Why can’t we (our solar system) escape Sirius?
Brad Guth
it was worth so much extra mass to begin with, and perhaps a million
fold worse yet as a molecular/nebula cloud with its progenitor stars,
further compounded by us having been moving towards that terrific mass
at 7.6 km/sec, rather than away (not that there’s any objective
science telling us exactly where those Sirius progenitor stars and
their molecular/nebula cloud were to begin with, as most likely a
molecular/nebula derived from a galactic merger). Perhaps the theory
of a similar supernova event that gave our sun its start is what also
transpired on behalf of boosting those Sirius progenitor stars to
life.
Lagrange Point Finder
http://www.orbitsimulator.com/formulas/LagrangePointFinder.html
Using 8.136e16 meters, 7e30 kg and 2e30 kg
The L4/L5 velocity is just .086 km/sec.
Perhaps the L2 of 0.128 km/sec is close to escape velocity.
at .1 ly (9.46e14 m) gives the L2 velocity of 1.19 km/sec
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
at 8.6 ly the escape velocity from 7e30 kg = 0.107167 km/sec
at .1 ly (9.46e11 km) the escape velocity from Sirius only climbs to
1 km/sec, but neither of these are taking into account the added
gravity pull of our solar system or any barycenter considerations.
Thus far the escape velocity from Sirius doesn’t seem so great, so why
exactly are we headed back towards that sucker at 7.6 km/sec?
Even at a spread of 1000 ly and 2.5e37 kg, we’re looking at an exit/
escape velocity of 18.8 km/sec required in order that our solar system
to avoid that amount of molecular/nebula gravitational tidal radii
grip. Problem is, at least as of lately, it seems we’ve been headed
the wrong way.
If we had a purely linear -7.6 km/sec closing velocity to deal with,
and 250 million years of that constant velocity without any radial
trajectory deviations, this only adds up to 6334 ly plus our existing
8.6 ly. = 6343 ly, and at that separation would require 7.46 km/sec
escape velocity (escape meaning as per our moving away from and
otherwise not as headed towards that original molecular/nebula cloud
of 2.5e37 kg).
Obviously as we close in on the existing mass of the Sirius star
system(7e30 kg), at some point the closing velocity of our elliptical
path should increase, just like those elliptical treks of Sedna and
other Oort cloud items that stick with us, and like many comets do not
maintain a constant velocity throughout their extended radial elliptic
trajectory. Sedna at 89 AU is likely moving a few percent faster than
at 900+ AU, suggesting that our negative radial velocity with Sirius
may also be on the increase.
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/02files/Sedna_01.html
Where’s the fully 3D interactive three body orbital simulation of
stellar proper motions that’ll work this rogue analogy of Sirius and
our solar system from the full elliptical trajectory and barycenter
point of view?
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Chris.B
<snip>
If you don't stop advertising cheap holidays on Sirius B I'm
reporting you for spamming!
Isn't it time for you to set your solar sail, yourself, Brenda?
Somebody responsible has to make the trip and check out the sand and
water quality.
I hear it's nice at this time of year. Just wax your cooking foil
bikini and your solar surfer board and you're set.
Get there before the bløødy Germans occupy the beaches and buy up all
the summer houses!
Brad Guth
As always, untrustworthy and unfunny at the same time.
~ BG
Chris.B
>
> As always, untrustworthy and unfunny at the same time.
>
> ~ BG
Stop bitching, Brenda.
It could be worse.
I could be ignoring you.
Brad Guth
As long as you have nothing positive or constructive to contribute,
perhaps you should just break wind and wet yourself at the same time.
Have you ever published anything original that we should be aware of?
~ BG
palsing
> As long as you have nothing positive or constructive to contribute...
Well, you do a great job of ignoring people who have things
constructive to contribute...
\Paul A
Brad Guth
I'm just trying to keep my deductive mindset open, and as uncluttered
of mainstream hype, eyecandy and nifty science infomercials that seem
to not always add up.
Even the most rogue stuff out there is in orbit around something, be
it a number of distant galactic gravity that merely creates a Great
Attractor kind of barycenter, or that of actual mass that so often
used to be much greater concentrated than it is today. Vast molecular/
nebula clouds of 1e6 progenitor mass that seem to exist for awhile as
they produce such impressive progenitor stars that fusion up to main
sequence in a flash and proceed to poof all the remainders of that
cloud far away, should be easily computer simulated by now.
The way stars seem to come and go (big ones doing this "here to day
and gone tomorrow" act in as little as a few ten million years), as
well as stellar and galactic mergers or interactions taking place in
spite of that supposed infinite expansion theory, makes it pretty hard
to objectively nail down exactly whatever transpired before our time.
Supposedly we have a large number of public funded supercomputers and
all the right stuff of the very best orbital plus stellar motion
software and operator expertise on tap, that's for the most part is
just sitting around collecting dust and lifetime benefits.
Obviously our moon and the planet Venus are each taboo/nondisclosure
rated, but is there any chance that we can expect to ever see some
public supercomputer simulation effort in a positive/constructive
format, on behalf of this topic?
~ BG
Chris.B
>
> As long as you have nothing positive or constructive to contribute,
>
Do you feel your trolling is remotely positive or constructive? What
do you really think you actually contribute anything at all? Wild and
baseless speculation? A desperate search for something (anything)
beyond the boringly mundane? Do you find scientific reality so
repugnant? Do you really prefer your conspiracy theories to simply
respecting those who gave their lives to and for science and the
advancement of knowledge? What about your descending into infantile,
knee-jerk racism when cornered?
The clown is not supposed to be respected. He dresses as the fool and
plays the fool to amuse. He does not actively seek kill-filing (as you
so obviously do) because that is not remotely the point. To stay at
the centre of attention you must remain in character. I will continue
to chase the foolish clowns until the main acts come on. You and I are
only the silly distraction while the main acts in the ring are
changing places. That is our only role. Live with it or change
roles.
Brad Guth
Am I the one that's topic/author stalking like yourself?
If I didn't know any better, I'd have to assume that your ZNR approved
mindset has your actions fully mainstream saturated past the point of
no return.
If I'm such a threat to whatever you and others of your kind believe,
then why not run those complex simulations that'll only prove your
side is supposedly always right. Of course you'd be fair about this
and not intentionally skew the data to suit only the outcome that
makes you a happy camper, right?
~ BG
Mark Earnest
Are you serious that Sirius is after us?
Black holes, maybe, but not suns.
john
>
> - Show quoted text -
Galaxies are how old and all their stars are
more or less neatly swirling around them
in an orderly fashion.
Barking. Wrong. Tree.
john
Mark Earnest
>
> - Show quoted text -
Then human organisms are the same age as their individual cells?
john
>
> - Show quoted text -
No, what I'm saying is that galaxies are ordered
structures that have lasted aeons of time,
so it's hardly likely that their
components are chaotically destroying
one another.
john
Mark Earnest
You mean you don't think stars can be born, live, die, and then other
stars can be born, and so
on, in the same galaxy?
Brad Guth
It's the other way around.
Even though our solar system was here first (by more than 4.25 billion
some odd years), it seems a very extensive and massive molecular/
nebula cloud showed up and subsequently gave birth to those nearby
Sirius stars. Ever since our passive little solar system has been
attracted to Sirius. It seems gravity has a nasty habit of attracting
and even capturing whatever is nearby enough, and especially capable
if that item (our solar system) was already headed towards Sirius to
begin with.
~ BG
Brad Guth
Galaxies have been merging and interacting for billions of years,
including any number that have been in negative redshift to us,
meaning that that BB apparently wasn't quite as all-inclusive as it
was supposed to be. The average galaxy may not last more than 15
billion years, such as our sun isn't going to be worth all that much
at the ripe old age of 10 billion years, as well as before then we'll
be stuck or further demised somewhere in the Great Attractor.
John doesn't want this to be the case, but stars do burn out, as they
turn into red supergiants before evolving into white dwarfs, neutron
stars or worse, as well as they collide, implode, explode, and
otherwise if sufficiently big and massive enough they'll capture other
stars. Those molecular/nebula clouds that create such new stars can
be worth 1e6 fold more massive than their progenitor star masses
combined, meaning that our nearby Sirius molecular/nebula cloud could
have easily been worth 2.5e37 kg.
Sirius isn't headed towards us, instead it is our wussy little solar
system that has become attracted to Sirius, especially attracted when
Sirius was considerably more massive.
~ BG
Brad Guth
In order to avoid being captured by a massive star system, not to
mention its progenitor molecular/nebula cloud that's a million fold
worse, you have to be headed away (not towards) that kind of local
gravity situation.
~ BG
Brad Guth
Possibly the stellar progenitor molecular/nebula mass that produced
those Sirius stars was actually worth something greater than 3e37 kg.
Here’s a little further proof-positive that our universe is likely
older than 13.7 billion years: BPM 37093 has lost a great deal of its
white dwarf heat.
White Dwarf Stars: Like a Diamond in the Sky
http://starryskies.com/articles/2004/02/diamond.html
Such spent or relatively cool and unusually compacted white dwarfs are
simply not supposed to be possible within the suggested age of our
universe. This might also further suggest that <16:1 from its
original main sequence mass isn’t unlikely, which means Sirius(B) was
most likely worth at least 9.5 Ms to begin with.
Sirius(B) temperature is supposedly 25,000 K
BPM 37093 temperature is just under 12,000 K
It’s exactly as though our galaxy is a composite from a merger with a
much older galaxy, especially when certain stars are not only older
than most everything else, but not exactly going with the expected
flow, so to speak
~ BG
Mark Earnest
>
> - Show quoted text -
If Sol and Sirius are caught in each other's gravitational fields,
wouldn't they
just become a double star?
Mark Earnest
>
> - Show quoted text -
So your view is that lives of galaxies and the lives of their
compositional
stars happen simultaneously? If that were the case, the universe
would finally expend itself, and there would only be non existence.
If however stars continue to be born, then the galaxies could go
on indefinitely.
Judging by the current massive quantities of new stars, that is, the
blue and the white,
this would seem to be the case.
And the red giants must have been here since the beginning of time.
Brad Guth
such thing. At this point there's no way of telling where you're
coming from.
>
> If that were the case, the universe
> would finally expend itself, and there would only be non existence.
>
> If however stars continue to be born, then the galaxies could go
> on indefinitely.
>
> Judging by the current massive quantities of new stars, that is, the
> blue and the white, this would seem to be the case.
>
> And the red giants must have been here since the beginning of time.
Red and brown dwarfs, as well as those little white dwarfs should live
next to forever. Bigger stuff not so lucky.
The average star gets rid of 4e9 tonnes/sec, and ours loses roughly
3e9 tonnes/sec. The bigger the star the shorter its main sequence
life (not including novas or supernovas that tend to make a mess out
of everything.
~ BG
Mark Earnest
Just because you never used the word you can't use it now?
At this point there's no way of telling where you're
> coming from.
It's not that complicated. One poster is saying basically that a
galaxy
will die as soon as all its stars die, as if the galaxy and its stars
are all dying at the same time.
I am replying that if this were the case, all the galaxies in the
universe will finally die, leaving
nothing but non existence, a philosophical impossibility.
palsing
> On Sep 12, 1:21 pm, palsing <pnals...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 12, 1:07 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > As long as you have nothing positive or constructive to contribute...
>
> > Well, you do a great job of ignoring people who have things
> > constructive to contribute...
>
> > \Paul A
>
> I'm just trying to keep my deductive mindset open, and as uncluttered
> of mainstream hype, eyecandy and nifty science infomercials that seem
> to not always add up.
Nothing wrong with an open mind, Brad, unless it is so open that your
brains fall out...
It looks like you, too, along with our mutual friend Oriel, are
incapable of learning anything here, but listen carefully anyhow; the
sun and Sirius are NOT influencing one another to the point that they
are going to orbit one another; the 7+ km/sec approach of Sirius is
only a part of its velocity component, it has a nearly equal component
across our field of view, with a total velocity of about 18 km/sec in
space ACROSS our bow, it is going to be long gone by the time we cross
its path, well behind it; the cloud from which Sirius (and the clouds
of the other 36 stars within 12.5 ly of Earth) have all dissipated
into the interstellar medium, which pervades our entire neighborhood
and far beyond, and their initial mass, whatever it was, is a total
non-factor, gravity-wise.
As stated before, you need to read-up on these things a little more...
here is a little something from another dead guy who obviously knew
you well;
"That theory is worthless. It isn't even wrong!"
~Wolfgang Pauli
\Paul A
Brad Guth
15 billion years is a lot of time for the vast majority of main
sequence stars to sufficiently fade out.
>
> I am replying that if this were the case, all the galaxies in the
> universe will finally die, leaving
> nothing but non existence, a philosophical impossibility.
For every thousand main sequence stare that bite the dust and
essentially die of old age, perhaps at least 10 new replacements come
to life, and possibly even a hundred show up, but that's about it.
With somewhere between 1% and 10% as new/renewed stars per galactic
half-life, it's going to take a few tens of billions of years before
our aging galaxy runs itself entirely out of main sequence stars.
~ BG
Brad Guth
I still like my interpretations better, because at least they tend to
explain a good number of things that are still up in the air, so to
speak.
You have absolutely no objective proof whatsoever, not even a good
subjective swag as to where Sirius originally emerged, but you can
always keep pretending that it was extremely far, far away.
Btw, 36 main sequence stars could easily have required 1e38 kg worth
of molecular/nebula mass, much of which can't be any too far away.
~ BG
~ BG
palsing
> For every thousand main sequence stare that bite the dust and
> essentially die of old age, perhaps at least 10 new replacements come
> to life, and possibly even a hundred show up, but that's about it.
Just where are you getting these juicy tidbits? I'm not saying you are
making them up on the fly, exactly, but I would surely like to see
some kind of reference.
"76.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot"
\Paul A
palsing
> You have absolutely no objective proof whatsoever, not even a good
> subjective swag as to where Sirius originally emerged, but you can
> always keep pretending that it was extremely far, far away.
Pure Bullshit. I've given you plenty of perfectly good links to prove
that your thinking is goofy, whereas you have provided nothing
except... well, 'swag'...
> Btw, 36 main sequence stars could easily have required 1e38 kg worth
> of molecular/nebula mass, much of which can't be any too far away.
Like I said, it is everywhere... but WHERE did you get 1e38? Just a
lucky guess?
\Paul A
Brad Guth
Astrophysics has been changing its tune with every new and improved
discovery. With a number of well photographed molecular/nebula
clouds, there seems to be only a few of any new stars created of much
less combined mass than whatever exploded, because at least 99.9% of
that molecular/nebula mass gets blown away and dispersed.
In other words, when stars die of old age, perhaps less than 0.1% of
the original mass becomes another star.
~ BG
Brad Guth
Most of what we know is a subjective swag, because the rules seem to
be changing as fast as new theories or interpretations emerge. That
1e38 kg is from what I read a conservative estimate of what was there
before stars fired up, the last of which being those terrific Sirius
stars.
~ BG
Chris L Peterson
wrote:
>Nothing wrong with an open mind, Brad, unless it is so open that your
>brains fall out...
Why do you waste so much time arguing this with somebody who is clueless
about orbital dynamics, and can't even understand the most basic data on
astronomical objects?
(Obviously, the brains fell out long ago, if they were ever there in the
first place. This is far from the only whacky idea spouted by Guth over
the years. Compared to some, this one is tame!)
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
palsing
> Why do you waste so much time arguing this with somebody who is clueless
> about orbital dynamics, and can't even understand the most basic data on
> astronomical objects?
>
> (Obviously, the brains fell out long ago, if they were ever there in the
> first place. This is far from the only whacky idea spouted by Guth over
> the years. Compared to some, this one is tame!)
Eternal optimist, I suppose... just sittin' here watching the Chargers
self-destruct... ;>(
\Paul A
Brad Guth
There are orbital long-period companion stars as binaries, trinaries
and greater multiples as star complex systems having their tidal
associations that exceed 100,000 years within the 225 million year
galactic cycle.
“Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
“The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
Centauri AB),”
The stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom utilized
to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our galactic cycle, in
that essentially everything remains in orbit around something,
including multiple long-period star systems and their tidal influence
on others (including our solar system) as we all trek about our
galactic center.
“Tales of a thousand and one nights: Past and future of the Milky Way”
"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood",
by B. Nordström et al.
http://www.aanda.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=71%3Atales-of-a-thousand-and-one-nights-6-april-2004&catid=79%3A2004-press-releases&Itemid=276&lang=en_GB.utf8%2C+en_GB.UT
“Most of the stars are located within about 500 light-years from the
Earth and were already observed by the ESA satellite Hipparcos to
measure their precise distances and motions in the plane of the sky.
But a key piece was missing in our knowledge of their space motions in
the Galaxy: The radial velocities [1] of the stars were still not
measured, so only their 2D motions were known. The team of astronomers
has now filled this gap: For the first time, we now know the 3D space
motion of a complete sample of typical stars in the solar
neighbourhood. From their space motions, the team was able to compute
the positions of these stars at different points in the Milky Way's
history. For example, the movie below shows the motions of the
observed stars in their latest orbit around the Galactic Center.”
Plus there’s always loads of other research data to mine through.
Galactic Spiral Structure / SpiralStructure.book / SpiralStructure.pdf
“After some time studying the velocity distributions for local stars
we have concluded that the observed stellar streams reflect the spiral
structure of the Milky Way. We have presented a straightforward model
of equiangular spiral arms constructed from elliptical orbits aligned
at a focus. This model applies in coordinates rotating at the spiral
pattern speed, which is equal to the mean rate of orbital precession.
We have shown by qualitative argument and by numerical simulation
describing perturbations to elliptical orbits, that, for a range of
arm densities, spiral structure is dynamically stable, up to
destruction by a bar and/or a ring. We have shown that, for a two-
armed equiangular spiral with pitch angle set to match the
distribution of neutral hydrogen, the observed eccentricity and
velocity distributions are a good fit to the predictions of the model
after taking expected perturbations into account. We have accounted
for all stellar streams in the observed local velocity distributions.
We find that the Sun follows a very typical orbit aligned to the Orion
arm, which is a major spiral arm containing Perseus and Sagittarius
sectors. We have calculated that its current eccentricity is 0.138.
This is a little higher than the modal value, 0.11, for stars in the
arm, giving a typical orbital period of about 300 Myrs – longer than
usually estimated because of the greater eccentricity. We have seen
how spiral structure can evolve to form the rings and bars found in
many galaxies, and that gas motions determine that flocculent galaxies
evolve toward bisymmetric spirals. We have found that the Milky Way
evolved into this form about 9 Gyrs ago.
“It is perhaps worth remarking that the model has made genuine
predictions, and not merely been retrodictively fitted to data. Having
made a prediction of a galactic structure, we searched images to find
examples of the configuration. The interlinked ring structure of
figure 18 was recognised by the astronomer (E.A.) among the authors,
but it was not known to the mathematician (C.F.), who produced the
figure from the numerical solution of perturbed orbits. The same was
true of the prediction that young stars are to be found on the outside
of spiral arms. Nor did we know of galaxies where the spiral arms are
separate from the ring. We have not made any predictions of galactic
structures for which we were unable to find examples.”
What this all means is that a lot of complex tidal issues keep many
stellar items closely associated with one another, with many long-
period orbital treks that can’t be ignored if you want to understand
and better appreciate what sorts of local stellar motions can affect
our solar system. The whereabouts of their progenitor molecular/
nebula worthy clouds and their subsequent demise or disbursements of
their terrific mass also can’t be excluded, especially when such
nearby clouds form as 3e37 kg or greater mass and stick around for
millions of years as they crank out impressive stars like those of
Sirius.
~ BG
Brad Guth
associations that exceed 100,000 years within the 225 million year
galactic cycle.
“Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
“The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
Centauri AB),”
The ESA stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom
utilized to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our realm of the
galactic cycle, in that essentially everything remains in orbit around
something, including multiple long-period star systems and their tidal
influence on others (including our solar system) as we all get to
stick with trekking about our galactic center that isn’t about to set
any of us free.
What this all means is that a lot of complex stellar tidal issues keep
many significant items closely associated with one another, with long-
period orbital treks that can’t be ignored if you want to understand
and better appreciate what sorts of local stellar motions can affect
our solar system. The whereabouts of their progenitor molecular/
nebula worthy clouds and their subsequent demise or disbursements of
their terrific mass also can’t be excluded, especially when such
nearby clouds form as 3e37 kg or greater mass and stick around for
millions of years as they crank out impressive stars like those of
Sirius.
~ BG
Mark Earnest
So you are saying our ultimate goal is permanent non existence, too.
Not a very hopeful philosopher, are you?
Brad Guth
For those of us that manage to get as smart or perhaps smarter than a
5th grader, there shouldn't be any such insurmountable problems with
our migrating from one star system to another better one, and thereby
keeping ourselves out of trouble, just like those Rothschild "seans"
that get to go pretty much anywhere and for as long as it takes.
Using a red dwarf as our sun and/or becoming a moon of a brown dwarf
or gas-giant planet should keep us going indefinitely, especially
nifty if there were another planet and moons that we could also
utilize.
On the other hand, if you keep looking purely for the most negative
interpretations, perhaps you'll turn into a black hole.
~ BG
Mark Earnest
But you said:
>For every thousand main sequence stare that bite the dust and
essentially die of old age, perhaps at least 10 new replacements come
to life, and possibly even a hundred show up, but that's about it.
>With somewhere between 1% and 10% as new/renewed stars per galactic
half-life, it's going to take a few tens of billions of years before
our aging galaxy runs itself entirely out of main sequence stars.
-You here are apparently indicating that the universe will finally run
out of stars,
and therefore (my own conclusion) finally vanish permanently.
Sure, we can skip around worlds and star systems for awhile, but
what happens when there are one day no more stars?
Or is this where the astronomers pass the ball to the philosophers?
I think we should at least try to paint a picture of a universe that
lasts
indefinitely, just in case the gods are listening.
Brad Guth
> > essentially die of old age, perhaps at least 10 new replacements
> > come to life, and possibly even a hundred show up, but that's about it.
>
> >With somewhere between 1% and 10% as new/renewed stars per galactic
> half-life, it's going to take a few tens of billions of years before
> our aging galaxy runs itself entirely out of main sequence stars.
>
> -You here are apparently indicating that the universe will finally run
> out of stars,
> and therefore (my own conclusion) finally vanish permanently.
humanity the way it's going has but a few thousand years left. So
what's the difference.
>
> Sure, we can skip around worlds and star systems for awhile, but
> what happens when there are one day no more stars?
Then we either utilize our own local energy or simply no longer exist.
>
> Or is this where the astronomers pass the ball to the philosophers?
>
> I think we should at least try to paint a picture of a universe that
> lasts indefinitely, just in case the gods are listening.
Go for it. You tell us how the hell this ride is going to last
forever, especially when so much of humanity can't deal with the right
here and now without going postal.
~ BG
Brad Guth
> There are orbital long-period companion stars as binaries, trinaries
> and greater multiples as complex star systems having their tidal
> associations that exceed 100,000 years within the 225 million year
> galactic cycle.
>
> “Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
> “The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
> but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
> Centauri AB),”
>
> The ESA stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom
> utilized to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our realm of the
> galactic cycle, in that essentially everything remains in orbit around
> something, including multiple long-period star systems and their tidal
> influence on others (including our solar system) as we all get to
> stick with trekking about our galactic center that isn’t about to set
> any of us free.
>
> “Tales of a thousand and one nights: Past and future of the Milky Way”
>
> "The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood",
Apparently this last one shut most every naysayer up, but good.
Not that rogue items don't seem to exist as unassociated with anything
else, but that's just the perception as long as the whole picture of
what's going on is never taken fully into account.
~ BG
Brad Guth
> and greater multiples as complex star systems having their tidal
> associations that exceed 100,000 years within the 225 million year
> galactic cycle.
>
> “Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
> “The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
> but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
> Centauri AB),”
>
> The ESA stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom
> utilized to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our realm of the
> galactic cycle, in that essentially everything remains in orbit around
> something, including multiple long-period star systems and their tidal
> influence on others (including our solar system) as we all get to
> stick with trekking about our galactic center that isn’t about to set
> any of us free.
>
> “Tales of a thousand and one nights: Past and future of the Milky Way”
>
> "The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood",
Apparently this last one is what shut most every naysayer up, but
good. It seems only certain diehard Semites are upset enough to apply
their usual form of tactical mainstream damage control, namely topic/
author stalking and essentially bashing for all it's worth.
It's not that rogue items don't seem to exist as seemingly
unassociated with anything else, but that's just our local perception
within our less than 0.0000001% volume of this Milky Way galaxy, and
otherwise as long as the whole picture of whatever else is going on is
never taken fully into account by using conditional physics and
mainstream approved obfuscation. After all, we wouldn't want to
overload any of our spendy public funded supercomputers with running
complex simulations as based upon the best available and most
comprehensive data.
Chris.B
<snip self-aggrandising crap including answering own self-quoting>
>
> Brenda Guff, Brenda_Guff, Brenda.Guff, BrendaGuff, BG / “Guff Abusenet”
The Bogologue?
Big Brenda finally admits addiction to alphabet goop.
Signs into clinic to have vowels flushed.
One letter at a time.
Brad Guth
Are you suggesting that a recently nearby molecular/nebula cloud of
3e37 kg was no big deal?
~ BG
Brad Guth
You mean triple star system, and there's actually a few other nearby
stars perturbed by that original molecular/nebula mass that cranked
out those impressive Sirius stars.
Some here would place our solar system age at 5+ billion years, and
the Sirius stars as newish as 200 million years (which I like to
suggest 260+ million as their starting point, because that's similar
to the big die-off era here on Earth).
Our sun most likely started out as worth 2.5e30 kg (possibly worth
<2.6e30 kg).
Figure the average all-inclusive loss of 3e9 tonnes/sec for our sun.
Sirius(B) started out as perhaps worth 1.9e31 kg, losing 4e12 tonnes/
sec for the first 200 million years before terminating into its white
dwarf phase, and that's certainly a lot of stellar CME flack or carbon
buckyballs, none of which would have been all that kind to whatever
local planets parked much closer than 32 AU (unless they had one heck
of a Venus like robust atmosphere and thick clouds in order to reflect
the bulk of that heat and UV energy).
Try to remember that little Sirius(A) of that same initial 200 million
years era was only a binary minor star to that of the much larger and
considerably massive Sirius(B).
~ BG
Chris.B
>
> Try to remember that little Sirius(A) of that same initial 200 million
> years era was only a binary minor star to that of the much larger and
> considerably massive Sirius(B).
>
> ~ BG
Sod this! Why can't Sirius escape from Brenda Guff?
Brad Guth
Why are only Semites and other faith-based Jesus freaks having such a
problem with this topic?
Do you really think your white Zionist approved God and all of its
faith-based voodoo intended everything off-world to be nothing except
inert eyecandy, having zilch worth of interactions with anything else?
~ BG
Chris.B
>
> Why are only Semites and other faith-based Jesus freaks having such a
> problem with this topic?
>
> Do you really think your white Zionist approved God and all of its
> faith-based voodoo intended everything off-world to be nothing except
> inert eyecandy, having zilch worth of interactions with anything else?
Include me out, Brenda! I'm a time served, fully paid up Infidel.
Brad Guth
I supposed your being another pretend Atheist that only acts/reacts
exactly like a Zionist/Jewish Semite is about as good as it gets.
When are you going to contribute something/anything that's positive/
constructive pertaining to this topic?
Are you going to suggest to us that long-period stellar associations
or elliptical interactions do not exist?
Are you going to suggest that a 3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud that's
relatively nearby and creating those massive stars is no big deal to
that of our existing solar system?
Are you going to suggest that this kind of stellar birth and motion
thing on a galactic scale can not be computer simulated?
Androcles
"Chris.B" <chr...@nypost.dk> wrote in message
news:7e9f5c4c-f79f-45fc...@m1g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...
=======================================
Me too. I'm a card carrying half-breed Pagan-Barbarian from a third
world country; England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Brad Guth
It's always good to know that if a 3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud
showed up and started pumping out massive stars nearby, which in turn
spent a few thousand years blowing away that unused portion of that
molecular/nebula mass, that as such nothing the least bit unusual
would happen throughout our nearby solar system.
I take it that you also don't believe anything ever gets captured.
~ BG
Quadibloc
wrote:
> Me too. I'm a card carrying half-breed Pagan-Barbarian from a third
> world country; England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
According to the people who write questions for Jeopardy, the next
question would be: "Which one?".
On the other hand, I think that you've already named the country you
live in, but I wonder why you aren't just saying that you're from the
United Kingdom, instead of listing its parts.
Of course, the fact that it's the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland means you can't just accurately say that you're from
Britain.
My understanding, which may be flawed, is that Britain = Wales,
including England, the part of Wales occupied by Englishmen, Great
Britain is what you get when you add Scotland, with Ireland, even
Northern Ireland, not being part of either, which is why it's
mentioned separately.
We have something similar in Canada: our province of Newfoundland is
really the province of Newfoundland and Labrador officially.
John Savard
Quadibloc
> Do you really think your white Zionist approved God and all of its
> faith-based voodoo intended everything off-world to be nothing except
> inert eyecandy, having zilch worth of interactions with anything else?
If the Sun is headed in the direction of Sirius, it might be captured
by it. But gravity is a conservative force, so without some fancy
interaction such as the gravity of Sirius B changing the direction of
the Sun's motion relative to Sirius A, all that will happen is a
hyperbolic orbit - it will pass by Sirius, and then go away again,
travelling at the same speed, but in a different direction, relative
to Sirius.
Of course, during the visit, if the distance is close enough, the
Earth might just fall directly into one of the two stars of that
system, or just gravitationally interact with one of them so as to be
thrown off into space to languish in cold and darkness forever after.
I suspect that this is a long way off... and that while the Sun might
be going in the general direction of Sirius, a close encounter is
unlikely.
John Savard
Brad Guth
> On Sep 17, 1:46 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Do you really think your white Zionist approved God and all of its
> > faith-based voodoo intended everything off-world to be nothing except
> > inert eyecandy, having zilch worth of interactions with anything else?
>
> If the Sun is headed in the direction of Sirius, it might be captured
> by it. But gravity is a conservative force, so without some fancy
> interaction such as the gravity of Sirius B changing the direction of
> the Sun's motion relative to Sirius A, all that will happen is a
> hyperbolic orbit - it will pass by Sirius, and then go away again,
> travelling at the same speed, but in a different direction, relative
> to Sirius.
barycenter factor is not a good option? (at least I certainly never
insisted that it was the one and only option, but just the more likely
one)
>
> Of course, during the visit, if the distance is close enough, the
> Earth might just fall directly into one of the two stars of that
> system, or just gravitationally interact with one of them so as to be
> thrown off into space to languish in cold and darkness forever after.
Perhaps that's exactly how Venus w/moon got ejected from those Sirius
stars, especially pulled away as Sirius(B) having lost so much of its
initial mass that Venus w/moon would have been attracted towards
Sirius(A) in addition to other factors of perturbing its orbit and
giving it escape velocity.
>
> I suspect that this is a long way off... and that while the Sun might
> be going in the general direction of Sirius, a close encounter is
> unlikely.
>
> John Savard
Perhaps one light year may be close enough, and perhaps it was
somewhat closer as of previous encounters as suggested by those pesky
ice-age thawing cycles that were more frequent and more warming as we
go back in time. 260 million years is certainly worth a great many
ice/thaw cycles (75000 yr average = 3466 cycles and nothing else out
there that comes even remotely close to what those nearby Sirius stars
had to deliver).
~ BG
Brad Guth
According to our resident naysayers and mainstream obfuscation wizards
of their insider cabal approved conditional physics and selective
science, it's always good to know that if any 3e37 kg molecular/nebula
cloud of <50 ly radii showed up within a few tens of light years from
us and started pumping out those massive stars nearby, which in turn
spent a few hundred some odd initial years creating planets and
blowing away that mostly unused portion of that molecular/nebula mass,
that as such nothing the least bit unusual would happen throughout our
solar system that’s rather nearby and unavoidably caught directly in
the exit path of all that molecular/nebula mass that’s also nicely
heated up to several thousand K from having just given birth to those
absolutely terrific Sirius stars that utilize their impressive fusion
and CMEs to the fullest extent.
I also have to interpret that our resident cosmology wizards don't
wish to believe that anything ever gets captured or even significantly
perturbed by such nearby mass, thereby zilch worth of interactions as
even from several hundred molecular particles/cm3 going 3000 km/s past
us for a few good centuries. That’s only like being caught in a
continuous 1e15 kg solar CME outflow. Gee whiz, as of roughly 260
million years ago, what could possibly go wrong?
~ BG
Androcles
"Quadibloc" <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
news:9104dfc5-66ff-4e46...@i17g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
John Savard
============================================
If you'd ever met a Pennsylvanian he/she might say she/he was
Polish or German or Irish or other European or African to another
Pennsylvanian, and if you pressed the point they might say they
were American, but almost never would one think of volunteering to
being Pennsylvanian first.
Great Britain includes the surrounding islands and groups of islands
such as the Channel Islands, the Scilly Islands, the Isle of Man
(which has its own parliament and has done so for yonks),
the Orkneys and the Shetlands.
The United Kingdom really refers to England and Scotland;
James the First of England and James the Sixth of Scotland were
the same bloke. Wales is a Principality. That part of Wales that
is under occupation by the Saesnaeg (Scottish name Sassenach,
English name Saxon) sadly lacks bilingual street signs. Much
of Quebec is bilingual and Brits are from Britanny which is in
France. However, the animosity was not so much between the
Cymru and the Saesnaeg as between their alliance and the
Normans from Normandy. Eire broke free of the Norman yolk
and became an independent farm, but that was after Wales became
the iron and copper capital of the world. Eire, being Catholic,
cannot be a third world country, but is part of the British Isles
and a member of the European Common Market. Catholics,
being Roman, have always been greedy for gold which they
horde in the Vatican. They've been missionaries searching for
more gold for 2000 years whilst toting their evil execution device
as a threat, hence the Holy Roman Empire.
Anglesey (where no Angles are from) is an island off the coast of
Wales on the other side of England where the Angles live.
No Bermonds live in Bermondsey which is now in London and
was once an island as its name suggests, so it all gets horribly
confused by the evolution of chaos.
As with Pennsylvanians, where I am from is not where I am now,
but this is where I was born and I speak fuckin' fluent Anglo-Saxon
for a Welshman and not much Welsh for an Englishman. Anglo-
Saxon words were declare naughty by the French speaking
Normans who objected to being told to fuck off. Both
of me detests gold hungry crucifix bearing Romans who entice
the Gaelic farmers of Eire to covet the industry of Northern Ireland
and want it all made into one big green horse farm.
If any of that is confusing I can't help it, I'm a descendent of all of
them. All my ancestors copulated, which I'm allowed to say, or
fucked, which I'm not allowed to say for fear of offending the
sophisticated Normans and Romans who are superior to Pagan-
Barbarians and use cement to build big houses to talk to their
god in after they nailed him to tree, which is why il duce papa
is babbling his rites and practicing his ritual cannibalism by eating
the body and drinking the blood of christ in Westminster Cathedral
today, surrounded by gold and brandishing his torture implement.
I want his jewish shower cap.
Brad Guth
According to our perpetual resident naysayers and mainstream
obfuscation wizards of their insider cabal approved conditional
physics and selective science, it's always good to know that if any
3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud of <50 ly radii showed up within a few
tens of light years from us, and started pumping out those massive
stars nearby, which in turn spent a few hundred some odd initial years
creating planets and then blowing away the mostly unused portion of
that molecular/nebula mass, that as such nothing the least bit unusual
would happen throughout our solar system that’s rather nearby and
unavoidably caught directly in the exit path of some of that molecular/
nebula mass that’s also nicely heated up to several thousand K from
having just given birth to those absolutely terrific Sirius stars that
subsequently utilize their impressive fusion and CMEs to the fullest
extent because when starting off massive enough they only have a
couple hundred million years to live before sequencing into a white
dwarf.
I also have to interpret that our resident cosmology wizards don't
wish to believe that anything ever gets captured or even significantly
perturbed by such nearby mass, thereby zilch worth of interactions as
even from several hundred molecular particles/cm3 going 3000 km/s past
and into us for a few good centuries. That’s only like being caught
Brad Guth
There are long-period companion stars as binaries, trinaries and
greater multiples as complex star systems having their interrelated
tidal associations that exceed 100,000 years within the greater 225
million year galactic cycle.
“Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
“The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
Centauri AB),”
The ESA stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom
utilized to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our realm of the
galactic cycle, in that essentially everything remains in orbit around
something, including multiple long-period star systems and their tidal
influence on others (including our solar system) as we all get to
stick with trekking about our galactic center that isn’t about to set
any of us free.
“Tales of a thousand and one nights: Past and future of the Milky Way”
"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood",
by B. Nordström et al.
“Most of the stars are located within about 500 light-years from the
Earth and were already observed by the ESA satellite Hipparcos to
measure their precise distances and motions in the plane of the sky.
But a key piece was missing in our knowledge of their space motions in
the Galaxy: The radial velocities [1] of the stars were still not
measured, so only their 2D motions were known. The team of astronomers
has now filled this gap: For the first time, we now know the 3D space
motion of a complete sample of typical stars in the solar
neighbourhood. From their space motions, the team was able to compute
the positions of these stars at different points in the Milky Way's
history. For example, the movie below shows the motions of the
observed stars in their latest orbit around the Galactic Center.”
Plus there’s always loads of other research data to mine through or
cheery-pick from.
What this all means to me is that a lot of complex stellar tidal
issues manage to keep many significant items closely enough associated
with one another, and yet with long-period orbital treks that can’t be
ignored if you want to understand and better appreciate what sorts of
local stellar motions can affect our solar system. The whereabouts of
their progenitor molecular/nebula worthy clouds and their subsequent
demise or disbursements of their terrific mass also can’t be excluded,
especially when such nearby clouds form or merge as 3e37 kg or greater
mass and stick around for a few million years as they crank out
impressive stars like those of Sirius w/planets.
~ BG
Brad Guth
According to our resident perpetual naysayers, mainstream obfuscation
expertise and denial of being in denial wizards of their insider cabal
approved conditional physics and selective science, it's always good
to know that if any 3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud of <50 ly radii
showed up within a few tens of light years from us, and started
pumping out those massive stars nearby, which in turn spent a few
hundred or thousands of some odd initial years creating planets and
then blowing away the mostly unused portion of that molecular/nebula
mass, that as such supposedly nothing the least bit unusual would
happen throughout our solar system that’s rather nearby and
unavoidably caught directly in the exit path of some of that molecular/
nebula mass that’s also nicely heated up to several thousand K from
having just given birth to those absolutely terrific Sirius stars,
that subsequently utilize their impressive fusion energy and CMEs to
the fullest extent because when starting off as massive enough they
only have a couple hundred million years to live before sequencing
into a white dwarf.
I also have to interpret that our resident cosmology wizards don't
wish other to believe that anything ever gets captured or even
significantly perturbed by such nearby mass, thereby zilch worth of
interactions as even from several hundred molecular particles/cm3
going 3000 km/s past and directly into us for a few good centuries.
That’s only something like being caught in a continuous 1e15 kg solar
CME outflow that’s temporarily kicking up our atmospheric temperature
by 1% for up to a day or so (whereas the continuous flow from all
things Sirius might conceivably obtain a local temperature boost of
<10%). Gee whiz, as of roughly 260 million years ago (shortly after
the initial creation of those Sirius stars), what could possibly go
wrong for our environment?
~ BG
palsing
> According to our resident perpetual naysayers, mainstream obfuscation
> expertise and denial of being in denial wizards of their insider cabal
> approved conditional physics and selective science, it's always good
> to know that if any 3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud of <50 ly radii
> showed up within a few tens of light years from us, and started
> pumping out those massive stars nearby, which in turn spent a few
> hundred or thousands of some odd initial years creating planets and
> then blowing away the mostly unused portion of that molecular/nebula
> mass, that as such supposedly nothing the least bit unusual would
> happen throughout our solar system that’s rather nearby and
> unavoidably caught directly in the exit path of some of that molecular/
> nebula mass that’s also nicely heated up to several thousand K from
> having just given birth to those absolutely terrific Sirius stars,
> that subsequently utilize their impressive fusion energy and CMEs to
> the fullest extent because when starting off as massive enough they
> only have a couple hundred million years to live before sequencing
> into a white dwarf.
WOW! One sentence! Might be a record!
Better read this;
This URL opens on page 395, start reading at 13-1, and report back
with what you find there. It is info that I have given you before, but
some lessons are apparently harder to learn than others.
Read also the end of page 400 and the beginning of page 401 where it
says (paraphrased) "although the densest dust clouds in space may
contain up to 1 million molecules per cc, this is still 20 trillion
times less dense than the air at sea level...". Like I said before,
3e37kg in a volume with a 50 ly radius is really, really thin, and has
no effect whatsoever on the solar system.
So, get a clue, the dust cloud that we are undoubtedly in the middle
of is essentially undetectable to us, and yet is still capable of
creating new stars under specific circumstances. And, it is COLD,
very, very cold. No 'conditional physics' or 'selective science"
needed here, we already know plenty about 'the way things really are".
Maybe you should just start at page 1, that should keep you busy for a
while, and you might actually learn something that you didn't know...
for a change.
"The learning and knowledge that we have, is, at the most, but little
compared with that of which we are ignorant."
- Plato
\Paul A
Chris.B
wrote:
> I want his jewish shower cap.
We'll keep a welcome by the till-sides. Tra-la.
Diolch yn fawr iawn. ;-)
Androcles
=================================
This one belonged to my nain but it is the wrong colour,
I want a white one like il duce papa's:
http://www.welsh-costume.co.uk/images/welsh-folk.jpg
Chris.B
wrote:
> This one belonged to my nain but it is the wrong colour,
> I want a white one like il duce papa's:
> http://www.welsh-costume.co.uk/images/welsh-folk.jpg
There's lovely, boyo.
I'll see you down the pub, isn't it?
We can make you a nice cap out of wet beer mats.
It will be white as snow after being put through the sheep dip a
couple of times!
Brad Guth
Thanks for that constructive feed back.
If you wish to insist that capturing mass or being captured by mass is
simply not possible, then where's that conditional physics hiding? (is
it hiding along with those dead people that you keep quoting?)
Are you suggesting that any public funded supercompluter simulation of
proper motions is also impossible?
Are you suggesting some other method of having created those Sirius
stars?
Are you suggesting that galaxies do not merge or otherwise combine?
Are you suggesting that long period elliptical orbits are bogus?
~ BG
Androcles
There's lovely, boyo.
=======================================
Right you are, Chris bach, it'll be your shout, isn't it? I thought
at first you were Chris the coal, now I find you are Chris the sheep.
Brad Guth
Apparently to our contributor “palsing”, gravity really doesn’t count
if it involves capturing some nearby mass, such as latching onto our
solar system, whereas even a nearby molecular/nebula cloud of 3e37 kg
that’s creating those horrific stars is considered as insignificant
and supposedly always cold no matters what.
According to our resident perpetual naysayers, mainstream obfuscation
expertise and denial of being in denial wizards of their insider cabal
approved conditional physics and selective science, it's always good
to know that if any 3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud of <50 ly radii
showed up within a few tens of light years from us, and started
pumping out those massive stars nearby, which in turn spent a few
hundred or thousands of some odd initial years creating planets and
then blowing away the mostly unused portion of that molecular/nebula
mass, that as such supposedly nothing the least bit unusual would
happen throughout our solar system that’s rather nearby and
unavoidably caught directly in the exit path of some of that molecular/
nebula mass that’s also nicely heated up to several thousand K from
having just given birth to those absolutely terrific Sirius stars,
that subsequently utilize their impressive fusion energy and CMEs to
the fullest extent because when starting off as massive enough they
only have a couple hundred million years to live before sequencing
into a white dwarf.
I also have to interpret that our resident cosmology wizards don't
wish others to believe that anything ever gets captured or even
significantly perturbed by such nearby mass, thereby zilch worth of
interactions as even from several hundred molecular particles/cm3
going 3000 km/s past and directly into us for a few good centuries.
That’s only something like being caught in a continuous 1e15 kg solar
CME outflow that’s temporarily kicking up our atmospheric temperature
by 1% for up to a day or so (whereas the continuous flow from all
things Sirius might conceivably obtain a local temperature boost of
<10%). Gee whiz, as of roughly 260 million years ago (shortly after
the initial creation of those Sirius stars), what could possibly go
wrong for our environment?
When those nearby Sirius Stars fired up and proceeded to blow away
their remaining molecular/nebula cloud of nearly 3e37 kg, is when our
solar system became engulfed in that outflow for a considerable amount
of time, and those new stars should have lit up our nighttime as
brighter than any full moonlight (especially in the UV spectrum).
~ BG
Brad Guth
There are many well known long-period companion stars as binaries,
trinaries and greater multiples as complex star systems as having
their interrelated tidal associations that exceed 100,000 year cycles
of proper motions within the greater 225 million year galactic cycle
of proper motion. There are also galactic companion or rogue clouds
of significant mass and those progenitor stars that come and go
depending on their individual size and mass.
“Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
“The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
Centauri AB),”
The ESA stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom
utilized to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our realm of the
galactic cycle, in that essentially everything remains in orbit around
something, including multiple long-period star systems and their tidal
influence on others (including our solar system) as we all get to
stick with trekking about our galactic center that isn’t about to set
any of us free.
“Tales of a thousand and one nights: Past and future of the Milky Way”
"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood",
by B. Nordström et al.
“Most of the stars are located within about 500 light-years from the
Earth and were already observed by the ESA satellite Hipparcos to
measure their precise distances and motions in the plane of the sky.
But a key piece was missing in our knowledge of their space motions in
the Galaxy: The radial velocities [1] of the stars were still not
measured, so only their 2D motions were known. The team of astronomers
has now filled this gap: For the first time, we now know the 3D space
motion of a complete sample of typical stars in the solar
neighbourhood. From their space motions, the team was able to compute
the positions of these stars at different points in the Milky Way's
history. For example, the movie below shows the motions of the
observed stars in their latest orbit around the Galactic Center.”
Plus there’s always loads of other research data to mine our way
through or cheery-pick from.
local stellar motions have affected our solar system. The whereabouts
of their progenitor molecular/nebula worthy clouds and their
subsequent demise or disbursements of all that terrific mass also
can’t be excluded, especially when such nearby clouds form or merge as
3e37 kg or greater mass and should stick around for a few million
years as they crank out impressive stars like those of Sirius w/
planets, and subsequently heating up their surrounding molecular/
nebular cloud that gets forced out by those terrific solar winds that
almost never let up.
~ BG
Brad Guth
Apparently to our contributor “palsing”, whatever nearby gravity
really doesn’t count if it involves capturing some nearby mass, such
as latching onto our solar system, whereas even a nearby molecular/
nebula cloud of 3e37 kg that’s creating those horrific stars is
considered as insignificant and supposedly always cold no matters
what.
According to our resident perpetual naysayers, mainstream obfuscation
expertise and denial of being in denial wizards of their insider cabal
approved conditional physics and selective science, it's always good
to know that if any 3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud of <50 ly radii
showed up within a few tens of light years from us, and started
pumping out those massive stars nearby, which in turn spent a few
hundred or thousands of some odd initial years creating planets and
then blowing away the mostly unused portion of that molecular/nebula
mass, that as such supposedly nothing the least bit unusual would
happen throughout our solar system that’s rather nearby and
unavoidably caught directly in the exit path of some of that molecular/
nebula mass that’s also nicely heated up to several thousand K from
having just given birth to those absolutely terrific Sirius stars,
that subsequently utilize their impressive fusion energy and CMEs to
the fullest extent because, when starting off as massive enough they
may only have a couple hundred million years to live before sequencing
into a white dwarf. In other words, the bigger the progenitor star
the faster it gets to die.
I also have to interpret that our resident cosmology wizards don't
wish others to believe that anything ever gets captured or even
significantly perturbed by such nearby mass, thereby zilch worth of
interactions as even from several hundred molecular particles/cm3
going 3000 km/s past and directly into us for a few good centuries.
That’s only something like being caught in a continuous 1e15 kg solar
CME outflow that’s temporarily kicking up our atmospheric temperature
by 1% for up to a day or so (whereas the continuous flow from all
things Sirius might conceivably obtain a local temperature boost of
<10%). Gee whiz, as of roughly 260 million years ago (shortly after
the initial creation of those Sirius stars), what could possibly go
wrong for our environment?
When those nearby Sirius Stars fired up and proceeded to blow away
their remaining molecular/nebula cloud of nearly 3e37 kg, is when our
solar system became engulfed in that outflow for a considerable amount
of time, and otherwise those new stars should have lit up our
Brad Guth
binaries, trinaries and greater multiples as complex star systems as
having their interrelated tidal associations that exceed 100,000 year
cycles of proper motions within the greater 225 million year galactic
cycle of proper motion. There are also galactic companion or rogue
progenitor stars that come and go depending on their individual size
and mass.
“Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
“The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
Centauri AB),”
The ESA stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom
utilized to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our pocket realm
of the galactic cycle, in that essentially everything remains in orbit
around something, including multiple long-period star systems and
their tidal influence on others (including our solar system) as we all
get to stick with trekking about our galactic center that isn’t about
to set any of us free.
“Tales of a thousand and one nights: Past and future of the Milky Way”
"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood",
by B. Nordström et al.
“Most of the stars are located within about 500 light-years from the
Earth and were already observed by the ESA satellite Hipparcos to
measure their precise distances and motions in the plane of the sky.
But a key piece was missing in our knowledge of their space motions in
the Galaxy: The radial velocities [1] of the stars were still not
measured, so only their 2D motions were known. The team of astronomers
has now filled this gap: For the first time, we now know the 3D space
motion of a complete sample of typical stars in the solar
neighbourhood. From their space motions, the team was able to compute
the positions of these stars at different points in the Milky Way's
history. For example, the movie below shows the motions of the
observed stars in their latest orbit around the Galactic Center.”
Plus there’s always loads of other mostly public funded research data
palsing
> Thanks for that constructive feed back.
Sure. So, you have no comment about what was on those pages? Nothing
to say at all? You didn't learn anything new at all? Impossible to
change your mind? Are you actually capable if learning new things?
Have trouble believing what real experts have to say?
> If you wish to insist that capturing mass or being captured by mass is
> simply not possible, then where's that conditional physics hiding? (is
> it hiding along with those dead people that you keep quoting?)
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.
> Are you suggesting that any public funded supercompluter simulation of
> proper motions is also impossible?
I would know nothing about such things.
> Are you suggesting some other method of having created those Sirius
> stars?
No, I believe the processes that formed the Sirius system are quite
well known. This happened a long ways away and had no effect on the
solar system.
> Are you suggesting that galaxies do not merge or otherwise combine?
No, merging galaxies are quite common, and I view them routinely
during my telescopic magnification exercise.
> Are you suggesting that long period elliptical orbits are bogus?
No, I'm not. I AM saying, with 100% certainty, that Sirius is not in
any kind of long period elliptical orbit with our sun. It is just
passing by and will get as close as 3.26 ly before heading way from
us, a long time from now.
\Paul A
Brad Guth
> There are many well known long-period companion stars as extended
> binaries, trinaries and greater multiples as complex star systems as
> having their interrelated tidal associations that exceed 100,000 year
> cycles of proper motions within the greater 225 million year galactic
> cycle of proper motion. There are also galactic companion or rogue
> molecular/nebula clouds of significant mass and creating those
> progenitor stars that come and go depending on their individual size
> and mass.
>
> “Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
> “The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
> but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
> Centauri AB),”
>
> The ESA stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom
> utilized to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our pocket realm
> of the galactic cycle, in that essentially everything remains in orbit
> around something, including multiple long-period star systems and
> their tidal influence on others (including our solar system) as we all
> get to stick with trekking about our galactic center that isn’t about
> to set any of us free.
>
> “Tales of a thousand and one nights: Past and future of the Milky Way”
>
> "The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood",
Escape from Sirius is perhaps a little easier said than accomplished,
especially when it was worth so much extra mass (<1.9e31 kg for
Sirius[B] and <2.6e31 for the whole package deal) to begin with, and
perhaps only a million fold worse yet as a molecular/nebula cloud
along with its progenitor stars, further compounded by us having been
moving towards that terrific mass at 7.6 km/sec, rather than away (not
that there’s any objective science telling us exactly where those
Sirius progenitor stars and their molecular/nebula cloud were to begin
with, as most likely from a molecular/nebula cloud derived from a
galactic merger). Perhaps the theory of a similar supernova event
that gave our sun its start is what also transpired on behalf of
boosting those Sirius progenitor stars to life.
Lagrange Point Finder
http://www.orbitsimulator.com/formulas/LagrangePointFinder.html
Using 8.136e16 meters, 7e30 kg and 2e30 kg
The L4/L5 velocity is just .086 km/sec.
Perhaps the L2 of 0.128 km/sec is close to escape velocity.
At 0.1 ly (9.46e14 m) gives the L2 velocity of 1.19 km/sec
http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
at 8.6 ly the escape velocity from 7e30 kg = 0.107167 km/sec
at .1 ly (9.46e11 km) the escape velocity from Sirius only climbs to
1 km/sec, but neither of these are taking into account the added
gravity pull of our solar system or any barycenter considerations.
Thus far the required escape velocity from Sirius doesn’t seem so
great, so why exactly are we headed back towards that sucker at 7.6 km/
sec?
Even at a spread of 1000 ly and 2.5e37 kg, we’re looking at an exit/
escape velocity of 18.8 km/sec required in order that our solar system
to avoid that amount of molecular/nebula gravitational tidal radii
grip. Problem is, at least as of lately and for as long as anyone can
figure, it seems we’ve been headed the wrong way.
If we always had a purely linear -7.6 km/sec closing velocity to deal
with, and 250 million years of that constant velocity without any
radial trajectory deviations, this only adds up to 6334 ly plus our
existing 8.6 ly. = 6343 ly, and at that separation would require 7.46
km/sec escape velocity (escape meaning as per our moving away from and
otherwise not as headed towards that original molecular/nebula cloud
of 2.5e37 kg).
Obviously as we close in on the existing depleted mass of the Sirius
star system(7e30 kg), at some point the closing velocity of our
elliptical path should increase, just like those elliptical treks of
Sedna and any other Oort cloud items that stick with us, and otherwise
like many comets do not maintain a constant velocity throughout their
extended radial elliptic trajectory. Sedna that’s currently at 89 AU
is likely moving a few percent faster than at 900+ AU, suggesting that
our negative radial trajectory velocity with Sirius may also be on the
Brad Guth
There are actually many well known long-period companion stars as
extended binaries, trinaries and greater multiples as complex star
systems as having their interrelated tidal associations that exceed
100,000 year cycles of proper motions within the greater 225 million
year galactic cycle of its spiral motion. There are also galactic
companion or rogue molecular/nebula clouds of significant mass and
creating those progenitor stars that come and go depending on their
individual size and mass.
“Many visual binaries have long orbital periods of several centuries”
“The orbital period can e.g. be a few days (components of Beta Lyrae),
but also hundreds of thousands of years (Proxima Centauri around Alpha
Centauri AB),”
The ESA stellar Hipparcos survey of proper motions that’s seldom
utilized to its potential, shows us quite a lot about our pocket realm
of the galactic cycle, in that essentially everything remains in orbit
around something, including multiple long-period star systems and
their tidal influence on others (including our solar system) as we all
get to stick with trekking about our galactic center that isn’t about
to set any of us free.
“Tales of a thousand and one nights: Past and future of the Milky Way”
"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood",
by B. Nordström et al.
Brad Guth
Apparently to the mainstream mindset of our contributor “palsing”,
whatever nearby gravity really doesn’t count if it involves capturing
some nearby mass, such as latching onto our solar system, whereas even
a nearby molecular/nebula cloud of 3e37 kg that’s creating those
horrific Sirius stars is considered as insignificant and supposedly
always cold no matters what. Go figure.
According to our resident perpetual naysayers, mainstream obfuscation
expertise and denial of being in denial wizards of their insider cabal
approved conditional physics and selective science, it's always good
to know that if any 3e37 kg molecular/nebula cloud of <50 ly radii
showed up within a few tens of light years from us, and started
pumping out those massive stars nearby, which in turn spent a few
hundred or thousands of some odd initial years creating planets and
then blowing away the mostly unused portion of that molecular/nebula
mass, that as such supposedly nothing the least bit unusual would
happen throughout our solar system that’s rather nearby and
unavoidably caught directly in the exit path of some of that molecular/
nebula mass that’s also nicely heated up to several thousand K from
having just given birth to those absolutely terrific Sirius stars,
that subsequently utilize their impressive fusion energy and CMEs to
the fullest extent because, when starting off as massive enough they
may only have a couple hundred million years to live before sequencing
into a white dwarf. In other words, the bigger the progenitor star
the faster it gets to die.
I also have to interpret that our resident cosmology wizards simply do
not wish others to consider that anything ever gets captured or even
significantly perturbed by such nearby mass, thereby zilch worth of
interactions as even from several hundred molecular particles/cm3
going 3000 km/s past and directly into us for a few good centuries.
That’s only something like being caught in a continuous 1e15 kg solar
CME outflow that’s temporarily kicking up our atmospheric temperature
by 1% for up to a day or so (whereas the continuous flow from all
things Sirius might conceivably obtain a local temperature boost of
<10%). With such planetary creation nebula particle density of <10000/
cm3, as well as temperatures <10000 K, Gee whiz, as of roughly 260
million years ago (shortly after the initial creation of those Sirius
stars), what could possibly go wrong for our environment?
When those nearby Sirius Stars fired up and proceeded to blow away
their remaining molecular/nebula cloud of nearly 3e37 kg, is most
likely when our solar system became engulfed in that surplus molecular/
nebula outflow for a considerable amount of time, and otherwise those
new stars should have lit up our nighttime as brighter than any full
moonlight (especially in the UV spectrum) so that at least our
terrestrial diatoms became happy campers.
~ BG
Brad Guth
> Escape from Sirius is easier said than accomplished, especially when
> it was worth so much extra mass to begin with, and perhaps a million
> fold worse yet as a molecular/nebula cloud with its progenitor stars,
> further compounded by us having been moving towards that terrific mass
> at 7.6 km/sec, rather than away (not that there’s any objective
> science telling us exactly where those Sirius progenitor stars and
> molecular/nebula derived from a galactic merger). Perhaps the theory
> of a similar supernova event that gave our sun its start is what also
> transpired on behalf of boosting those Sirius progenitor stars to
> life.
>
> Lagrange Point Finder
> http://www.orbitsimulator.com/formulas/LagrangePointFinder.html
> Using 8.136e16 meters, 7e30 kg and 2e30 kg
> The L4/L5 velocity is just .086 km/sec.
> Perhaps the L2 of 0.128 km/sec is close to escape velocity.
>
> http://www.calctool.org/CALC/phys/astronomy/escape_velocity
> at 8.6 ly the escape velocity from 7e30 kg = 0.107167 km/sec
> at .1 ly (9.46e11 km) the escape velocity from Sirius only climbs to
> 1 km/sec, but neither of these are taking into account the added
> gravity pull of our solar system or any barycenter considerations.
>
> exactly are we headed back towards that sucker at 7.6 km/sec?
>
> Even at a spread of 1000 ly and 2.5e37 kg, we’re looking at an exit/
> escape velocity of 18.8 km/sec required in order that our solar system
> to avoid that amount of molecular/nebula gravitational tidal radii
> the wrong way.
>
> If we had a purely linear -7.6 km/sec closing velocity to deal with,
> and 250 million years of that constant velocity without any radial
> trajectory deviations, this only adds up to 6334 ly plus our existing
> 8.6 ly. = 6343 ly, and at that separation would require 7.46 km/sec
> escape velocity (escape meaning as per our moving away from and
> otherwise not as headed towards that original molecular/nebula cloud
> of 2.5e37 kg).
>
> system(7e30 kg), at some point the closing velocity of our elliptical
> path should increase, just like those elliptical treks of Sedna and
> maintain a constant velocity throughout their extended radial elliptic
> at 900+ AU, suggesting that our negative radial velocity with Sirius
> may also be on the increase.
>
> http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/02files/Sedna_01.html
> Where’s the fully 3D interactive three body orbital simulation of
> stellar proper motions that’ll work this rogue analogy of Sirius and
> our solar system from the full elliptical trajectory and barycenter
> point of view?
>
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Corrections and 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 like a soft nova taking place, and as
such the expansion and subsequent 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 a cloud radii of at least 64 ly, 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 3000 km/sec that I’d suggested).
In order to double that cloud radius from 64 to 128 ly takes 1000
years. The average cloud density that needs to include those terrific
stellar CMEs is likely going to become worth 1e4/cm3 of rather nicely
heated molecular plus CME stuff to start off with.
In other words, a million years after those new stars started pushing
away their remainder/surplus of molecular/nebula mass, the radii will
have increased by only 6.4e4 ly (with us pretty much dead center), and
when given 260 million years offers 16.64e6 ly. At most the Sirius
molecular cloud radii has likely expanded something less than 16
million light years out, and we’re situated pretty much dead center
within that expanding sphere that’s probably making the exact same red-
shifted noise as the CMBR
At 64 ly to start off with (our solar system as if it were just
outside of that original molecular/nebula cloud), whereas that’s only
looking at a thousand fold more proton density and roughly 32 times
the average solar CME velocity that our own sun tosses at us, and I’d
bet that it’s also at least twice as hot as well as a sustained
molecular interaction that going to affect our terrestrial environment
for a good thousand years.
I’ll run these numbers a few more times, and likely have to revise my
topic to suit, but you should at least get the gist of what this
means.
~ BG
Brad Guth
> On Sep 19, 6:00 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for that constructive feed back.
>
> Sure. So, you have no comment about what was on those pages? Nothing
> to say at all? You didn't learn anything new at all? Impossible to
> change your mind? Are you actually capable if learning new things?
> Have trouble believing what real experts have to say?
entirely new that I hadn't picked up before. I'll do some more
reading and let you know if I have give this topic a rest.
>
> > If you wish to insist that capturing mass or being captured by mass is
> > simply not possible, then where's that conditional physics hiding? (is
> > it hiding along with those dead people that you keep quoting?)
>
> 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.
Your subjective "impossibility" is noted, especially since none of us
has an objective clue as to where that Sirius molecular/nebula cloud
was as of 260 million years ago.
>
> > Are you suggesting that any public funded supercompluter simulation of
> > proper motions is also impossible?
>
> I would know nothing about such things.
Why of course not. (me sarcastically speaking)
>
> > Are you suggesting some other method of having created those Sirius
> > stars?
>
> No, I believe the processes that formed the Sirius system are quite
> well known. This happened a long ways away and had no effect on the
> solar system.
>
> > Are you suggesting that galaxies do not merge or otherwise combine?
>
> No, merging galaxies are quite common, and I view them routinely
> during my telescopic magnification exercise.
>
> > Are you suggesting that long period elliptical orbits are bogus?
>
> No, I'm not. I AM saying, with 100% certainty, that Sirius is not in
> any kind of long period elliptical orbit with our sun. It is just
> passing by and will get as close as 3.26 ly before heading way from
> us, a long time from now.
>
> \Paul A
Perhaps this time around it's only good for 3.26 ly, or if your
subjective math/swag is in error, perhaps it'll get to within .326 ly,
or something in between.
I’ll research and run these numbers a few more times, and likely have
palsing
But it doesn't really mean anything. Even if all of your calculations
are exactly right, that cloud now has no effect on the solar system at
all, and never did.
Remember that 1e4/cm3 is still 20 trillion times less dense than air
here on Earth, and is still way less than the best vacuum we can make
on Earth, which contains about 10e10 molecules per CC. Also, with an
increase to the cloud radius such as you are suggesting, well, the
density would have therefore dropped by many magnitudes. I found
another very descriptive page, here;
... study up and learn that these clouds from which stars form are
very, very tenuous. Like I said before, the solar system has probably
traveled right through the heart of many of these things in the last 5
billion years with no effect whatsoever.
You are trying hard to make a big deal out of something that is
literally less than nothing. Do the math yourself; how many kg per cc
with the initial mass of 3e37 and a final volume a sphere of radius 16
ly. I personally think your numbers are wrong, but no matter, using
yours will still prove my point. That cloud has always been less than
nothing.
\Paul A
Brad Guth
those conditional laws of physics that always have more than their
fair share of public funded infomercial eyecandy apply. In other
words, you think our faith-based approved K-12s are being educated
just perfectly fine and dandy as is.
>
> Remember that 1e4/cm3 is still 20 trillion times less dense than air
> here on Earth, and is still way less than the best vacuum we can make
> on Earth, which contains about 10e10 molecules per CC.
Air (sea level) = ~2.5e19 assorted atoms/cm3
>
> Also, with an
> increase to the cloud radius such as you are suggesting, well, the
> density would have therefore dropped by many magnitudes. I found
> another very descriptive page, here;
>
> http://deoxy.org/vacuum.htm
>
> ... study up and learn that these clouds from which stars form are
> very, very tenuous. Like I said before, the solar system has probably
> traveled right through the heart of many of these things in the last 5
> billion years with no effect whatsoever.
error(s): "average matter density of visible matter in the universe
10-9 hydrogen atoms/cm3" reads as 1e-9 atom/cm3 or that's .001 atom/m3
is probably not a correct analogy unless we're talking about including
the most extreme ISM that's further out than 15 billion light years,
and near absolute zero K to boot.
>
> You are trying hard to make a big deal out of something that is
> literally less than nothing. Do the math yourself; how many kg per cc
> with the initial mass of 3e37 and a final volume a sphere of radius 16
> ly. I personally think your numbers are wrong, but no matter, using
> yours will still prove my point. That cloud has always been less than
> nothing.
>
> \Paul A
It's not a problem,unless your old and relatively small or
insignificant solar system was parked right next to or partially
within that terrific molecular/nebula cloud of <3e37 kg to begin
with. Obviously you don't have any objective clues as to what nailed
us as of 260 +/- some odd million years ago, or where the hell our
moon/Selene or Venus came from, or why Venus lost its moon, and
therefore you're not going to allow any other interpretations get past
or over your dead body, so to speak.
~ BG
Chris.B
<snip tripe>
Fräulein Brenda, baby, ya'll going to have to stop copying your hero,
Herr Professor Kelleher.
You're beginning to sound so alike it's hard to tell you two trolls
apart.
Cue: The usual crap about Yosemite, half-baked brownshirt nazis,
whatever...
Brad Guth
Obviously you and other perverts think the past, present and future is
perfectly fine and dandy as is, as though you would not have changed a
damn thing even if you could. Good for you and all the other ZNRs
that you brown-nose with. Your pretentious anti-tripe and usual
mainstream status-quo or bust and closed mindset is noted for exactly
what it is.
~ BG