obviously the all-inclusive mass of Sirius and its surrounding of
whatever’s remaining of nebula/molecular gas that’s within 1 ly, plus
whatever its local Oort cloud of dark and icy debris should no longer
maintain its original grip on our solar system. However, no such
luck, perhaps for the same reasons why Sedna and other far reaching
Oort cloud items are not able to escape our solar system is perhaps
the very same reason why our solar system can’t entirely avoid the
deep elliptical association that had been previously established with
Sirius.
So, either there’s something absolutely dead wrong or voodooish about
the physics of orbital mechanics, or we are in fact stuck with
orbiting Sirius even at its greatly reduced mass, for the same reason
Sedna with its way more than sufficient escape velocity is stuck with
orbiting our sun.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Chris.B
<snip watery, textual diarrhoea>
>
> Brenda Guffaw (whatever)
So? Which part of off-topic gobshite don't you understand?
Are you trying to outdo St Kelleher on post count?
Or are you simply Kelleher's bastard child?
Keep it brief. We're fast running out of toilet paper!
Brad Guth
represented by Sirius, then by all means we should not have held onto
the tidal radii that’s represented by Sedna and other similar
elliptical companions. So what’s wrong or conditional with orbital
mechanics?
Is there another pervasive or dominate factor of dark matter or dark
energy that orbital mechanics simply can’t deal with?
Contributor “palsing” has been telling us:
“Captures are possible, of course; many of the solar system's moons,
after all, are captures... but I AM saying that a capture specifically
between Sirius and our solar system is a mathematical impossibility.”
Firstly I totally agree that a number of items within our solar system
are those captured, but we’ll just have to see about that
“mathematical impossibility” of our solar system being captured by
Sirius, because to me it honestly doesn’t seem as so insurmountably
impossible for our solar system to have been captured, especially
considering the nearby original molecular/nebula mass of <3e37 kg, the
million plus year exposure and the fact that we’re still not headed
away from Sirius, plus there’s simply no telling where that Sirius
molecular/nebula cloud was to begin with as of 260+ million years
ago. 7.6 km/sec may have become sufficient escape velocity with the
current reduced mass and sufficient distance, although all things
Sirius didn’t always represent such little influence, not that our
trajectory or velocity seems sufficient anyway.
With <6% of stars being recorded as white dwarfs should have to
suggest a fair number of rogue planets exist, because that’s
suggesting <30e9 WDs within our galaxy that were initially of equal or
greater mass than our sun, and if given on average only one surviving
planet per WD is suggesting a whopping 30e9 rogue planets (some w/
moons) that had to go somewhere. I would have to think the average
number of surviving planets is something more like 3 or 4 per WD, and
our latest IR spectrum telescopes should manage to detect those as
large or greater than Venus which so happens to emit 20.5 w/m2, though
even Earth at 128 mw/m2 shouldn’t be all that invisible, although the
minimal heat flow from our physically dark moon at perhaps 8<16 mw/m2
could be a little tough to detect because of its smaller size and
especially if its thick crust were to become icy (say covered by 64 km
of ice and carbon buckyballs) should manage to further insulate and
keep that average heat flux well below 8 mw/m2, which is still
relatively hot compared to the surrounding ISM of perhaps offering at
most 0.1 mw/m2 (including IR & UV).
Apparently there’s also a few black holes of <1e9 Ms going rogue, as
headed away from their galactic cores which likely had multiple ultra
massive <1e10 Ms BHs interacting, so perhaps these too are likely
dragging a few spare solar systems along for the intergalactic ride,
and there’s no telling where those fast moving items will eventually
end up. I can imagine that a few galaxies of <5e44 kg could manage to
spare and thus shed multiple rogue BHs that have since been on their
way towards becoming either pup-galaxies of their own, or should
eventually encounter and merge with whatever is in their path. For
all we know, Andromeda has tossed a few of those BH suckers our way,
and perhaps by the time we know with any certainty it’ll already be
too late.
Not to continually nitpick at this pesky capture thing, however,
besides our reddish icy Sedna that’s not going away (even though it
should), there’s also the likes of 2005-VX3/damocloid(icy asteroid) of
112 km diameter, as perhaps worth at most 1.5e18 kg that’s still
hanging with us all the way out to 2275.5 AU(3.4e14 m) that’s offering
a pathetic tidal radii binding force of merely 1.71e9 N, and obviously
even it is not going away from our solar system's tidal radii grip.
It seems this is representing a current Sirius:XV3 ratio as having
nearly 8.3e7:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we
seem to be headed back towards that drastically down-sized mass at 7.6
km/s and unavoidably accelerating, pretty much exactly as any
elliptical Newtonian orbital trek should.
That original mass ratio as offering a gravity tidal binding force and
subsequent capture link between Sol and Sirius, as such used to have
something near 4.28e6 fold as much mass as it has nowadays to work
with, and there’s still no objective way of telling how close we
actually were to begin with.
Ongoing corrections and somewhat better math:
Apparently a stellar and planet producing molecular/nebula cloud
doesn’t get blown away from the initial fusion of its protostar(s) any
too slowly. Instead it’s more likely a soft nova taking place within
the first cloud radii, and as such the initial cloud expansion and the
subsequent 1r(64 ly) exit velocity of <20,000 km/sec could be
expected.
For example, the estimated 3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud that gave
birth to those nearby Sirius protostars of at least 12.5 Ms, likely
had their cloud radii of at least 64 ly to start with, and in order to
disperse that volume of mass within any reasonable amount of time is
going to require that cloud radii to increase by roughly 0.1%/yr, and
that’s worth .064 ly or 6.05e11 km/year, which works out to 19184 km/
sec (not the previous estimate of 3000 km/sec that I’d once
suggested).
In order to double that cloud radius from 64 to 128 ly, at a starting
velocity of 19,184 km/sec takes roughly another 1500 years as it slows
down, or given a thousand years if it were constant at the same 1r
starting velocity. The average cloud density that needs to include
those terrific stellar CMEs is likely going to become worth >1e4/cm3
(clumps exceeding 1e7/cm3) of rather nicely heated molecular plus
whatever CME stuff to start off with.
In other words, if using a constant outflux velocity and a million
years after those new stars started pushing away their remainder/
surplus volume of molecular/nebula mass, the radii will have increased
by only 6.4e4 ly (with us pretty much situated dead center), and when
given 260 million years offers 16.64e6 ly as long as the exit velocity
remained unchanged. However, at most the Sirius molecular cloud radii
has likely expanded something less than a million light years out, and
never the less we’re situated pretty much dead center within that
expanding molecular/nebula sphere that’s probably making the exact
same red-shifted noise as the CMBR.
At 64 ly to start off with (as if our solar system were situated
initially just outside of that original molecular/nebula cloud),
whereas that’s only looking at our receiving a thousand fold more
proton density and getting traumatized by roughly 32 times the average
solar CME velocity that our own sun tosses at us, and I’d bet that
it’s also at the very least twice as hot and kept UV saturated as well
as representing a sustained molecular interaction that’s going to
affect our terrestrial environment for a good thousand years, because
that’s exactly what progenitor stars do if not worse things to their
surroundings.
Perhaps by the time that molecular/nebula cloud doubles its first
radii (2r and say 2500 years from the initial stellar fusion kickoff)
the molecular exit velocity will have subsided down to the dull roar
of roughly half of its initial 1r shockwave velocity that took roughly
the first thousand years to initially accomplish, and at 4r could
become half that of the 2r exit velocity due to the core and other
half (1.5e37 kg) portion of molecular/nebula as still representing
significant gravity that’s directly behind and always working as an
unfocused weak force against cloud expansion, as well as the initial
stellar fusion backing off. This method might suggest as little as
having 10000 km/sec available at 2r, then falling off to 5000 km/sec
at 4r, 2500 km/sec at 8r and perhaps only 312 km/sec at 64r (4096 ly).
I’ll likely have to further research and run through these numbers a
few more times, as well as having to revise my topic in order to suit
what I’d like to interpret, but you should at least get the basic gist
of what this topic means and the implications as to this nearby event
and subsequent cosmic evolution of Sirius having affected our local
environment, starting as of roughly 260 million years ago.
In other words, it’s probably not a coincidence of random happenstance
that Sirius emerged and UV illuminated us at roughly the exact same
time as our global environment and a few other considerations about
our solar system changed forever. There’s even a good chance that the
terrific Sirius UV illumination was for a time every bit as great as
that of what our sun was providing. In other words to plants and some
animals that respond to UV, we had two suns illuminating us.
Discrediting Newton seems to be the tall faith-based order of the
mainstream status-quo day, because even at 1024 light years requires
20.3 km/sec escape velocity in order that our solar system to stay
clear of being influenced by any such 3e37 kg mass of a nearby
molecular/nebula cloud. Of course that also requires that we’re
either running at least parallel or much less not heading into it or
being overtaken. Gee whiz, as is what could possibly go wrong?
The Andromeda galaxy at <2e42 kg and a radii of <7.5e4 light years
will become worth ~300 km/s escape velocity at 500,000 light years
distance, however especially capture worthy when our galactic mass is
added into the formula, which of course only works to our escape
velocity advantage if we’re not headed towards or being overtaken,
because the closer we get the greater that escape velocity requirement
becomes. So, if we don’t get nailed by Andromeda on this pass, sure
thing the next time around isn’t going to be so lucky.
In the case of Sirius, the available mass as is is hardly worth
anything compared to what its surroundings started out as worth <3e37
kg, so perhaps we’re gradually losing our orbital attachment or
elliptical capture by Sirius, and that’s a very good thing unless
you’re into perpetual doom and gloom predictions.
Then we have the elliptical velocity variance of 12.4:1 (4.64>.374 km/
sec) of Sedna, and its kinetic energy difference of 154:1 seems rather
impressive. So what’s the special voodoo of conditional physics
that's keeping our interaction with Sirius down to such a dull roar,
especially from way back when the Sirius molecular/nebula threat used
to be worth <3e37 kg?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100414224102AAxaj50
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
In other words, how can something like Sedna and even those more
extreme items remain attracted to and thus captured by our sun when
they each have excessive escape velocity as is, while at the same time
our sun supposedly can’t be attracted to or much less tidal captured
by Sirius that started out worth <3e37 kg? (the escape velocity at
1024 ly = 20.33 km/sec, or 81.3 km/sec if that were us parked right
next to its 64 ly radii molecular/nebula cloud)
Perhaps it’s because of their voodoo conditional physics is why I
still can’t grasp their form of mainstream conditional reality that
gets to exclude or obfuscate whatever rocks their public funded fleet
of boats.
Did our solar system always have enough escape velocity?
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
Offering a direct analogy of a stable elliptical orbit that’s
captured within our solar system is that of Sedna/90377 ~ 3e21 kg, of
an exotic reddish mineral saturated icy planetoid that can’t seem to
get away from the past any better than our solar system is keeping
itself away from Sirius.
Orbital trek velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
942 AU 374 m/sec (escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
76 AU 4640 m/sec (escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Obviously Sedna is moving itself along at better than 150 fold faster
than the required escape velocity at its furthest elliptical
trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550 fold faster
escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why doesn’t Sedna
just sail off into the wild black yonder?
Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was worth
considerably more than Sedna, and the Sirius mass only gets much worse
as we go back in time, such as prior to its considerable molecular/
nebula cloud getting blown away.
Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
m/sec.
Sirius at <3e37 kg and 64 ly, escape velocity becomes worth 81.3 km/
sec.
As you can plainly see there’s supposedly no problem, as of our solar
system nowadays that’s supposedly closing in at the radial velocity of
-7.6 km/sec, thereby we’re supposedly escaping whatever Sirius has to
offer unless those trajectory estimates of proper motion are way the
hell off. However, in the beginning as of 260 million years earlier
when all things Sirius for more than a million years represented a
terrific molecular/nebula cloud worth <3e37 kg, is when our rogue
solar system independence or freedom from all things Sirius should
have been technically impossible (even at 128 light years = 57.5 km/
sec, or if you like 1024 ly = 20+ km/sec might suggest that we never
had the independence that we’ve been systematically indoctrinated
about).
Of course it would be nice if our solar system had been at least
running as parallel or ideally somewhat away from Sirius, but sadly
that hasn’t been the case. Instead we have two orbital trajectories
getting modified as each closes in on one another, and that’s pretty
much exactly as the Sedna elliptical path manages to survive its
multiple encounters within 76 AU of our sun, as somehow never losing
its tidal radii bound association in spite of Sedna always having more
than sufficient escape velocity.
Obviously the current all-inclusive mass of Sirius and its surrounding
of whatever’s remaining of nebula/molecular gas that’s held within 1
ly, plus whatever its local Oort cloud of dark and icy debris should
no longer maintain its original grip on our solar system. However, no
such luck, perhaps for the same voodoo physics reasons why Sedna and
other far reaching Oort cloud items are not able to escape our solar
system is perhaps the very same reason why our solar system can’t
entirely avoid the deep elliptical association that had been
previously established with Sirius.
So, either there’s something absolutely dead wrong or voodooish about
the physics of orbital mechanics, or we are in fact stuck with
orbiting Sirius even at its greatly reduced mass, for the same reason
Sedna with its way more than sufficient escape velocity is stuck with
orbiting our sun as though it’s being electrically and/or magnetically
attracted, because it sure as hell isn’t being held by gravity.
Brad Guth
Did our solar system always have enough escape velocity?
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
Offering a direct analogy of a stable elliptical orbit that’s
captured within our solar system is that of Sedna/90377 ~ 3e21 kg, of
an exotic reddish mineral saturated icy planetoid that can’t seem to
get away from the past any better than our solar system is keeping
itself away from Sirius.
Orbital trek velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
942 AU 374 m/sec (escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
76 AU 4640 m/sec (escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Obviously Sedna is moving itself along at better than 150 fold faster
than the required escape velocity at its furthest elliptical
trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550 fold faster
escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why doesn’t Sedna
just sail off into the wild black yonder?
Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was worth
considerably more than Sedna, and the Sirius mass only gets much worse
as we go back in time, such as prior to its considerable molecular/
nebula cloud getting blown away.
Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
m/sec.
Sirius at <3e37 kg and 64 ly, escape velocity becomes worth 81.3 km/
sec.
As you can plainly see there’s supposedly no problem, as of our solar
system nowadays that’s supposedly closing in at the radial velocity of
-7.6 km/sec, thereby we’re supposedly escaping whatever Sirius has to
offer unless those trajectory estimates of proper motion are way the
hell off. However, in the beginning as of 260 million years earlier
when all things Sirius for more than a million years represented a
terrific molecular/nebula cloud worth <3e37 kg, is when our rogue
solar system independence or freedom from all things Sirius should
have been technically impossible (even at 128 light years = 57.5 km/
sec, or if you like 1024 ly = 20+ km/sec might suggest that we never
had the independence that we’ve been systematically indoctrinated
about).
Of course it would be nice if our solar system had been at least
running as parallel or ideally somewhat away from Sirius, but sadly
that hasn’t been the case. Instead we have two orbital trajectories
getting modified as each closes in on one another, and that’s pretty
much exactly as the Sedna elliptical path manages to survive its
multiple encounters within 76 AU of our sun, as somehow never losing
its tidal radii bound association in spite of Sedna always having more
than sufficient escape velocity.
Obviously the current all-inclusive mass of Sirius and its surrounding
of whatever’s remaining of nebula/molecular gas that’s held within 1
ly, plus whatever its local Oort cloud of dark and icy debris should
no longer maintain its original grip on our solar system. However, no
such luck, perhaps for the same voodoo physics reasons why Sedna and
other far reaching Oort cloud items are not able to escape our solar
system is perhaps the very same reason why our solar system can’t
entirely avoid the deep elliptical association that had been
previously established with Sirius.
So, either there’s something absolutely dead wrong or voodooish about
the physics of orbital mechanics, or we are in fact stuck with
orbiting Sirius even at its greatly reduced mass, for the same reason
Sedna with its way more than sufficient escape velocity is stuck with
orbiting our sun as though it’s being electrically and/or magnetically
attracted, because it sure as hell isn’t being held by gravity.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Sam Wormley
> Or if you prefer to use the �Cosmological Ice Ages�, because that also
> works for Henry Kroll and myself. It seems long period double/triple
> stars are not that uncommon nor without their ability of capturing
> another nearby star, especially while in their proto-star molecular/
> nebula cloud phase that can last a million plus years.
Distance is too great and the gravitation too weak. Sirius and the
Sun are not in bound orbits with respect to each other.
Brad Guth
Basically stated; if our solar system can somehow via voodoo physics
manage to hold onto the likes of Sedna, then it should be ever so much
easier for Sirius to hold onto our solar system as a local long period
star that was captured. In other words, our solar system didn't
capture Sirius nearly as much as Sirius captured us, which started
those ice age and thawing cycles, as well as having contributed items
into our solar system.
I believe we're in the last thaw this planet w/moon will ever see, so
get used to it. Given another thousand years and most all of
Greenland will be nearly ice free, as well as most of Florida will be
submerged. In other words, you win some, you lose some.
If we're lucky, by then our hydrocarbon reserves will be nearly
exhausted and/or too spendy to utilize, and perhaps other cleaner
energy alternatives will be sustaining the 24+ billion humans that our
planet can only provide for half of those.
~ BG
Brad Guth
> On 10/17/10 11:33 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > works for Henry Kroll and myself. It seems long period double/triple
> > stars are not that uncommon nor without their ability of capturing
> > another nearby star, especially while in their proto-star molecular/
> > nebula cloud phase that can last a million plus years.
>
> Distance is too great and the gravitation too weak. Sirius and the
> Sun are not in bound orbits with respect to each other.
Go right ahead and tell that to Sedna and more than a few other items
that don't seem to respect your weak force of gravity excuse.
Did our solar system really have enough escape velocity?
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
Offering a direct analogy of a stable elliptical orbit that’s
captured within our solar system is that of Sedna/90377 ~ 3e21 kg, of
an exotic reddish mineral saturated icy planetoid that can’t seem to
get away from the past any better than our solar system is keeping
itself away from Sirius.
Orbital trek velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
942 AU 374 m/sec (escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
76 AU 4640 m/sec (escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Obviously Sedna is moving itself along at better than 150 fold faster
than the required escape velocity at its furthest elliptical
trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550 fold faster
escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why doesn’t Sedna
just sail off into the wild black yonder?
Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was worth
considerably more than Sedna, and the Sirius mass only gets much worse
as we go back in time, such as prior to its considerable molecular/
nebula cloud getting blown away.
Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
m/sec.
Sirius at <3e37 kg and 64 ly, escape velocity becomes worth 81.3 km/
sec.
As you can plainly see there’s supposedly no problem, as of our solar
system nowadays that’s supposedly closing in at the radial velocity of
-7.6 km/sec, thereby we’re supposedly escaping whatever Sirius has to
offer unless those trajectory estimates of proper motion are way the
hell off. However, in the beginning as of 260 million years earlier
when all things Sirius for more than a million years represented a
terrific molecular/nebula cloud worth <3e37 kg, is when our rogue
solar system independence or freedom from all things Sirius should
have been technically impossible (even at 128 light years = 57.5 km/
sec, or if you like 1024 ly = 20+ km/sec might suggest that we never
had the independence that we’ve been systematically indoctrinated
about).
Of course it would be nice if our solar system had been at least
running as parallel or ideally somewhat away from Sirius, but sadly
that hasn’t been the case. Instead we have two orbital trajectories
getting modified as each closes in on one another, and that’s pretty
much exactly as the Sedna elliptical path manages to survive its
multiple encounters within 76 AU of our sun, as somehow never losing
its tidal radii bound association in spite of Sedna always having more
than sufficient escape velocity.
Obviously the current all-inclusive mass of Sirius and its surrounding
of whatever’s remaining of nebula/molecular gas that’s held within 1
ly, plus whatever its local Oort cloud of dark and icy debris should
no longer maintain its original grip on our solar system. However, no
such luck, perhaps for the same voodoo physics reasons why Sedna and
other far reaching Oort cloud items are not able to escape our solar
system is perhaps the very same reason why our solar system can’t
entirely avoid the deep elliptical association that had been
previously established with Sirius.
So, either there’s something absolutely dead wrong or voodooish about
the physics of orbital mechanics, or we are in fact stuck with
orbiting Sirius even at its greatly reduced mass, for the same reason
Sedna with its way more than sufficient escape velocity is stuck with
orbiting our sun as though it’s being electrically and/or magnetically
attracted, because it sure as hell isn’t being held by gravity.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Brad Guth
represented by Sirius, then by all means we should not have held onto
similar elliptical companions. So what’s wrong or conditional with
orbital mechanics?
Is there another pervasive or dominate factor of dark matter or dark
energy that Newtonian orbital mechanics simply can’t deal with?
Contributor “palsing” has been telling us:
“Captures are possible, of course; many of the solar system's moons,
after all, are captures... but I AM saying that a capture specifically
between Sirius and our solar system is a mathematical impossibility.”
Firstly, I have to totally agree that a number of items within our
Did our solar system always have enough escape velocity?
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
Offering a direct analogy of a stable elliptical orbit that’s
captured within our solar system is that of Sedna/90377 ~ 3e21 kg, of
an exotic reddish mineral saturated icy planetoid that can’t seem to
get away from the past any better than our solar system is keeping
itself away from Sirius.
Orbital trek velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
942 AU 374 m/sec (escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
76 AU 4640 m/sec (escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Obviously Sedna is moving itself along at better than 150 fold faster
than the required escape velocity at its furthest elliptical
trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550 fold faster
escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why doesn’t Sedna
just sail off into the wild black yonder?
Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was worth
considerably more than Sedna, and the Sirius mass only gets much worse
as we go back in time, such as prior to its considerable molecular/
nebula cloud getting blown away.
Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
m/sec.
Sirius at <3e37 kg and 64 ly, escape velocity becomes worth 81.3 km/
sec.
As you can plainly see there’s supposedly no problem, as of our solar
system nowadays that’s supposedly closing in at the radial velocity of
-7.6 km/sec, thereby we’re supposedly escaping whatever Sirius has to
offer unless those trajectory estimates of proper motion are simply
way the hell off. However, in the beginning as of 260 million years
earlier when all things Sirius for more than a million years
represented a terrific molecular/nebula cloud worth <3e37 kg, is when
our rogue solar system independence or freedom from all things Sirius
should have been technically impossible (even at 128 light years =
57.5 km/sec, or if you like to ponder 1024 ly = 20+ km/sec might
suggest that we never had the independence that we’ve been
systematically indoctrinated about).
Of course it would be nice if our solar system had been at least
running as parallel or ideally somewhat away from Sirius trajectory,
but sadly that hasn’t been the case. Instead we have two orbital
trajectories getting modified as each closes in on one another, and
that’s pretty much exactly as the Sedna elliptical path manages to
survive its multiple encounters within 76 AU of our sun, as somehow
never losing its tidal radii bound association in spite of Sedna
always having more than sufficient escape velocity. In other words;
what the hell is holding onto Sedna?
Obviously the current all-inclusive mass of Sirius and its surrounding
of whatever’s remaining of nebula/molecular gas that’s held within 1
ly, plus whatever its local Oort cloud of dark and icy debris should
no longer maintain its original grip on our solar system. However, no
such luck, perhaps for the same voodoo physics reasons why Sedna and
other far reaching Oort cloud items are not able to escape our solar
system is perhaps the very same reason why our solar system can’t
entirely avoid the deep elliptical association that had been
previously established with Sirius.
So, either there’s something absolutely dead wrong or voodooish about
the physics of orbital mechanics, or we are in fact stuck with
orbiting Sirius even at its greatly reduced mass, for the same reason
Sedna with its way more than sufficient escape velocity is stuck with
orbiting our sun as though it’s being electrically and/or magnetically
attracted, because it sure as hell isn’t being held by gravity.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
On Oct 17, 9:33 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
Brad Guth
so much easier for Sirius to hold onto our solar system as a local
didn't capture Sirius nearly as much as Sirius captured us, which most
likely started those ice age and thawing cycles, as well as having
contributed items into our solar system.
I believe we are in the last thaw this planet w/moon will ever see, so
get used to it. Given another thousand years and most all of
Greenland will be nearly ice free, as well as most of Florida will be
submerged. In other words, you win some, you lose some.
If we're lucky, by then our hydrocarbon reserves will be nearly
exhausted and/or too spendy to utilize, and perhaps other cleaner
energy alternatives will be sustaining the 24+ billion humans that our
planet can only adequately provide for roughly half of those. So, we
best figure out this interplanetary and even interstellar travel stuff
real soon, or else.
~ BG
Brad Guth
Perhaps our solar system simply could not avoid the original Sirius
attraction and subsequent long period elliptical bound capture of our
solar system that took place as of 260 million years ago, at least not
any better than our Milky Way can avoid getting rear-ended or at least
sucker-punched by Andromeda, because everything out there (including
rogue intergalactic stuff) is in orbit around something, even if it’s
just “The Great Attractor” as a cosmic wormhole that doesn’t fit into
the scheme of anything Alan Guth has figured out, or otherwise we’re
just being held tight by the substantial core and disk associated mass
of our galaxy. As far as I can tell, it’s simply impossible to remain
as isolated and independently rogue forever, because sooner or later
something else gets within range of the mutual tidal radii and
trajectories get unavoidably perturbed or revised, including some
captured as being within the many possibilities, and unfortunately
Andromeda isn’t the only item that’s closing in on us, just like ours
is not the only galaxy headed into The Great Attractor.
According to our Sam Wormley:
"Bound" implies elliptical orbits between two stars, i.e., the
orbital eccentricity < 1. For eccentricity > 1, i.e., hyperbolic
orbits, any two bodies are not "bound" to each other even
though they have gravitational influence on each other.
: The sun didn't have to escape, because it was never bound to
: any other star. Hyperbolic trajectories are one time encounters.
Thanks for that constructive feedback and better use of words to go
along with your faith-based approved denial and obfuscation policy
that likes to pretend that we’re all alone. Too bad that you and
other parrots still can’t muster up any 3D interactive orbital
simulations to shock and awe the rest of us into submission, so that
we can make a few well educated adjustments and otherwise easily go
back and forward in time, just like JPL does all the time with
captured satellites or whatever plans of getting new missions captured
while utilizing the least amount of energy.
Hyperbolic trajectories are typically escape trajectories unless
there’s a third significant body involved, however it doesn’t seem as
though our solar system has ever managed to entirely escape Sirius,
unless it’s just recently getting to that point because of the great
amounts of mass reductions is what allows our existing velocity to
escape whatever amount of mass remains associated with those Sirius
stars. The more likely conventional Kepler elliptical captured orbit
is what I believe we’re still dealing with, and is there really any
doubt as to what sort of million plus year gravitational influence a
3e37 kg body of molecular/nebula mass is going to have on our nearby
solar system?
Try to remember, unless there were preexisting gravity seeds or
external causations via nearby supernova compressions, it was likely a
good million some odd years before those Sirius stars managed to
emerge and proceed to blow all else away. Even a 1e37 kg molecular/
nebula mass and its 50 ly radii can't be all that insignificant when
you're parked right next to it, or conceivably even a little into it,
and only worse yet if our galactic orbital trajectory were less than
parallel and closing the gap.
Escape Velocity (did we always have enough escape velocity?)
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
Are you still suggesting that captures are impossible? (because team
Keck, Hubble and most others might not agree with that analogy or
interpretation)
What small percentage of our galaxy has been captured by something
that’s more massive? (if there were only those substantial black holes
from the BB to begin with, would you care to believe at least 99.9%?)
How about on a local solar system limited bases; what percentage of
items have been captured as opposed to their having existed or created
as is from the very get-go?
Most faith-based and politically correct mindsets want to insist that
everything stays exactly the same, as well as insisting that their
singular Big Bang and its forever expansion represents that nothing
ever interacts with anything else or much less ever gets reincarnated
or reformulated as another comparable solar system, much less hosting
wet Eden like planets suitable for naked Goldilocks inhabitants.
However, a properly outfitted tribe of Goldilocks with some technical
expertise actually has a wide range of planets and moons to explore
and even habitat, and with only minimal space travel or directed
panspermia capability that’s similar to ours, means that there’s no
telling how many Goldilocks inhabited or seeded planets and moons are
out there, or even those existing within our solar system. For all we
know, at least part of our global biodiversity was likely imported or
seeded by other Goldilock ETs (aka Rothschild Seans claim being here
as of 70 million years ago), rather than purely created by random
happenstance and/or limited as to purely terrestrial evolution that
has more missing gaps than Muslims having WMD.
All combined, by now there's likely more significant rogue stuff
that's Ceres or larger, than there are stars within our galaxy. As
time goes on there will be an increased number of those WDs and
therefore an increased number of rogue planets and their moons, not to
mention billions of perfectly stable red and brown dwarfs with their
own planets to pick from, and perhaps that’s just on our half of this
galaxy. Close binary stars would have tossed or sent whatever planets
packing as of long before becoming WDs, but that’s only adding to
whatever’s available as rogue items, so it seems the James Webb Space
Telescope is going to be very busy at cataloging such items.
A 10x Jupiter mother planet with moons the size of Earth would
actually be an okay option for going rogue, as long as some degree of
geothermal, nuclear/thorium and local fusion energy was made available
in addition to whatever hydrocarbons necessary for polluting
everything in sight.
Pick a direction, and perhaps on average there's likely a million
perfectly good options within any one degree cone. That's 129.6
billion viable planets or moons to pick from (including whatever’s
rogue), plus whatever the other half of our galaxy has to offer. How
could there not be any possible life elsewhere, especially when taking
other galaxies into account?
This potential of 256 billion worthy considerations per galaxy is not
having to insist that other complex life populated planets or moons
have to be nearly as Goldilocks advanced as us, or even humanoid
populated (their entire biodiversity could be all plant and animal).
But honestly, how hard would it have to be for others being a whole
lot smarter than most of us? (especially when there’s terrestrial
slime-mold and spores that have been smarter about surviving than some
dysfunctional versions of people we know of)
At least contributor “palsing” isn’t afraid to allow "C3 = 0 orbit"
captures by simply reversing the escape velocity formula, and of
course taking the time of whatever nearby gravitational exposures into
account. Obviously Sam Wormley and others of his faith-based
mainstream naysay cabal of perpetual denial and obfuscation want
nothing to ever change, at least not for the better if that means
revising history or worse having to admit they screwed up.
But then we have the elliptical velocity variance of 12.4:1 (4.64>.374
km/sec) of Sedna, and the kinetic energy difference of 154:1 seems
rather impressive. So what’s the special voodoo of conditional
physics that's keeping our interaction with Sirius down to such a dull
roar, especially way back when a million years exposure to the Sirius
molecular/nebula threat used to be worth <3e37 kg?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100414224102AAxaj50
In other words, how can something like Sedna and even more extreme
ranging items as having such excessive escape velocity remain
attracted to and thus captured by our sun, while at the same time we
are being told to believe that our sun supposedly can’t be attracted
to or much less bound/captured by way of anything Sirius that started
out nearby and worth <3e37 kg?
It just doesn’t add up.
~ BG
Brad Guth
As a terrific molecular/nebula cloud creates fast burning stars like
Sirius(B) that goes from bad to worse in a relatively short period of
time, emulating a soft/slow nova as it quickly consumes itself, as
well as getting rid of mass as it converts from its red supergiant
phase into the final remainder as a white dwarf, is when having more
than a few light years separation is a seriously good idea, as well as
your planet having a thick/robust atmosphere is also going to come in
real handy.
Sirius(B) of roughly 260 million years old, is likely classified as a
medium-large white dwarf, as having converted or main sequenced itself
down from >8.5 Ms (possibly 9+) should have been an impressive sight
to behild. There are apparently a few extremely large supernovas like
“SN 2007if” suggesting an extra-massive white dwarf had exceed 2 Ms,
and those sorts of Wolf Rayet stars might have started out as worth
16<32 Ms. Supposedly anything as small and >1.44 Ms is supposed to
become a neutron star that should remain stable, so it’s somewhat
uncertain what happened.
SN 2007if offers further speculation of a possible binary or as
having rogue white dwarfs combining into creating a supernova, forming
into what otherwise requires a WD of 2.1 Ms. Possibly the Wolf Rayet
star that likely started off as a 30 Ms will become a maximum unstable
WD of <2 Ms.
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/03/mystery-of-how-white-dwarf-star-system-could-exceed-mass-limit.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf%E2%80%93Rayet_star
The likes of Wolf Rayet (WR-124/M1-67) most certainly can’t be very
old, as perhaps only worth a few million years, possibly as young as
2.5e6 years (a tenth the age of Sirius), and thus when given just
2.5e6 years as having to lose <6.36e14 tonnes/sec is going to sustain
a rather considerable solar wind and packing enough density that’ll
affect most anything within several light years.
http://www.peripatus.gen.nz/astronomy/wolraysta.html
Some WR stars start off as worth <100 Ms, which sort of makes
Sirius(B) as having been kind of a minor pup version at ~9 Ms and
perhaps triggered towards the end by consuming Sirius(C). As long as
Sirius(B) never merges with or draws significant mass away from
Sirius(A), we got nothing to worry about.
Our sun most likely started off as worth <2.6e30 kg and having lost on
average ~ 4e12 kg/sec (obviously there was more initial loss/sec, and
it’s an ongoing process that’s as of lately running at somewhat less
than losing 3e12 kg/sec, could even be down to as little as 1e12 kg/
sec). Our eventual white dwarf will likely become the size of Mars,
as worth somewhat less than medium sized at 0.25<.33 Ms (possibly
ending as great as .5 Ms, though most don’t believe it’ll ever retain
that much mass).
Just to give us some better idea about this. If our sun were having
to lose another 1.5e30 kg within the next 5 billion years requires an
average loss of 9.5e12 kg/sec. Obviously the red giant phase and the
final demise of converting into a white dwarf is when the vast bulk of
stellar mass has to be let go. The exact same thing happened for
Sirius(B), except much worse because of its original mass and the much
shorter timeline.
Mainstream published astronomy and K12 taught astrophysics would
suggest that our sun is currently losing at most only 4e9 kg/sec,
however at that passive rate it’ll take 4.5 trillion years to
sufficiently deplete itself in order to turn into a red giant before
ever becoming the 0.25<.5 Ms white dwarf, and most of us should
realize that kind of main sequence process is not going to take nearly
that much time. However, perhaps using the stellar mass loss average
of <4e9 tonnes/sec works about right, or at the very conservative
least using the average mass reduction average of 3e9 tonnes/sec
should not be excluded.
Either way, it’s looking as though our Sirius(B) was originally worth
at least 8.5<9.5 Ms, as well as having to lose an average 2.6e12
tonnes/sec, and its dynamic outflux at the red supergiant end of its
accelerated main sequence phase that was about to convert into a
stable WD, likely gave off those helium flashover solar winds of
nearly 20000 km/s, which likely simmered down to something less than a
dull roar of perhaps as little as 2000 km/sec by the time such winds
interacted with our nearby solar system, and helped to blow away
whatever surviving planets that had already been released from their
original Sirius gravity binding capture, because there’s no way any
star as having been so quickly reduced to 1/8th mass is ever going to
keep its planets.
With <6% of stars reported as being white dwarfs should suggest a fair
number of rogue planets must exist, because that’s suggesting <30e9
WDs within our galaxy, and if given only one surviving planet per WD
is 30e9 rogue planets that had to go somewhere. When our sun ends as
a white dwarf, there well be at least 6 planets plus all the other
stuff set free, and because our sun is below average seems to suggest
that our galaxy likely has at least 1e11 rogue items available, and
that number could even be as great as 1e12 if we included all
significant items of Ceres or larger.
The latest James Webb Space Telescope that’s capable of doing an
extensive IR survey should help spot and catalog these rogue and
relatively cool galactic items, as well as a few those large
intergalactic items that got pulled out by an escaping massive enough
star or rogue black hole. With a good supercomputer and loads of
trajectory data, interactive 3D orbital simulations should be capable
of suggesting where certain rogue items (including clouds of
relatively cool molecular/nebula mass) well end up. Fortunately,
>99.9999999999% of whatever’s out there will never interact with our
solar system, whereas it’s only of what the existing nearby stuff like
Sirius has yet to offer, that we may need to pay some attention to in
order to better understand the past and of what’s to come.
Brad Guth Usenet, Blog and Google document pages:
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
Michael Moroney
>Orbital velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
>942 AU 374 m/sec (escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
> 76 AU 4640 m/sec (escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Check your math, Guthball.
>Obviously Sedna is moving itself along at better than 150 fold faster
>than the required escape velocity at its furthest elliptical
>trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550 fold faster
>escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why doesn’t Sedna
>just sail off into the wild black yonder?
Sedna's average orbital speed of 1.04 km/sec is less than its escape
velocity. Once you get your math right.
>Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was worth
>considerably more than Sedna,
yet it is so much farther away.
> and it only gets much worse as we go
>back in time.
You mean when Sirius was even further away?
>Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
>m/sec.
Which is less than the sun-Sirius relative velocity, meaning the sun
already exceeds Sirius escape velocity, therefore your ravings of
the sun/Sirius being co-orbital are just that, ravings.
Sirius at <3e37 kg
Absurd. The Sirius system is only about three times the mass of the sun.
(well, you did use the "less than" sign. Should have used the "much
less than" sign («))
Brad Guth
wrote:
My goodness, talk about mainstream obfuscation and denial of being in
denial.
btw; it's not just my math. You should learn how to read and
comprehend at least half as well as you take gold stars away from my
topic.
~ BG
Brad Guth
This topic of "Why can’t our solar system escape Sirius" or “The
Cosmological Thaw from Sirius” is not about my being another brown-
nosed clown or parrot of the mainstream status quo, because if it
were, what would be the point?
I’m trying to connect a few public-funded dots of research and
accepted orbital math that’ll suggest what happened to our terrestrial
environment starting as of 260 some odd million years ago, and then
again roughly 60 some odd million years ago, as well as possibly
having something to do with our solar system obtaining Venus and our
moon in addition to being the primary cause of our ice-age
cosmological cycles.
Those pretending that Sirius never amounted to anything and was never
nearby are just bluffing their closed mindset butts off because, they
got absolutely nothing that proves or even computer simulates anything
of the sort, just like they can’t prove when Earth got most of its
seasonal tilt or the moon.
Astrophysics and the usual hoards of their devout followers is always
changing its tune and its tap-dance, almost every time any new and
improved space telescope or even terrestrial based astronomy gets a
better look-see or those enhanced instrument readings. Even the most
devout relativity lovers of all things Einstein are simply without a
clue as to why their precious theory doesn't always hold true,
especially when those pesky sunspot cycles and significant cosmic
events seem to alter the local atomic/radioactive rate of decay, and
otherwise reported that a scientific DR/SR qualified clock runs faster
when placed on top of a mountain (shouldn't it run slower if it's in a
location that’s moving faster, or is intergalactic time really that
much because it's the furthest away from gravity, and perhaps
otherwise having the least surrounding protection from whatever cosmic
energy).
Of course, our galaxy is supposedly moving at near c with respect to
those most distant galaxies, and so what gives with that sort of
velocity affecting or rather seemingly not affecting our precious GR/
SR certified clocks or whatever we can manage to observe?
In other words; How much faster or slower is intergalactic time? (say
if our atomic clock were resting at 1e9 ly from the nearest galaxy)
Otherwise, how about considering the influence of cosmic and solar
radiation (aka quantum energy and stellar magnetic factors) as forcing
the local nuclear/atomic radioactive rate of decay, as being at least
partly the case of the GR/SR interpretation?
Some of the more impressive CMEs are not exactly short-term events,
instead represent a great deal of ejected mass (<1e14 kg) along with
fast solar winds (<3000 km/sec), loads of initial X-rays and even a
little gamma with 24+ hours and even 10+ days worth of excessive
protons from start to finish that interacts badly with Earth, along
with solar magnetic related forces that seem to interact and thus
affect radioactive decay in addition to such energy doing collateral
damage to our global energy grids and data infrastructure that’s not
exactly immune. Keeping in mind that our is somewhat less than
average and relatively passive, especially when compared to those
Sirius stars that only gets a whole lot worse as we go back in time.
http://projectworldawareness.com/2010/10/terrifying-scientific-discovery-strange-emissions-by-sun-are-suddenly-mutating-matter/
“”Something impossible has happened. Yet the “impossible” has been
proven to be true. Laboratories around the globe have confirmed that
the rate of radioactive decay—once thought to be a constant and a
bedrock of science—is no longer a constant.””
And there's lots more fun and scary stuff to read unless you think
that your closed mindset would only self-destruct or implode. The
same goes for figuring out why the likes of Sedna hasn’t flown the
coop (so to speak), might offer clues as to why we can’t so easily
shake loose of Sirius.
~ BG
Brad Guth
play by the rules.
Or if you prefer to use the “Cosmological Ice Ages”, because that also
works for Henry Kroll and myself. It seems long period double/triple
stars are not actually all that uncommon nor without their ability of
capturing another nearby star, especially while in their initial proto-
star molecular/nebula cloud phase that can last a good million plus
years is what puts celestial mechanics at risk.
Sirius Escape Velocity (did our solar system always have enough escape
velocity?)
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
Offering a direct analogy of a stable elliptical orbit that’s
captured within our solar system is that of Sedna/90377 ~ 3e21 kg, of
an exotic reddish mineral saturated icy planetoid that can’t seem to
get away from the past any better than our solar system is keeping
itself away from Sirius.
On Oct 18, 8:35 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
: Sedna's orbital eccentricity about the sun is 0.8527 which
: makes it an elliptical orbit bound to the sun. Sirius does
: NOT have a closed orbit with the sun. The Earth's tug on the
: sun is more than a million times stronger than that of Sirius
: or any other star.
Sedna at 76 AU has more than 550 times the required escape velocity,
and yet it's still here, when by your own rules of mainstream peer
accepted orbital mechanics, it shouldn't be.
Orbital eccentricity velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
942 AU 374 m/sec (actual escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
76 AU 4640 m/sec (actual escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Obviously icy Sedna has been moving itself along at better than 150
fold faster than the required escape velocity at its furthest
elliptical trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550
fold faster escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why
doesn’t Sedna just sail off into the wild black yonder?
Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was still worth
considerably more than Sedna, and its concentration or collective mass
only gets much worse as we go back in time, such as prior to its
considerable molecular/nebula cloud getting blown away is when that
collective mass was worth <3e37 kg.
Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
m/sec.
Sirius at <3e37 kg and 64 ly, escape velocity becomes worth 81.3 km/
sec.
As you can plainly see there’s supposedly no problem, as of our solar
system nowadays that’s supposedly closing in at the radial velocity of
-7.6 km/sec, thereby we’re capable of escaping whatever Sirius has to
offer, unless those trajectory estimates of proper celestial motion
are way the hell off and those same voodoo escape velocity physics
don’t apply. However, in the beginning as of 260 million years ago
when all things Sirius for more than a million years represented a
terrific molecular/nebula cloud worth <3e37 kg, is when our rogue
solar system independence or freedom from all things Sirius should
have been technically impossible (even at 128 light years = 57.5 km/
sec, or if you like using 1024 ly = 20+ km/sec might suggest that we
simply never had the rogue independence that we’ve been systematically
indoctrinated about).
Of course it would also have been nice if our solar system had been at
least running parallel or ideally somewhat away from Sirius, but sadly
that hasn’t been the case. Instead we have two inner galactic orbital
trajectories getting modified as each closes in on one another, and
that’s pretty much exactly as the Sedna elliptical eccentricity path
manages to survive its multiple encounters within 76 AU of our sun, as
somehow never losing its tidal bound association in spite of Sedna
always having 550 times more than sufficient escape velocity, and
otherwise Sedna never had any horrific molecular/nebula cloud mass to
begin with. In other words, Sedna always had way more than sufficient
escape velocity, and yet it’s still with us.
Obviously the all-inclusive mass of Sirius and its surrounding of
whatever’s remaining of nebula/molecular or stellar CME gas that’s
likely held within 1 ly, plus whatever its local Oort cloud of dark
and icy debris should by rights of orbital mechanics no longer
maintain its original grip on our solar system. However, no such
luck, perhaps for the same voodoo reasons why Sedna and other far
reaching Oort cloud items are not able to escape our solar system is
perhaps the very same reason why our solar system can’t entirely avoid
the deep elliptical association that had been previously established
with Sirius.
So, either there’s something absolutely dead wrong or voodooish about
the conditional physics of Newtonian orbital mechanics, or we are in
fact stuck with orbiting Sirius even at its greatly reduced mass, for
the same reason Sedna with its way more than sufficient escape
velocity is stuck with orbiting our sun. This is actually a very good
analogy of orbital eccentricity that has powers far above that of
Newtonian orbital mechanics.
Brad Guth
works for Henry Kroll and myself. It seems long period double/triple
capturing another nearby star, especially while in their initial proto-
star molecular/nebula cloud phase that can last a good million plus
years is what puts celestial mechanics at risk.
The Cosmological Thaw from Sirius & Celestial Mechanics get to use
conditional voodoo physics, that otherwise doesn't have to play by the
rules, is what I believe is keeping us associated with those Sirius
stars. The mainstream closed mindset clearly doesn’t like this
interpretation or any interpretation other than their own.
Sirius Escape Velocity (did our solar system always have enough escape
velocity?)
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
Offering a direct analogy of a stable elliptical orbit that’s
captured within our solar system is that of Sedna/90377 ~ 3e21 kg, of
an exotic reddish mineral saturated icy planetoid that can’t seem to
get away from the past any better than our solar system is keeping
itself away from Sirius.
On Oct 18, 8:35 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
: Sedna's orbital eccentricity about the sun is 0.8527 which
: makes it an elliptical orbit bound to the sun. Sirius does
: NOT have a closed orbit with the sun. The Earth's tug on the
: sun is more than a million times stronger than that of Sirius
: or any other star.
On Oct 19, 5:37 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...@gmail.com> wrote:
: This is where you are incorrect, Brad. You have blundered.
: Have you forgotten that velocity has direction?
The elliptical trek of Sedna offers pretty much any direction to/from
our sun that you'd care to mention, and otherwise having more than 550
times the required escape velocity to boot. So, why doesn't Sedna go
away?
Sedna at 76 AU offers more than 550 times the required escape
velocity, and yet it's still here, when by your own rules of
mainstream peer accepted orbital mechanics, it shouldn't be.
Orbital eccentricity velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
942 AU 374 m/sec (actual escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
76 AU 4640 m/sec (actual escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Obviously icy Sedna has been moving itself along at better than 150
fold faster than the required escape velocity at its furthest
elliptical trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550
fold faster escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why
doesn’t Sedna just sail off into the wild black yonder?
If we can’t ever get rid of Sedna that has way more than sufficient
exit velocity as is, then how is it even remotely possible for Sirius
to get rid of our solar system?
Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was still worth
considerably more than Sedna, and its concentration or collective mass
only gets much worse as we go back in time, such as prior to its
considerable molecular/nebula cloud getting blown away is when that
collective mass was worth <3e37 kg.
Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
m/sec.
Sirius at <3e37 kg and 64 ly, escape velocity becomes worth 81.3 km/
sec.
As you can plainly see there’s supposedly no problem, as of our solar
system nowadays that’s supposedly closing in at the radial velocity of
-7.6 km/sec, thereby we’re capable of escaping whatever Sirius has to
offer, unless those trajectory estimates of proper celestial motion
are way the hell off and those same voodoo escape velocity physics
don’t apply. However, in the beginning as of 260 million years ago
when all things Sirius for more than a million years represented a
terrific molecular/nebula cloud worth <3e37 kg, is when our rogue
solar system independence or freedom from all things Sirius should
have been technically impossible (even at 128 light years = 57.5 km/
sec, or if you like using 1024 ly = 20+ km/sec might suggest that we
simply never had the rogue independence that we’ve been systematically
indoctrinated about).
Of course it would also have been nice if our solar system had been at
least running parallel or ideally somewhat away from Sirius, but sadly
that hasn’t been the case. Instead we have two inner galactic orbital
trajectories getting modified as each closes in on one another, and
that’s pretty much exactly as the Sedna elliptical eccentricity path
manages to survive its multiple encounters within 76 AU of our sun, as
somehow never losing its tidal bound association in spite of Sedna
always having 550 times more than sufficient escape velocity, and
otherwise Sedna never had any horrific molecular/nebula cloud mass to
begin with. In other words, Sedna always had way more than sufficient
escape velocity, and yet it’s still with us.
Obviously the all-inclusive mass of Sirius and its surrounding of
whatever’s remaining of nebula/molecular or stellar CME gas that’s
likely held within 1 ly, plus whatever its local Oort cloud of dark
and icy debris should by rights of orbital mechanics no longer
maintain its original grip on our solar system. However, no such
luck, perhaps for the same voodoo reasons why Sedna and other far
reaching Oort cloud items are not able to escape our solar system is
perhaps the very same reason why our solar system can’t entirely avoid
the deep elliptical association that had been previously established
with Sirius.
So, either there’s something absolutely dead wrong or voodooish about
the conditional physics of Newtonian orbital mechanics, or we are in
fact stuck with orbiting Sirius even at its greatly reduced mass, for
the same reason Sedna with its way more than sufficient escape
velocity is stuck with orbiting our sun. This is actually a very good
analogy of orbital eccentricity that has powers far above that of
Newtonian orbital mechanics.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Brad Guth
If our solar system is supposedly not bound by the gravitational force
represented by Sirius, then by all means we should not have held onto
the elliptical tidal radii that’s represented by Sedna and other
similar elliptical companions the exceed escape velocity. So what’s
wrong or voodoo conditional with orbital mechanics?
Is there another pervasive or dominate factor of dark matter or dark
energy that Newtonian orbital mechanics simply can’t deal with?
Contributor “palsing” has been telling us:
“Captures are possible, of course; many of the solar system's moons,
after all, are captures... but I AM saying that a capture specifically
between Sirius and our solar system is a mathematical impossibility.”
Firstly, I have to totally agree that a number of items within our
solar system are those captured, but we’ll just have to see about that
“mathematical impossibility” of our solar system being captured by
Sirius, because to me it honestly doesn’t seem as so insurmountably
impossible for our solar system to have been captured, especially
considering the nearby original molecular/nebula mass of <3e37 kg, the
million plus year exposure and the fact that we’re still not headed
away from Sirius, plus there’s simply no telling where that Sirius
molecular/nebula cloud was to begin with as of 260+ million years
ago. 7.6 km/sec may have become sufficient escape velocity with the
current reduced mass and sufficient distance, although all things
Sirius didn’t always represent such little influence, not that our
trajectory or velocity seems sufficient anyway.
With <6% of stars being recorded as white dwarfs should have to
suggest a fair number of rogue planets exist, because that’s
suggesting <30e9 WDs within our galaxy that were initially of equal or
mostly greater mass than our sun, and if given on average only one
surviving planet per WD is suggesting a whopping 30e9 rogue planets
(some w/moons) that had to go somewhere. I would have to think the
average number of surviving planets is something more likely 3 or 4
per WD, and our latest IR spectrum telescopes should manage to detect
those rogue items as large or greater than Venus which so happens to
emit 20.5 w/m2, though even Earth at 128 mw/m2 shouldn’t be all that
invisible, although the minimal heat flow from our physically dark
moon at perhaps 8<16 mw/m2 could be a little tough to detect because
of its smaller size and especially if its thick crust were to become
icy (say covered by 64 km of ice and carbon buckyballs) should manage
to further insulate and keep that average heat flux well below 8 mw/
m2, which is still relatively hot compared to the surrounding ISM of
perhaps offering at most 0.1 mw/m2 (including IR & UV).
Apparently there’s also a few black holes of <1e9 Ms going rogue, as
headed away from their galactic cores which likely had multiple ultra
massive <1e10 Ms BHs interacting, so perhaps these too are likely
dragging a few spare solar systems along for the intergalactic ride,
and there’s no telling where those fast moving items will eventually
end up. I can imagine that a few galaxies of <5e44 kg could manage to
spare and thus shed multiple rogue BHs that have since been on their
way towards becoming either pup-galaxies of their own, or should
eventually encounter and merge with whatever is in their path. For
all we know, Andromeda has tossed a few of those BHs or neutron stars
our way, and perhaps by the time we know with any certainty it’ll
already be too late.
Not to continually nitpick at this pesky capture thing, however,
besides our reddish icy Sedna that’s not going away (even though it
should), there’s also the likes of 2005-VX3/damocloid(icy asteroid) of
112 km diameter, as perhaps worth at most 1.5e18 kg that’s still
hanging with us all the way out to 2275.5 AU(3.4e14 m) that’s offering
a pathetic tidal radii binding force of merely 1.71e9 N, and obviously
even it is not going away from our solar system's tidal radii grip.
It seems this is representing a current Sirius:XV3 ratio as having
nearly 8.3e7:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we
seem to be headed back towards that drastically down-sized mass at 7.6
km/s and unavoidably accelerating, pretty much exactly as any
elliptical Newtonian orbital trek should.
That original mass ratio as offering a gravity tidal binding or
elliptical bound force as the subsequent capture link between Sol and
sec) of Sedna, and its kinetic energy difference of 154:1 seems rather
impressive. So what’s the special voodoo of conditional physics
that's keeping our interaction with Sirius down to such a dull roar,
especially from way back when the Sirius molecular/nebula threat used
to be worth <3e37 kg?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100414224102AAxaj50
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
In other words, how can something like Sedna and even those more
extreme items remain attracted to and thus captured by our sun when
they each have excessive escape velocity as is, while at the same time
our sun supposedly can’t be attracted to or much less tidal captured
by Sirius that started out worth <3e37 kg? (the escape velocity at
1024 ly = 20.33 km/sec, or 81.3 km/sec if that were us parked right
next to its 64 ly radii molecular/nebula cloud)
Perhaps it’s because of their voodoo conditional physics is why I
still can’t grasp their form of mainstream conditional reality that
gets to exclude or obfuscate whatever rocks their public funded fleet
of boats.
Did our solar system always have enough escape velocity?
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
Offering a direct analogy of a stable elliptical orbit that’s
captured within our solar system is that of Sedna/90377 ~ 3e21 kg, of
an exotic reddish mineral saturated icy planetoid that can’t seem to
get away from the past any better than our solar system is keeping
itself away from Sirius.
Orbital trek velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
942 AU 374 m/sec (escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
76 AU 4640 m/sec (escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Obviously Sedna is moving itself along at better than 150 fold faster
than the required escape velocity at its furthest elliptical
trajectory, and otherwise it’s moving at better than 550 fold faster
escape velocity than required at its nearest. So why doesn’t Sedna
just sail off into the wild black yonder?
Last time I’d checked, the Sirius collective mass was worth
considerably more than Sedna, and the Sirius mass only gets much worse
as we go back in time, such as prior to its considerable molecular/
nebula cloud getting blown away.
Sirius at <7e30 kg and 8.6 ly offers an escape velocity of only 107.2
m/sec.
Sirius at <3e37 kg and 64 ly, escape velocity becomes worth 81.3 km/
sec.
As you can plainly see there’s supposedly no problem, as of our solar
system nowadays that’s supposedly closing in at the radial velocity of
-7.6 km/sec, thereby we’re supposedly escaping whatever Sirius has to
offer unless those trajectory estimates of proper motion are simply
way the hell off. However, in the beginning as of 260 million years
earlier when all things Sirius for more than a million years
represented a terrific molecular/nebula cloud worth <3e37 kg, is when
our rogue solar system independence or freedom from all things Sirius
should have been technically impossible (even at 128 light years =
57.5 km/sec, or if you like to ponder 1024 ly = 20+ km/sec might
suggest that we never had the independence that we’ve been
systematically indoctrinated about).
Of course it would be nice if our solar system had been at least
running as parallel or ideally somewhat away from Sirius trajectory,
but sadly that hasn’t been the case. Instead we have two orbital
trajectories getting modified as each closes in on one another, and
that’s pretty much exactly as the Sedna elliptical path manages to
survive its multiple encounters within 76 AU of our sun, as somehow
never losing its tidal radii bound association in spite of Sedna
always having more than sufficient escape velocity. In other words;
what the hell is holding onto Sedna?
Obviously the current all-inclusive mass of Sirius and its surrounding
of whatever’s remaining of nebula/molecular gas that’s held within 1
ly, plus whatever its local Oort cloud of dark and icy debris should
no longer maintain its original grip on our solar system. However, no
such luck, perhaps for the same voodoo physics reasons why Sedna and
other far reaching Oort cloud items are not able to escape our solar
system is perhaps the very same reason why our solar system can’t
entirely avoid the deep elliptical association that had been
previously established with Sirius.
So, either there’s something absolutely dead wrong or voodooish about
the physics of orbital mechanics, or we are in fact stuck with
orbiting Sirius even at its greatly reduced mass, for the same reason
Sedna with its way more than sufficient escape velocity is stuck with
orbiting our sun as though it’s being electrically and/or magnetically
attracted, because it sure as hell isn’t being held by gravity.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Michael Moroney
>Sedna at 76 AU offers more than 550 times the required escape
>velocity, and yet it's still here, when by your own rules of
>mainstream peer accepted orbital mechanics, it shouldn't be.
>Orbital eccentricity velocity of Sedna (12.4:1)
>942 AU 374 m/sec (actual escape velocity = 2.379 m/sec)
> 76 AU 4640 m/sec (actual escape velocity = 8.375 m/sec)
Why do you stick with your broken math? That site you mention
(http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity) makes it
easy to not screw up by accepting mass in solar masses and distance in AU.
Plug in 1 Sun for mass and 947 AU for distance and you get 1.37264 km/s
for the escape velocity at that distance (or 4.832 km/s at 76 AU). Sedna
remains in orbit.
And for Sirius? The escape velocity from it is under 100 m/s. A race
car exceeds the necessary velocity.
Brad Guth
wrote:
Good one, but that means the exact same internet provided formula
driven calculator works entirely different than it did as of before
today. So they fixed it or forced it to work all because of me.
So, when is the check arriving?
~ BG
Sam Wormley
> Good one, but that means the exact same internet provided formula
> driven calculator works entirely different than it did as of before
> today. So they fixed it or forced it to work all because of me.
Ya Think?
Brad Guth
Yes, no question they obviously fixed it all because of me. So
where's my reward?
~ BG
Sam Wormley
Rewards for true achievers come from within. You should relish
the corrections of your errors, from which you might learn
something.
Brad Guth
I've learned once again not to trust others, such as that bogus/
dysfunctional Escape Velocity calculator that didn't get fixed until I
came along. Was that prearranged?
~ BG
Michael Moroney
I suppose the possibility that you accidentally selected the wrong
unit for either mass or distance, or accidentally entered a wrong
numerical value for either, has been ruled out..
Brad Guth
wrote:
Pretty much ruled out, because I always use 2e30 kg and I'd tried to
get those same numbers again, and simply could not. Go figure, though
I could have entered the 942 AU as 14.083e10 km or otherwise as having
some entirely weird number out of nowhere (using 942 parsecs = 3.03 m/
sec).
I'm fairly certain that it was remotely rigged to give out bogus
data. Besides, since when can we trust our government and their rogue
agents to do what's right?
~ BG