Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
BradGuth
according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
orbital mechanics.
In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media
has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius
star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and
extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from
our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial
illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth.
First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very
least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy
star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown
away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our
existing solar system wasn't any too far away. Others might go so far
as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million,
while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5
million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller
galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. In any case, that must have
been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of
this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly
nowhere to be found.
In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system
wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal
radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least
subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily
dominated by the Sirius star/solar system.
Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions
isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big
Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest.
Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone)
http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/localgroup/localgroup.html
The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.cfm?fareaid=20
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html
Local galactic motion simulation:
"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B.
Nordström et al.
http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en
According to several physics and astronomy kinds of observationology
science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer
replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two
galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way
towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). Seems hardly fair
considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular
Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of
galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including
us) for their final demise and/or rebirth.
Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other
archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting
“colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced
and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital
observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble
plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further
document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours
and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown
via mergers.
Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us
whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely?
Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as
republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our
Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo
(much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not
representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
Hagar
"BradGuth" <brad...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e424991a-27fa-4ce9...@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
orbital mechanics.
***********************************
GuthBall, I think the doctor slapped you waayyyyy too hard
when you were born. Even evolution in retro-grade couldn't
account for your insanity.
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Thanks for that topic unrelated data, as I'm sure your rabbi would
approve.
Apparently the regular laws of Newtonian physics do not apply to your
closed mindset.
~ BG
BradGuth
Sirius and us(our solar system) are very much indeed inseparable, at
least according to the regular laws of physics pertaining to the
mainstream accepted laws of Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics
that seems more than sufficient, especially if little Sedna can be
turned around at a tidal radii of 1.459e14 m that’s worth merely
2.975e13 N, whereas Sirius at 1.417e17 N (20 thousand fold stronger)
and we’ve been gaining on the 3.5 solar mass of Sirius by 7.6 km/sec,
plus most likely accelerating towards our next close encounter.
It’s pretty much all nothing but a mainstream infowar, a tactical
disinformation gauntlet of carefully orchestrated lies, deceptions and
systematic obfuscation is what it’s all about. When I’ve merely
expected of others to share information and to otherwise
constructively ponder and contribute to this topic and many similar
ones before, all we ever got at best was a stone cold shoulder, and
otherwise mostly negativity and banishment from most, as well as from
a certain racist and bigotry spouting rabbi none the less. However,
the laws of physics are seldom if ever politically correct or
otherwise faith-based, and as such they simply do not lie, and even
the best available science doesn’t support many of those established
mainstream notions of excluding anything and everything that rocks a
given faith-based boat..
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
The cosmic molecular cloud of what created Sirius, as being worth at
least 1.25e6 solar masses, while at a center to center distance of 100
ly and using our solar system mass of 2.05e30 kg for that same era, we
get the following results for 100 ly (9.46053e17 m), 50 ly (4.7303e17
m) and 10 ly (9.46053e16 m).
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 100 ly = 3.819e20 Newtons
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 50 ly = 1.528e21 N
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 10 ly = 3.819e22 N
current (sun ~ earth) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 5.974e24 kg at 1.496e11 m = 3.541e22 N
current (sun ~ mars) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 6.418e23 kg at 2.2794e11 m = 1.639e21 N
current (sun ~ pluto) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 1.305e22 kg at 5.906e12 m = 4.964e16 N
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/average gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 7.867e13 m = 1.023e14 N
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N
current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction:
2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
Being that a molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses is going
to have a diameter of nearly 100 light years, as such I might suggest
that we use the 50 ly parameter for the adjusted distance from the
core density of such a molecular cloud, as for mutually binding us at
the weak gravity force of 1.528e21 N. Of course by doubling that
distance cuts this tidal binding force of radial gravitational
attraction down to a forth, whereas even at 500 ly it’s still worth
1.528e19 N, and at the 2.5e37 solar masses brings that 500 ly distance
right back up to being worth 1.528e20 N.
The cosmic creation of the Sirius star/solar system was no small
matter of any wussy little molecular cloud. This was an extremely
large cloud and subsequent stellar birthing event of relatively recent
times (250~300 MBP), and as such it would have been entirely visible
to the naked human eyes of that era (not that any intelligent human
via Darwin or intelligent design even existed at that time, although
Ed Conrad’s “Man of Coal” seems to be of that era), and as of most
recently transforming the red supergiant phase of Sirius B into a
white dwarf required a helium flashover (slow nova) about as close as
you can safely get, if not a little too close.
By way of reading from what others claiming to know more than most
anyone else (must be Einstein clones), it seems they’d have no
problems with suggesting the 1e6:1 cosmic molecular cloud of having
been worth 1.25e7 solar masses that created the Sirius star/solar
system, and if still using 2.05e30 kg mass for that of our solar
system of that same era results in yet another 10 fold increased force
of attraction for that same 50 ly distance, representing 1.528e22 N
(nearly half of the sun~earth attraction), and 99.9999% of this 1e6:1
molecular cloud that’s oddly nowhere to be found, by rights should
have greatly affected our solar system.
Try to remember that this wasn’t a one brief time kind of a cosmic
drive-by shooting, but most likely worth at least ten million years of
persistent gravity pull before ever having cranked out those
impressive Sirius stars, and for at least another million some odd
years of having blown everything else (99.999% of that molecular
cloud) far away. Once again, how can this kind of nearby cosmic event
and of such horrific original mass not have affected our solar system?
Saul Levy
Maybe on purpose?
Saul Levy
Saul Levy
Neither do I!
Saul Levy
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:17:08 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Saul Levy
We NEED TO KNOW!
Your INSANITY IS GROWING!
Saul Levy
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 06:55:31 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
>according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
>orbital mechanics.
>
>In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media
>has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius
>star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and
>extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from
>our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial
>illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth.
>
> ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force into
proper context, it’s always good to draw upon whatever we objectively
know to be the case.
TNOs like Sedna, multiple thousands of SDOs and even a few of the
larger OCOs (Ort Cloud Objects) are no longer hard to find within the
radii of our Oort cloud that’s reaching way the hell out there at the
tidal radii of < 3e16 meters and isn’t exactly going anywhere either,
all because of the weak binding force of gravity (“the Sun's orb of
physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence”).
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro/tnoslist.html
Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna;
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N
Whereas Sirius has apparently been holding onto us;
current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction:
2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5
solar masses is quite capable of its gravitational force holding onto,
not to mention as of prior to Sirius B becoming a white dwarf, and of
not too long before then of whatever the original molecular cloud of
<1.25e7 solar masses has to offer (even at 500 ly it’s a worthy pull
or attractive force of 1.528e20 N).
As is, that 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force
represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you
can always trust the mainstream obfuscation from our resident
newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps
simply use one of the following:
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid)
of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging
all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9
N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius.
That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal
radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back
towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an
elliptical Newtonian trek should.
In other words, we unavoidably became a Newtonian orbiting part of
that same Sirius molecular cloud, and having remained associated with
the Sirius star/solar system ever since. The 99.999% remains of that
original molecular cloud which gave birth to Sirius is however nowhere
in sight, which is rather odd in that our observing instruments having
imaged the remains of similar or far less robust clouds at millions of
light years away, suggesting that the Sirius B helium flashover may
have actually been more like a sustained nova or possibly that of a
supernovae which directly affected our terrestrial environment, as
having triggered our most recent genetic mutations.
As I've said often before, you do not have to take my word on this,
because the laws of physics and the Newtonian binding force of gravity
are entirely in charge of this one. Only a religious skewed faith
that systematically excludes such matters of fact can manage to keep a
straight face, as they publicly obfuscate and otherwise remain in such
perpetual denial, somewhat like a Pope in denial of what their faith
once did to those nice Cathars. (how is it that mainstream religion
and their devout minions are never responsible for anything bad
happening?)
Hagar
On Jul 6, 6:55 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
> according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
> orbital mechanics.
< snip usual GuthBall frothing >
> As I've said often before, you do not have to take my word on this,
GuthBall, no matter how many time you have recited your usual and
unintelligible gibberish, it remains just that: the rantings of a total
loon.
BradGuth
The Sirius star/solar system as having recently evolved from scratch,
as of supposedly 200<300 million years ago, and then only most
recently its Sirius B having gone soft/slow nova as it converted
itself from the original 8.5 solar mass into a red supergiant worth
perhaps as much as 5.7 (> 5.3) solar masses, as having an impressive
1000 fold radii, finally got itself down to the helium flashover phase
of becoming a white dwarf within perhaps as recently as a few million
years ago. In other words, having been close enough as to creating a
living hell on Earth with a 2nd sun until after the red supergiant and
final helium flashover demise of becoming the nearly invisible white
dwarf. The original Sirius B luminosity was likely worth 10,000 times
brighter than our sun, and perhaps the combined luminosity of Sirius
ABC was likely worth 20,000 times brighter than our sun. However,
since so much of its spectrum was UV would mean that the energy
received from the Sirius star/solar system was actually worth
considerably greater to that of our mostly wet and growing environment
of that era.
The original location of Sirius and especially that of its terrific
molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses (<1.25e7) is still not
known (as though it materialized out of nowhere), nor has whatever
previous proper motions of either us or the remainder of that
molecular cloud been plotted or ever so much as virtually identified
via supercomputer simulations. Perhaps we have lost any track of such
remainders of that molecular cloud because of the horrific Sirius B
helium flashover having so extensively blown it all away.
Perhaps the public funded mainstream mindset of astrophysics and
related science simply doesn’t want us to know exactly whatever such a
nearby star/solar system as Sirius could have come from or having done
to us.
~ BG
BradGuth
This isn’t even hocus-pocus rocket science, instead it’s just plain
old Newtonian physics that a dysfunctional 5th grader should
understand.
As is, the 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force
represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you
can always trust the mainstream obfuscation from our resident
newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps
simply use one of the following:
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid)
of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging
all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9
N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius.
That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal
radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back
towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an
elliptical Newtonian trek should.
The Sirius star/solar system as having recently evolved from scratch
as of supposedly 200<300 million years ago, and then only most
recently its Sirius B having gone soft/slow nova as it converted
itself from the original 8.5 solar mass into a red supergiant worth
perhaps as much as 5.7 (> 5.3) solar masses, as having an impressive
1000 fold radii, finally got itself down to the helium flashover phase
of becoming a white dwarf within perhaps as recently as a few million
years ago. In other words, having been close enough as to creating a
living hell on Earth with a second sun until after the red supergiant
and final helium flashover demise of becoming the nearly invisible
white dwarf. The original Sirius B luminosity was likely worth 10,000
times brighter than our sun, and perhaps the combined luminosity of
Sirius ABC was likely worth 20,000 times brighter than our sun.
However, since so much of its spectrum was UV would mean that the
energy received from the Sirius star/solar system was actually worth
something considerably greater to that of our mostly wet and growing
environment of that era.
The original location of Sirius and especially that of its terrific
molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses (1.25e5<1.25e7) is
still not objectively known (almost as though it materialized out of
nowhere), nor has whatever previous proper motions of either us or the
remainder of that molecular cloud been plotted or ever so much as
virtually identified via supercomputer simulations. We have obviously
lost any track of such remainders of that terrific molecular cloud
because of the Sirius B helium flashover having so extensively blown
it all away, and somehow supposedly not having affected us.
Perhaps the public funded mainstream mindset of astrophysics and
related science simply doesn’t want us to know exactly whatever such a
nearby star/solar system as Sirius could have come from, or having
done to us.
It takes a fairly substantial ratio of mostly hydrogen and some helium
consumption, plus a staggering CME loss of roughly causing a third of
its original stellar mass to go away, before a star becomes a worthy
full blown red giant or supergiant, thereby making the red supergiant
of Betelgeuse originally worth an impressive 30+ solar masses.
http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/06/betelgeuse_about_to_blow.html
Yes indeed, perhaps Betelgeuse should blow our socks off with one
hell of a nova or possibly supernovae as it becomes a fairly
substantial white dwarf or possibly turns itself into a neutron star,
and rather soon if there's an ongoing shrinkage of 1%/year for the
past 15 years (actually its helium flashover into becoming a white
dwarf or that neutron star has already taken place as of more than 550
years ago).
Here’s my further revised/edited version of stellar timelines that’ll
offer some alternative interpretation as to the recent birth and rapid
evolution of the Sirius star/solar system, and of this process most
likely having impacted our relatively nearby and passive solar system.
Our sun that supposedly took 100 million years in order to assemble
itself, consumes or burns its way through 4.28e9 kg/sec of mostly
hydrogen (or rather its more like burning through plus otherwise
having been CME tossing away <3e12 kg/sec, and perhaps even <4e12 kg/
sec if it were taking less than 9 billion years of its stellar
evolution to become a white dwarf). Supposedly within another 4.5
billion years our sun will have become noticeably expanding into a red
giant, and otherwise by at most 7.5 billion from now it should have
become a full blown red giant of at least 250 radii before the same
kind of measurable shrinkage and helium flashover phase into becoming
a white dwarf of perhaps not larger than Mars.
On the other hand, the original Sirius B of <8.5 solar masses had an
extremely short timeline up until reaching its most recent white dwarf
phase, as having obtained this status at roughly 500 times faster
stellar evolution than our sun reaching it’s white dwarf phase within
roughly 12e9 years (in other words, at merely 4.28e9 kg/sec our sun is
almost never going to die off unless something extremely large smacks
into it). On the other nearby stellar hand, Sirius B may have evolved
itself within as little as 200 million years, before having become the
white dwarf as of something less than 64 million years ago. However,
Sirius C could have also played an important roll at the same time or
before Sirius B evolved into the white dwarf. Perhaps the last thing
anyone within mainstream science wants any of us to have is that
TRACEe3 taking a much higher resolved look-see.
Sirius B had to burn through its fuel and otherwise toss mass away at
<4e16 kg/sec, an average mass reduction rate of <4e15 kg/sec.
In other words, having to consume roughly 8+ times as much mass in as
little as 1/60th the time is what has to represent an extremely
vibrant neighbor (as a nearly exploding or slow nova kind of highly
terrestrial illuminating star), especially along with the original of
Sirius A at perhaps 3+ solar mass and Sirius C at whatever it started
out as perhaps worth <1 solar mass, all together representing one heck
of a great deal of stellar mass consuming and CMEs tossing sufficient
stellar volumes of mostly hydrogen, helium plus a few other plasma
elements as considerable mass leaving that vibrant star system, that
wasn’t any too far away from us.
Now that’s a seriously hot kind of active star system that’s sharing
loads of substantial hard-X-rays and gamma, taking place at perhaps
less than 10 light years from us, while the red supergiant phase and
its helium flashover (aka slow nova) into becoming the little white
dwarf happening even closer to us, and perhaps closer yet if there’s
any barycenter orbital considerations due to the original molecular
cloud of 1.2e6 or greater solar masses that obviously had to exist as
of 250~350 million years ago.
Our Earth and moon are also in the process of each losing mass, and at
the very least we are losing a combined 1e3 kg/sec in addition to the
3e12 kg/sec that our sun is losing. Given the persistent 350~450 km/s
of solar wind that’s gently pushing upon us (not to mention the added
force of halo CMEs), is suggesting it’s most likely this gradual
ongoing loss of such mass and its worth of gravity is what’s causing
the majority of our orbital recession (under 15 cm/year) away from the
sun. This could actually become a good thing, especially if we could
somehow manage to artificially cause Earth and our moon combined to
lose <1e4 kg/sec, while our sun keeps getting more into the IR
spectrum that’ll eventually become an inflated red giant of <250 times
radii, along with fluctuations and the increased loss of mass reaching
its highly charged plasma out nearly to the Mars radii, means that
Earth needs to get as far away form our sun as possible, and the
sooner the better. By then, we’d actually be a whole lot better off
as a moon of Saturn or Jupiter.
Nothing all that much to worry about: (as long as our fading
geomagnetic force doesn’t entirely fail us)
http://spaceweather.gmu.edu/index_files/cme.jpg
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/images/lasco-c2-cme.jpg
http://www.astronomycast.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/cme.jpg
http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/images/large/suncombo1_prev.jpg
http://ct.gsfc.nasa.gov/insights/vol13/tele.htm
Btw; Sirius A has most likely gone through nearly 30% of it’s
original mass, and is about to become an impressive red supergiant of
its very own once exceeding a mass reduction of 33% via consumption
and CME losses, and of especially accelerated stellar evolution with a
nearby Sirius B sucking the hydrogen life out of Sirius A, as such
isn’t exactly retarding this process. Fortunately, Sirius A is not
going to become nearly as red supergiant as Sirius B, however the
helium flashover phase (at a forth the Sirius B mass) may happen a
whole lot closer to us, as we’re being pulled along our elliptical
Newtonian trek towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and accelerating.
Of course, within the next few thousand years there’ll also be
considerably less terrestrial magnetosphere and otherwise insufficient
energy resources for Eden/Earth to sustain much other than robust
bugs, microbes and spores of whatever we’d once had been. That
progression is actually a very insignificant cosmic amount of time,
especially considering that we’re also eventually headed into the
Great Attractor plus way before then nailed by the Andromeda galaxy,
so not to worry about such matters is best, even though advancing
technology could help salvage our otherwise certain demise. Too bad
the previous million years of terrestrial human life had been so
utterly wasted, and otherwise perhaps we’ll have better luck next time
unless some faith-based cults and their cabals have other intentions.
~ BG
Saul Levy
You make Sirius out to be something very rare and special when it's
NOT!
Saul Levy
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 13:19:28 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Jul 6, 6:55�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
>> according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
>> orbital mechanics.
>>
>> In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media
>> �~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet�
>
>This isn�t even hocus-pocus rocket science, instead it�s just plain
>old Newtonian physics that a dysfunctional 5th grader should
>understand.
>
>As is, the 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force
>
> ~ BG
BradGuth
clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of
physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics.
In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their parrot media
has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the truly
substantial Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a
relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite
possibly contributed from our Milky Way encountering another galaxy),
and most likely especially terrestrial illuminating of the first
200~250 million years worth, and for all we know Sirius C may have
been the most massive and thus the first to burn itself out, or having
imploded itself into a spent star (possibly neutron or black hole
mass of <.06 (1.19e29 kg).
First off, it’s not that Sirius is all that extra special, other than
having evolved so recently and nearby, whereas it took a cosmic
molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 1.25e5 solar masses in
order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99%
of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for
itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any
too far away. Others of sufficient cosmology expertise might go so
far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25e6,
while still others yet would prefer having a robust cloud worthy of
<1.25e7 solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller
galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. In any case, that must have
been quite an impressive stellar birthing process, especially if the
remains of this terrific cloud having been originally near 100 ly
diameter that is suddenly nowhere to be found.
In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system
wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal
radius interrelated with such a nearby cosmic molecular mass of
1.25e6<1.25e7, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual
barycenter that's still primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar
system.
Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions
isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and
singular Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest.
Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone)
http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/localgroup/localgroup.html
The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.cfm?fareaid=20
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html
Local galactic motion simulation:
"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B.
Nordström et al.
http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en
According to several physics and astronomy kinds of peer reviewed and
science journal accepted observationology (deductive interpretation of
eye-candy plus other collaborative peer replicated research), our
Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the
same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely
Andromeda). Seems hardly fair considering that everything was
supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that
hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed
into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or
rebirth.
Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other
archives (including those of what our FAS has compiled) depicting
“colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced
and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital
observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble
plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further
document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours
and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown
via mergers.
Where's the all-knowing expertise from our FAS, telling us whatever
they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely, and where
exactly are those public funded supercomputer simulations. Surely
these brown-nosed clowns, faith-based bigots and closed mindsets of
our Usenet/newsgroup proprietors that are continually enforcing their
mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do
by trashing everyone in sight) are hopefully not speaking on behalf of
our FAS or any other professional group that attempting to
constructively contribute on behalf of the greater good.
BradGuth
Sirius and us(our solar system) are very much indeed inseparable, at
least according to those regular laws of physics pertaining to the
mainstream accepted notions of Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics
that seems more than sufficient for everything else we’re told to
accept, and especially if little Sedna can be turned around at a tidal
radii of 1.459e14 m that’s worth merely 2.975e13 N, whereas Sirius at
8.6 light years and worth 1.417e17 N (20 thousand fold stronger), and
to think that we’ve been gaining on this 3.5 solar mass of Sirius by
7.6 km/sec, plus most likely and unavoidably accelerating towards our
next close encounter.
However, it’s pretty much all nothing but another mainstream infowar,
of media damage-control by way of a mainstream tactical disinformation
gauntlet of carefully orchestrated lies, deceptions and systematic
obfuscation is what it’s apparently all about. When I’ve merely
expected of others to share information and to otherwise
constructively ponder and contribute to this topic and many similar
ones before, all we ever got at best was a stone cold shoulder, and
otherwise mostly negativity and banishment, as well as from a certain
racist and kosher bigotry spouting potty-mouth rabbi none the less.
However, the laws of physics are seldom if ever politically correct or
otherwise faith-based, and as such they simply do not lie, and even
the best available science doesn’t support many of those established
mainstream notions of excluding anything and everything that rocks a
given faith-based boat.
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
The cosmic molecular cloud of what created Sirius, as being worth at
least 1.25e6 solar masses, while at a center to center distance of 100
ly and using our solar system mass of 2.05e30 kg for that same era, we
get the following results for 100 ly (9.46053e17 m), 50 ly (4.7303e17
m) and 10 ly (9.46053e16 m).
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 100 ly = 3.819e20 Newtons
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 50 ly = 1.528e21 N
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 10 ly = 3.819e22 N
current (sun ~ earth) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 5.974e24 kg at 1.496e11 m = 3.541e22 N
current (sun ~ mars) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 6.418e23 kg at 2.2794e11 m = 1.639e21 N
current (sun ~ pluto) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 1.305e22 kg at 5.906e12 m = 4.964e16 N
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/average gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 7.867e13 m = 1.023e14 N
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N
current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction:
2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
Being that a molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses is going
persistent gravity pull before that massive molecular cloud ever
having cranked out those impressive Sirius stars, and for at least
another million some odd years of having blown everything else
(99.999% of that molecular cloud) far away. Once again, how can this
kind of nearby cosmic event and of such horrific original mass not
have affected our solar system?
This one shouldn’t be so hard to answer, but then our resident wizards
seem unable, and/or unwilling to share and share alike without
involving a great deal of bloodshed.
BradGuth
In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force of
well established orbital mechanics into proper context, that which an
average bloke can understand, it’s always good to draw upon whatever
we objectively know and collectively accept as being the case.
TNOs like Sedna, multiple thousands of SDOs and even a few of the
larger OCOs (Ort Cloud Objects) are no longer hard to find within the
radii of our vast Oort cloud that’s reaching way the hell out there at
the tidal radii of <3e16 meters, and isn’t exactly going anywhere
either, all because of the weak binding Newtonian force of gravity
(“the Sun's orb of physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence”).
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro/tnoslist.html
Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna;
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N
Whereas instead Sirius has apparently been holding onto us;
current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction:
2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5
solar masses is quite capable of its gravitational force holding onto,
not to mention as of prior to Sirius B having lost so much of it’s
mass by having been such a red supergiant and becoming a white dwarf,
and of not too long before then of whatever the original molecular
cloud of <1.25e7 solar masses had to offer (even at 500 ly it’s still
a worthy pull or attractive force of 1.528e20 N).
As is, that 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force
represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you
can always trust the mainstream obfuscation from our resident
newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps
simply use one of the following:
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid)
of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging
all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9
N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius.
That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal
radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back
towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an
elliptical Newtonian trek should.
In other words, we unavoidably became a Newtonian orbiting part or
member of that same Sirius molecular cloud, and having remained
associated with the Sirius star/solar system ever since. The 99.999%
remains of that original molecular cloud which gave birth to Sirius is
however nowhere in sight, which is rather odd in that our observing
instruments having imaged the cosmic remains of similar and/or far
less robust clouds at millions of light years away, suggesting that
the Sirius B helium flashover may have actually been more like a
sustained nova or possibly that of a supernovae which directly
affected our terrestrial environment, as likely having triggered our
final ice age thaw and most recent genetic mutations.
As I've said often before, you do not have to take my word on this,
because the laws of physics and the unavoidable Newtonian binding
force of gravity are entirely in charge of this one. Only a religious
skewed faith-based nutcase that systematically excludes such matters
of fact can manage to keep a straight face, as they publicly obfuscate
and otherwise remain in such perpetual denial, somewhat like a Pope in
denial of what their supposed Christian faith once did to those nice
Cathars (and yet how is it that mainstream religion and their devout
minions are never responsible for anything bad or unjust happening?).
BradGuth
This isn’t even hocus-pocus rocket science, instead it’s just plain
old Newtonian physics that a dysfunctional 5th grader should
understand.
As is, the 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force
represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you
can always trust the mainstream obfuscation and perpetual denial from
our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself,
or perhaps simply use either one of the following:
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid)
of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging
all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9
N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius.
That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal
radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back
towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an
elliptical Newtonian trek should.
The Sirius star/solar system as having recently evolved from scratch
as of supposedly 200<300 million years ago, and then only most
recently its Sirius B having gone soft/slow nova as it converted
itself from the original 8.5 solar mass into a red supergiant worth
perhaps as much as 5.7 (> 5.3) solar masses, as having that impressive
1000 fold radii, finally got itself down to the helium flashover phase
of suddenly becoming a white dwarf within perhaps as recently as a few
million years ago. In other words, having been close enough as to
creating a living hell on Earth with a second sun until after the red
supergiant and final helium flashover demise of becoming the nearly
invisible white dwarf. The original Sirius B luminosity was likely
worth 10,000 times brighter than our sun, and perhaps the combined
luminosity of Sirius ABC was likely worth 20,000 times brighter than
our sun. However, since so much of its spectrum was UV would mean
that the energy received from the Sirius star/solar system was
actually worth something considerably greater to that of our mostly
wet and growing environment of that era.
The original location of Sirius and especially that of its terrific
molecular cloud of perhaps 1.25e6 solar masses (1.25e5<1.25e7) is
still not objectively known (almost as though it materialized out of
nowhere and just as suddenly vanished), nor has whatever previous
proper motions of either us or the remainder of that molecular cloud
been plotted or ever so much as virtually identified via supercomputer
simulations. We have obviously lost any observable track of such
remainders of that terrific molecular cloud, because of the Sirius B
helium flashover having apparently so extensively blown it all away,
and somehow supposedly not having affected us.
Perhaps the public funded mainstream mindset of astrophysics and
related science simply doesn’t want the rest of us village idiots to
know exactly whatever such a nearby star/solar system as Sirius could
have come from, or having done to us.
It takes a fairly substantial ratio of mostly hydrogen and some helium
consumption, plus a staggering CME loss of roughly causing a third of
its original stellar mass to go away, before a star becomes a worthy
full blown red giant or supergiant, thereby making the red supergiant
of Betelgeuse originally worth an impressive 30+ solar masses.
http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2009/06/betelgeuse_about_to_blow.html
Yes indeed, perhaps Betelgeuse should eventually blow our socks off
with one hell of a nova or possibly supernovae climax as it becomes a
fairly substantial white dwarf or possibly turns itself into a neutron
star, and rather soon if there's an ongoing shrinkage of 1%/year for
the past 15 years (actually its helium flashover into becoming a white
dwarf or that of a neutron star has already taken place as of more
than 550 years ago, because it’s 600 light years away from us).
Here’s my further revised/edited version of stellar timelines that’ll
offer some alternative interpretation as to the recent birth and rapid
evolution of the Sirius star/solar system, and of this process most
likely having impacted our relatively nearby and passive solar system.
Our sun that supposedly took 100 million years in order to assemble
itself, consumes or burns its way through 4.28e9 kg/sec of mostly
hydrogen (or rather its more like burning through plus otherwise
having been CME tossing away <3e12 kg/sec, and perhaps even <4e12 kg/
sec if it were taking less than 9 billion years of its stellar
evolution to becoming a white dwarf). Supposedly within another 4.5
billion years our sun will have noticeably expanded into a red giant,
and otherwise by at most 7.5 billion from now it should have become a
full blown red giant of at least 250 radii before the exact same kind
of measurable shrinkage and helium flashover phase into becoming a
white dwarf of perhaps not larger than Mars.
On the other hand, the original Sirius B of <8.5 solar masses had an
extremely short timeline up until reaching its most recent white dwarf
phase, as having obtained this status at roughly 500 times faster
stellar evolution than our sun reaching it’s white dwarf phase within
roughly 12e9 years (in other words, at merely 4.28e9 kg/sec our sun is
almost never going to die off unless something extremely large smacks
into it). On the other nearby stellar hand, Sirius B may have evolved
itself within as little as 150 million years, before having become the
white dwarf as of something less than 64 million years ago. However,
Sirius C could have also played an important roll at the same time or
before Sirius B evolved into the white dwarf. Perhaps the last thing
anyone within mainstream science wants any of us to have is that
TRACEe3 taking a much higher resolved look-see.
Sirius B had to burn through its fuel and otherwise toss mass away at
<1.6e16 kg/sec, perhaps an average mass reduction rate of <4e15 kg/
sec.
In other words, having to consume roughly 8+ times as much mass in as
little as 1/60th the time is what has to represent an extremely
vibrant stellar neighbor (as a nearly exploding or slow nova kind of
highly terrestrial UV illuminating star), especially along with the
original of Sirius A at perhaps 3+ solar mass and Sirius C at whatever
it started out as perhaps worth <1 solar mass, all together
representing one heck of a great deal of stellar mass consuming and
CMEs tossing sufficient stellar volumes of mostly hydrogen, helium
plus a few other heavier plasma elements as representing considerable
mass leaving that vibrant star system, and wasn’t any too far away
from us.
Btw; Sirius C could have been the original big one of <10 solar
masses, and Sirius A has most likely gone through nearly 30% of it’s
original mass and is about to become an impressive red supergiant of
its very own once exceeding a mass reduction of 33% via consumption
and CME losses, of especially accelerated stellar evolution with a
nearby Sirius B sucking the hydrogen life out of Sirius A, as such
isn’t exactly retarding this process. Fortunately, Sirius A is not
going to become nearly as red supergiant as Sirius B, however the
helium flashover phase (at a forth the Sirius B mass) may happen a
whole lot closer to us, as we’re being pulled along our elliptical
Newtonian trek towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and accelerating.
Of course, within the next few thousand years there’ll also be
considerably less terrestrial geomagnetic sustained magnetosphere, and
otherwise insufficient energy resources for Eden/Earth to sustain much
other than robust bugs, microbes and spores of whatever we’d once had
been. That kind of human genetic progression is actually a very
insignificant cosmic amount of time (having existed as an intelligent
species within less than 0.1% of Eden thus far, and only formally
educated in physics and science within the last 0.0001%) , especially
special terminal considering that we’re also headed into the Great
Attractor, plus way before then getting nailed by the Andromeda
galaxy, so not to worry about such matters is best, even though
advancing technology could help salvage our otherwise certain demise.
Too bad the previous million years of terrestrial human life had been
so utterly wasted, as otherwise perhaps we’ll have better luck next
time unless some faith-based cults and their cabals have other
intentions.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet"
BradGuth
> "BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
In that case, perhaps you and rabbi Saul should get a room.
It seems now even Newtonian physics and your own peer accepted science
is off-limits with you crazy kosher guys.
~ BG
Saul Levy
What a MORON you are, GOOFBALL! lmfjao!
Saul Levy
On Thu, 9 Jul 2009 05:55:24 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Jul 9, 5:46�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In spite of all the usual naysayers, Sirius and our solar system are
>> clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of
>> physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics.
>However, it�s pretty much all nothing but another mainstream infowar,
>of media damage-control by way of a mainstream tactical disinformation
>gauntlet of carefully orchestrated lies, deceptions and systematic
>obfuscation is what it�s apparently all about. When I�ve merely
>expected of others to share information and to otherwise
>constructively ponder and contribute to this topic and many similar
>ones before, all we ever got at best was a stone cold shoulder, and
>otherwise mostly negativity and banishment, as well as from a certain
>racist and kosher bigotry spouting potty-mouth rabbi none the less.
>However, the laws of physics are seldom if ever politically correct or
>otherwise faith-based, and as such they simply do not lie, and even
>the best available science doesn�t support many of those established
>mainstream notions of excluding anything and everything that rocks a
>given faith-based boat.
>
> ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet�
Saul Levy
Hard to tell...
Saul Levy
On Thu, 9 Jul 2009 06:12:36 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Jul 9, 6:06�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force of
>> well established orbital mechanics into proper context, that which an
>> average bloke can understand, it�s always good to draw upon whatever
>> we objectively know and collectively accept as being the case.
[a tremendous amount of worthless SHIT deleted, unread as usual!]
>
>�~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet"
Saul Levy
We would have a GREAT TIME together POURING OUT RIDICULE ABOUT YOU!
The SUPREME VILLAGE IDIOT!
Thanks for the suggestion!
Saul Levy
On Thu, 9 Jul 2009 06:19:05 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Jul 6, 9:59�am, "Hagar" <ha...@sahm.name> wrote:
BradGuth
In that case, perhaps you and rabbi Saul (aka Art Deco) should get a
room.
It seems now even the most peer reviewed interpretations of Newtonian
physics and your own peer accepted science is suddenly off-limits with
you crazy kosher guys. Local planets, moons and satellites go by
Newtonian physics, but apparently stars and exoplanets by way of your
mindset don't (especially of those we're headed towards don't count).
~ BG
BradGuth
what represents a 4763:1 greater grip than our sun has on Sedna. Of
course you can always trust the mainstream obfuscation and perpetual
denial from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the
math yourself, or perhaps simply use either one of the following:
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
~ BG
Saul Levy
Sedna is. Around the SUN!
4763:1?
BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Saul Levy
On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 22:07:28 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>As is, the 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force is
>what represents a 4763:1 greater grip than our sun has on Sedna. Of
>course you can always trust the mainstream obfuscation and perpetual
>denial from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the
>math yourself, or perhaps simply use either one of the following:
> Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
>
> ~ BG
BradGuth
As is, the 1.417e17 N (1.445e16 kgf) worth of the Sirius tidal radii
holding force or that of its Newtonian dynamic range is what
represents a 4763:1 greater gravitational grip than our sun has on
little Sedna. Of course you can always maintain your devout trust in
mainstream obfuscation and perpetual denials from the likes of our
resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or
perhaps simply use either one of the following:
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid)
of 112 km diameter as perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg, that’s hanging
all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.4e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.71e9 N,
and even it’s not going away from our solar system's tidal radius.
That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal
radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back
towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as any
elliptical Newtonian trek should.
Are these Newtonian laws of physics conditional? (I don't think so)
Other than external sources of gravity yet to be identified, such as
dark cosmic matter and black holes keeping us away from fully
encountering the Sirius star/solar system, is there yet another
mysterious repelling/antigravity force that hasn't been identified?
In order to avoid a full orbit of Sirius, would not the interstellar
fields of electrostatic and/or magnetic forces have to become that of
repulsion?
BradGuth
I'm asking nicely; how can the Newtonian physics laws of gravity be
conditional?
How can those Newtonian laws and those of orbital mechanics which
apply for Sedna and the likes of 2005-VX3, and yet not apply for that
of Sirius and our solar system?
Do the electrons of stars or similar charged bodies repel that much?
Saul Levy
These is NO SUCH ORBIT!
Saul Levy
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:42:39 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Other than external sources of gravity yet to be identified, such as
>dark cosmic matter and black holes keeping us away from fully
>encountering the Sirius star/solar system, is there yet another
>mysterious repelling/antigravity force that hasn't been identified?
>
>In order to avoid a full orbit of Sirius, would not the interstellar
>fields of electrostatic and/or magnetic forces have to become that of
>repulsion?
>
> ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
I'm still asking nicely; how can the Newtonian physics laws of
gravity be conditional?
How can those Newtonian laws and otherwise those of orbital mechanics
which apply for Sedna and even the likes of 2005-VX3, and yet
according to mainstream naysayism do not apply for that of Sirius and
our solar system?
Do the electrons of stars or similar charged bodies repel that much?
What's the barycenter between us and the Sirius star/solar system?
Why hasn’t the little Sirius C (<.06 solar mass) been detected?
On this trajectory pass we’re on, exactly when and how close will our
passive solar system get to the Sirius star/solar system?
BradGuth
I'm still here and asking; how can those Newtonian physics laws of
gravity be conditional and thus not apply to interstellar attraction?
How can those Newtonian laws and otherwise orbital mechanics which
apply for Sedna and even the likes of 2005-VX3, and yet according to
mainstream naysayism do not apply for that of Sirius and our solar
system?
Do the electrons of stars or similar charged bodies repel that much?
What's the barycenter situation between us and the Sirius star/solar
system?
Why hasn’t the little Sirius C (<.06 solar mass) been detected?
On the trajectory path and pass we’re on, exactly when and how close
will our passive solar system get to the Sirius star/solar system?
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
BradGuth
> according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
> orbital mechanics.
>
> has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius
> star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and
> extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from
> illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth.
>
> First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very
> least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy
> star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown
> away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our
> as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million,
> while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5
> galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. In any case, that must have
> this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly
> nowhere to be found.
>
> In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system
> wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal
> subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily
> dominated by the Sirius star/solar system.
>
> Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions
> Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest.
>
> Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone)
> http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/localgroup/localgroup.html
>
> The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
> http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.cfm?fareaid=20
> http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html
>
> Local galactic motion simulation:
> "The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B.
> Nordström et al.
> http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en
>
> science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer
> replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two
> galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way
> towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). Seems hardly fair
> considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular
> Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of
> galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including
> us) for their final demise and/or rebirth.
>
> Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other
> “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced
> and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital
> observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble
> plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further
> document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours
> and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown
> via mergers.
>
> whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely?
> Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as
> republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our
> Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo
> (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not
>
> ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
What would have happened within our solar system and the environment
of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same
molecular cloud of <1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth
to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten
millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create?
~ BG
Saul Levy
Not a SINGLE PARTICLE from SIRIUS EVER MADE IT TO OUR SOLAR SYSTEM.
Saul Levy
BradGuth
I'm still asking nicely; how can the Newtonian physics laws of
gravity be conditional? (remember that perpetual mainstream denial
and systematic obfuscation don’t count)
How can those Newtonian laws and otherwise those matters of orbital
mechanics which apply for the likes of our solar system holding onto
Sedna and even the likes of wussy little 2005-VX3, and yet according
to mainstream naysayism do not apply for that of nearby Sirius and our
somewhat wussy little solar system?
Do those electrons of stars or similar charged bodies repel that much?
What's the barycenter between us and the Sirius star/solar system?
Why hasn’t the little Sirius C (<.06 solar mass) been observed?
On this stellar accelerating trajectory path, and closing at –7.6+ km/
s that we’re currently on and only increasing that velocity, exactly
when and how close will our passive solar system get to the vibrant
and 3.5 fold massive Sirius star/solar system?
In the past, what should have happened within our solar system and
specifically to the environment of Eden/Earth as we passed through any
remaining portion of that same molecular cloud of 1.25e6<1.25e7 solar
masses that had just previously given birth to those nearby Sirius
stars, and from such a stellar birthing process as having taken at
least ten million to a hundred some odd million years in order to
create?
What’s keeping stars that have become close enough, and even moving
towards one another, from simply following the natural progression of
Newtonian physics, by way of eventually combining or merging their
mass into becoming a truly large supernovae?
Electron Attraction and Repulsion
http://www.smeter.net/daily-facts/6/fact1.php
Last modified: Sun, 05 Jul 2009 00:44:57 GMT
“Gravity attracts two electrons towards each other, but their
identical negative charges cause an electrical repulsion force. If the
gravity force and the electrical force were equal in strength there
would be no net force of attraction or repulsion. However, it is well
known that electrons repel each other, so the electrical force is
stronger than the gravitational force, but how much stronger? The
force ratio is enormous. The electrical force is 4.17x1042 times
stronger than the gravitational force regardless of the distance
between two electrons. There is a strange thing about that ratio. If
the age of the universe is 8.34x1010 years, the age of the universe is
4.17x1042 times greater than the time required for an electromagnetic
wave to pass across a proton (10-24 seconds). So, is the gravitational
constant related to the age of the universe? Probably not, but it
might be.”
As is, the 1.417e17 N (1.445e16 kgf) worth of the Sirius tidal radii
holding/binding force or that of its Newtonian dynamic range is what
represents a 4763:1 greater gravitational grip than our sun has on
little Sedna. Not to mention 2005-VX3 that’s worth merely 1.709e9 N,
and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius,
thereby representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of having nearly 83e6:1
greater tidal radii hold on us. Of course you can always maintain
your devout trust in mainstream obfuscation and perpetual denials from
the likes of our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can simply do the
math yourself, or perhaps use either one of the following:
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Now we should consider the energy (E=MV2) of our 2.02e30 kg closing in
at the differential velocity of 7.6 km/s upon Sirius isn’t none too
shabby, offering 1.167e38 joules (1.167e38 N.m). This kind of makes
the 1.417e17N of gravitational force seem entirely insignificant, but
none the less a constant applied force that’s only increasing by that
same pesky inverse square law as we get closer. Obviously the
velocity of mass is dominating this stellar interaction between our
sun and the still massive and extremely nearby Sirius star system that
we’re headed towards, somewhat like we’re headed towards the Andromeda
galaxy, and together we’re all headed into the “Great Attractor”.
BradGuth
Why is it that the laws of physics, the best available science that's
peer replicated to death, and the subsequent technology that works
likes a charm on Earth or on behalf of anything our DARPA and NASA
wants to do or would fully support doing, doesn't function on behalf
of anything related to the Sirius star/solar system or the planet
Venus?
As of lately, even the Newtonian laws of gravity do not seem to apply,
except as to whatever our DARPA and NASA cares to invest our hard
earned public loot into.
Is it just me?
~ BG
BradGuth
Notice that whenever the regular laws of physics and best available
science that's easily peer replicated supports an outside theory or
deductive interpretation of anything, suddenly those exact same laws
of physics (including everything Newtonian) and whatever science are
systematically disqualified and/or simply can't apply.
It's like everything of Usenet/newsgroups and Google Groups turns
itself into a brown-nosed clown populated realm of bizarro land,
whereas up becomes down and black becomes white, or else we merely
slip into the 4th or 5th dimension (similar to falling off the edge of
Earth).
~ BG
Saul Levy
NOTHING WILL HAPPEN!
Saul Levy
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 18:40:15 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I'm asking nicely; how can the Newtonian physics laws of gravity be
>conditional?
>
>How can those Newtonian laws and those of orbital mechanics which
>apply for Sedna and the likes of 2005-VX3, and yet not apply for that
>of Sirius and our solar system?
>
>Do the electrons of stars or similar charged bodies repel that much?
>
> ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
Obviously our local environment and of course that of our sun would
have been affected by the excess of whatever the Sirius molecular
cloud had to offer, not to mention that of it's terrific original
mass.
And btw; don't let the gauntlet of these Usenet/newsgroup bogeyman
and faith-based pretenders and mainstream pranksters keep us from the
task of deductively and otherwise independently thinking for
ourselves, because now and then it’s perfectly OK to color outside the
lines.
~ BG
BradGuth
So once again, instead of progress we have this thing of ignoring and/
or obfuscating in behalf of whatever is technically doable and
banishing those with nothing but good intentions, and otherwise we
have this other lemming genetic disorder and subsequent obsession of
no longer deductively thinking for ourselves. No wonder this nation
has been going nowhere.
~ BG
Mike Collins
>
> - Show quoted text -
Forget about Sirius.
Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/multimedia/lroimages/apollosites.html
BradGuth
wrote:
Been there, done that.
So far those LORC images are not very good (still too far away and
must be using a narrow bandpass as well as only a small portion of
their DR), and oddly those original Apollo metric mapping images do
not seem to look as though the moon is so gosh darn reflective. How
the heck did A-16 end up in such a vast lunar expanse of such a near
white-out area that went in all directions for as far as their 70 mm
film and its unfiltered lens could see?
~ BG
BradGuth
Been there, done that.
So far those LROC images are not very good (still too far away and
Mike Collins
You write "Been there, done that" and yet the evidence that you are
wrong did not tempt you to post about it. You've been bleating on for
years that the Moon landings were a hoax with the lack of images being
high up on your list of "evidence". Thes are early images and will be
improved. The track of the moonwalks seems particularly convincing.
When better images are available we should have images of the rover
tracks aswell.
BradGuth
I never said or implied that Apollo equipment didn't make it to the
physically dark surface. I stipulated that the objective evidence for
such being fully manned and otherwise entirely unharmed (not a scratch
or one strand of damaged DNA) simply didn't exist (too much missing
evidence and original science documentation that's still nowhere to be
found), and again there's still some lingering doubts as to those EVAs
taking place as specified, because of too much of what simply doesn't
add up.
Robotically, all sorts of complex things could have taken place
(including rover tracks).
~ BG
BradGuth
How the heck did A-16 end up landing in such a vast lunar expanse of
such a near white-out area that went in all directions for as far as
their Kodak 70 mm film and its unfiltered lens could see?
~ BG
Saul Levy
Saul Levy
BradGuth
How the heck did our Apollo 16 end up landing within such a vast lunar
expanse of such a near white-out terrain that recorded as oddly more
as what a guano island made to look as a lunar terrain, that went off
in all directions for as far as their unshielded Kodak 70 mm film and
its unfiltered lens could see?
Correction; each lens had a polarized element, as intended to reduce/
eliminate surface glare, and thus making whatever surfaces as solar
illuminated record as noticeably darker than what the naked eye sees.
(what the hell went wrong? are such laws of physics different while
on the moon?)
~ BG
Saul Levy
You have BATSHIT on the BRAIN due to frootbat's INSANITY!
Guano in, guano out!
Saul Levy
On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:50:34 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>How the heck did our Apollo 16 end up landing within such a vast lunar
>expanse of such a near white-out terrain that recorded as oddly more
>as what a guano island made to look as a lunar terrain, that went off
>in all directions for as far as their unshielded Kodak 70 mm film and
>its unfiltered lens could see?
>
> ~ BG
BradGuth
I don't mean to be technically condescending or willfully disregarding
of other established interpretations, but merely asking as to what
exactly took place as of somewhat recently within our solar system and
upon Earth, as of a few years after Sirius B had its helium flashover,
whereas I truly believe this wasn't all that insignificant or entirely
unrelated to our Selene/moon having encountered Earth and affected the
subsequent last ice-age thaw that abruptly started as of 11, 711 years
ago, and obviously hasn’t stopped thawing us out ever since.
How can our solar system of 2.02e30 kg have been so unaffected by the
original 12.5e30 kg worth of the nearby Sirius star/solar system, and
even as of today by the remaining 7e30 kg worth of Sirius ABC that we
are moving ourselves towards at 7.6 km/sec?
Of the original Sirius molecular cloud of <12.5e6 solar masses that
existed some 250 +/- 25 odd millions of years ago is also of something
truly horrific, that by rights should have affected our nearby solar
system and the frail environment of Eden/Earth.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Saul Levy
Saul Levy
On Sat, 25 Jul 2009 07:57:23 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 15, 10:33�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 6, 6:55�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
>> > according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
>> > orbital mechanics.
[rest of RANT deleted, unread as usual]
>How can our solar system of 2.02e30 kg have been so unaffected by the
>original 12.5e30 kg worth of the nearby Sirius star/solar system, and
>even as of today by the remaining 7e30 kg worth of Sirius ABC that we
>are moving ourselves towards at 7.6 km/sec?
>
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
I don't mean to be technically condescending or willfully disregarding
of other established interpretations, as always touted and enforced by
the usual preponderance of our alt.astronomy naysayers, but merely
asking as to the best available swag of what took place as of somewhat
recently within our solar system and upon Earth, as of a few years
after Sirius B had its helium flashover, whereas I truly believe this
consequence wasn't all that insignificant or entirely unrelated to our
Selene/moon having encountered Earth, and having ever since
contributed to the last ice-age thaw that abruptly started as of 11,
711 years ago, and obviously hasn’t stopped thawing us out ever since.
How can our solar system of 2.02e30 kg have been so unaffected by the
original 12.5e30 kg worth of the nearby Sirius star/solar system, and
even as of today by the remaining 7e30 kg worth of Sirius ABC that we
are moving ourselves towards at 7.6 km/sec?
Of the original proto-Sirius molecular cloud <12.5e6 solar masses that
existed some 250 (+/- 25) odd millions of years ago is also of
something truly horrific, that by rights should have affected our
nearby solar system and the frail environment of Eden/Earth,
especially as the cloud got blown/expanded further away from having
created the Sirius star system.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
BradGuth
Downright silly of little old me, to think that these topic and reply
lords of Google Groups and Usenet/newsgroups are not even up to the
minimal physics and science standards of a dysfunctional 5th grader.
Perhaps our public news and infomercial spewing media (including our
school textbooks) needs to get themselves unplugged from the pecker of
their mainstream Borg collective, and while they’re at it, rediscover
their balls.
BradGuth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “GuthUsenet”
Saul Levy
It's called SCIENCE, FOOL!
Saul Levy
BradGuth
As per usual, the all-knowing mainstream status quo is being told to
back off and keep away at all cost, as in mum's the word. It's as
though the planet Venus has the ultimate plague, or something worse
that Zionist Nazis want absolutely nothing to do with.
Perhaps you can share as to how it feels working for Hitler or those
of his Zionist puppet masters?
BradGuth
How can such a nearby and vibrant star system be so intellectually and
scientifically dark and scary?
Saul Levy
GOOFBALL! lmfjao!
He IS INSANE! You are THE VILLAGE IDIOT!
Saul Levy
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:27:22 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 27, 1:05�pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 25, 12:05�pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 15, 10:33�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > On Jul 6, 6:55�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
>> > > > according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
>> > > > orbital mechanics.
>>
>> > > > In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media
>> > > > has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius
>> > > > star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and
>> > > > extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from
>> > > > our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial
>> > > > illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth.
>> > > > �~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet�
>> > > What would have happened within our solar system and the environment
>> > > of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same
>> > > molecular cloud of <1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth
>> > > to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten
>> > > millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create?
>>
>> > I don't mean to be technically condescending or willfully disregarding
>> > of other established interpretations, as always touted and enforced by
>> > the usual preponderance of our alt.astronomy naysayers, but merely
>> > asking as to the best available swag of what took place as of somewhat
>> > recently within our solar system and upon Earth, as of a few years
>> > after Sirius B had its helium flashover, whereas I truly believe this
>> > consequence wasn't all that insignificant or entirely unrelated to our
>> > Selene/moon having encountered Earth, and having ever since
>> > contributed to the last ice-age thaw that abruptly started as of 11,
>> > 711 years ago, and obviously hasn�t stopped thawing us out ever since.
> BradGuth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / �GuthUsenet�
Saul Levy
formed Sirius? lmfjao!
YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW WRONG THAT IS! You just made it up in that EMPTY
HEAD of YOURS!
The WHOLE CLOUD IS NOT NEEDED TO MAKE A BINARY STAR SYSTEM, FOOL!
Even of the size of Sirius A/B (no evidence that C exists)!
The left-over material didn't add up to a PILE OF YOUR SHIT!
How did a 12.5 solar mass "star" COLLECT MATTER FROM 50 LIGHT YEARS
AWAY? That's BULLSHIT too! The scale here is WAY BEYOND YOUR ABILITY
TO UNDERSTAND!
Learn some ASTRONOMY FIRST, MORON!
Once INSANE, ALWAYS INSANE!
Saul Levy
On Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:32:38 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 25, 12:05�pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 15, 10:33�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
>> > > according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
>> > > orbital mechanics.
>> > > First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very
>> > > least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy
>> > > star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown
>> > > away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our
>> > > existing solar system wasn't any too far away. �Others might go so far
>> > > as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million,
>> > > while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5
>> > > million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller
>> > > galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. �In any case, that must have
>> > > been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of
>> > > this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly
>> > > nowhere to be found.
>>
>> > > In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system
>> > > wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal
>> > > radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least
>> > > subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily
>> > > dominated by the Sirius star/solar system.
>>
>> > > Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions
>> > > isn�t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big
>> > > Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest.
BradGuth
Are we talking about stellar electron kinds of repulsion that'll far
exceed the Newtonian force of gravity?
As otherwise according to the peer accepted formula and that of the
much less force of gravity that's holding onto our Kuiper and Oort
cloud items is hardly worth anything compared to the mutual binding
force of gravity that exist between our solar system and that of
Sirius.
BradGuth
http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/ast20may98_1.htm
On Aug 2, 5:38 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
: Hvac I tried it and it fits well with my thinking. Great site you
are
: showing to us. Magnetars with a magnetic pull of 800 trillion gauss
has
: to tell us a lot. lots of mysteries as well. Like why do they lose
: their spin so fast? hmmm Here are the places to find answers to
why
: objects send out a magnetic field. My "Spin is in theory" gives out
some
: answers but I use it mainly in the micro realm. Magnetars show it in
the
: macro realm Thanks again for that great site Trebert
How very true, that there is a whole lot more to realize than just the
relatively weak force of gravity. However, some planets and those icy
moons are essentially magnetically inert (aka "flat line" when it
comes to being even the least bit paramagnetic). Our passive sun is
however nicely saturated with complex and powerful magnetic fields,
and by rights the nearby Sirius star/solar system should be downright
off the scale, especially vibrant and gauss worthy as of prior to
Sirius-B going red supergiant.
Imagine the strong force of attraction between the electron and the
positron as worth 4.17e42 fold greater than gravity, and/or consider
the repulsion worth of 2.398e-43 between to electrons is downright
impressive. No wonder electron emitting stars can't so easily smack
into one another.
BradGuth
How can such a nearby and vibrant star system (especially back in its
prime) become so intellectually and scientifically dark and scary?
Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna;
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N
Whereas instead Sirius has apparently been holding onto us;
current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction:
2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5
solar masses is quite capable of its gravitational force holding onto,
not to mention as of prior to Sirius B having lost so much of it’s
mass by having been such a red supergiant and only recently becoming a
white dwarf, and of not too long before then of whatever the original
molecular cloud of <1.25e7 solar masses had to offer (even at 500 ly
it’s still a worthy pull or attractive force of 1.528e20 N, or ten
fold again out to 5000 ly is still worth 1.528e18 N).
As is, the 1.417e17 N (1.445e16 kgf) worth of the Sirius tidal radii
holding/binding force or that of its Newtonian dynamic range is what
represents a 4763:1 greater gravitational grip than our sun has on
little Sedna. Of course you can always maintain your devout trust in
mainstream obfuscation and perpetual denials from the likes of our
resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can simply do the math yourself, or
perhaps use either one of the following:
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid)
of 112 km diameter as perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg, that’s hanging
all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.4e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.71e9 N,
and even it’s not going away from our solar system's tidal radius.
That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal
radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back
towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as any
elliptical Newtonian trek should.
So, what's insurmountable or unusual about Sirius holding onto us?
~ BG
BradGuth
> according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
> orbital mechanics.
>
> In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media
> has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with theSirius
> extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from
> our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial
> illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth.
>
> First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very
> least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy
> star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown
> away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our
> existing solar system wasn't any too far away. Others might go so far
> as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million,
> while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5
> million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller
> galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. In any case, that must have
> been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of
> this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly
> nowhere to be found.
>
> In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system
> wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal
> radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least
> subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily
Mainstream physics and science is not to be lightly discounted or
otherwise discarded. However, some items of our solar system seem to
have been added after the original formations of our sun and a few
planets, while others seem badly skewed because of nearby external
forces. It seems +/- 1 degree might be an acceptable standard for
being part of the original protoplanetary elliptic plane. However,
the more degrees off that plane, the more unlikely they existed from
the very start of our solar system.
Like those icy Pluto planetoids and Sedna at near 12 degrees most
certainly are not in the same plane. However, supposedly there are a
few interesting Kuiper and Oort retrograde orbits, although Sedna
isn't one of those. Noteworthy is that Cruithne has been a nearby
second moon of Earth, however oddly so and otherwise at nearly 20
degrees inclination is also not within the expected orbital plane,
just like our Selene/moon at 5+ degrees isn’t exactly flying within
the expected plane of our solar system.
Besides the usual orbital mechanics that can’t quite explain items
like Sedna with such minimal velocity and low density, as to why the
hell does Sedna bother to turn itself around and head way the hell
back out there? (are the Sedna electrons helping to repel it away from
those of our solar system electron outflux?)
With Sedna we're talking of an extremely deep elliptical trek of 76 AU
out to 976 AU and obviously back again, at an average orbital velocity
of 1.04 km/sec (about the same as our Selene/moon), with an overall
duration of <12,060 years (also given as >10,000 years by some), as
supposedly offering the 0.84 eccentric orbit in relationship with the
elliptic antipode focus that’s roughly 900 AU. I think it’s more of
an irregular elliptical trek that’s taking a tight turn at 76 AU and a
broad turn at 976 AU.
Just because something like Sedna as once upon a time having been
perturbed into an elliptical trek (most likely by Sirius B and/or from
that substantial Sirius molecular cloud of < 12.5e6 Ms) , doesn't
explain why it's keeping that extreme elliptical pattern, unless the
stealth gravity or dark matter influence is still out there, and/or
the electrons emitted by Sedna are that much unusually greater
influence than previously thought. According to some, there’s also
another 40 some odd distant items as large or larger than Sedna.
In other words, the reduced velocity at 976 AU and relatively low mass
of Sedna simply isn’t worth enough kinetic energy in order to match or
exceed the orbital escape velocity, pretty much the same analogy that
applies as to why our solar system can not escape the extended
elliptic association we have had with the Sirius star/solar system, or
at least that of some barycenter dominated by the remaining 3.5
greater mass that used to be worth <12.5 Ms, and before then (>250e6
BP) represented by the molecular cloud of <12.5e6 Ms.
How is it even remotely possible of orbital mechanics that applies to
the likes of Sedna and otherwise not to the stellar motions of nearby
solar systems?
Saul Levy
It's also the SECOND REPEAT!
Saul Levy
On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:16:45 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 21, 2:46�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 15, 10:33�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Jul 6, 6:55�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
>> > > according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
>> > > orbital mechanics.
>>
>> > > �~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet�
>>
>> > What would have happened within our solar system and the environment
>> > of Eden/Earth as we passed through any remaining portion of the same
>> > molecular cloud of <1.25e7 solar masses, as what had just given birth
>> > to those nearby Sirius stars and such having taken at least ten
>> > millions to a hundred some odd million years in order to create?
>>
>
BradGuth
Too bad so many topics or even alternative interpretations of the best
available science are considered as media taboo or nondisclosure
rated. It's almost exactly like Hitler or some weird religious cult/
cabal was still in charge of our public media.
~ BG
Saul Levy
lmfjao!
Whew! That would REALLY BE A DISASTER OF COSMIC PROPORTIONS!
Has there been any DEATH FROM ABOVE LATELY?
Saul Levy
BradGuth
Too bad so many honest topics or even alternative interpretations of
the best available science are considered as media taboo or
nondisclosure rated. It's almost exactly like Hitler or some weird
religious cult/cabal was still in charge of our public media. In this
case it's the laws of Newtonian Physics and orbital mechanics that's
forbidden.
BradGuth
banishment enforced policy, or rather media infowar tactic, even if it
means forcing mainstream to ignore any fix to our badly GW traumatized
environment and of its unique biodiversity we call Eden/Earth, or
merely on behalf of improving it’s use of government and our limited
resources. The biggest forbidden topics have to do with discussing
other forms of off-world intelligent life, because such isn’t supposed
to exist unless it’s of a subhuman Zionist/Jewish species that we get
to dominate and profit from. (isn't that special)
All we seem to get nowadays is the usual Republican Zionist Nazi
replies of change nothing and otherwise do nothing, because apparently
nothing is bad with the way everything is, and besides nothing
seriously bad is ever going to happen, and even if it should we mere
humans couldn't have done anything positive or constructive for the
better.
In other Usenet/newsgroup words of cult/cabal wisdom; Change nothing,
revise nothing and above all do nothing about learning, exploring,
researching or forbid any public sharing of whatever knowledge,
because we (those in charge) supposedly like everything exactly as it
is.
~ BG
On Jul 6, 6:55 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
> according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and
> orbital mechanics.
>
> In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media
> has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius
> star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and
> extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from
> our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial
> illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth.
>
> First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very
> least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy
> star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown
> away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our
> existing solar system wasn't any too far away. Others might go so far
> as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million,
> while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5
> million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller
> galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. In any case, that must have
> been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of
> this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly
> nowhere to be found.
>
> In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system
> wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal
> radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least
> subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily
> dominated by the Sirius star/solar system.
> ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
Saul Levy
BORING!
Saul Levy
>> Nordstr�m et al.
>> �~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
> Now we have a new and improved gauntlet of a topic/author taboo and/or
> banishment enforced policy, or rather media infowar tactic, even if it
> means forcing mainstream to ignore any fix to our badly GW traumatized
> environment and of its unique biodiversity we call Eden/Earth, or
> merely on behalf of improving it’s use of government and our limited
> resources. The biggest forbidden topics have to do with discussing
> other forms of off-world intelligent life, because such isn’t supposed
> to exist unless it’s of a subhuman Zionist/Jewish species that we get
> to dominate and profit from. (isn't that special)
>
> All we seem to get nowadays is the usual Republican Zionist Nazi
> replies of change nothing and otherwise do nothing, because apparently
> nothing is bad with the way everything is, and besides nothing
> seriously bad is ever going to happen, and even if it should we mere
> humans couldn't have done anything positive or constructive for the
> better.
>
> In other Usenet/newsgroup words of cult/cabal wisdom; Change nothing,
> revise nothing and above all do nothing about learning, exploring,
> researching or forbid any public sharing of whatever knowledge,
> because we (those in charge) supposedly like everything exactly as it
> is.
Notice how my very own kosher shadow and his gay lovechild Hagar can't
be the least bit topic constructive. No wonder so few respond
directly to these faith-based fools, as it must be something of a
special kosher DNA thing that the rest of us will likely never
understand. Obviously my open research and willingness to share has
created a major risk factor for all these Zionist Nazis of their
Usenet/newsgroups.
~ BG
BradGuth
plus stellar motion simulator that'll run this Sirius thing. Make a
list of all their excuses and post them in this topic.
~ BG
On Aug 24, 11:07 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
BradGuth
considering the remaining worth of the vibrant Sirius star/solar
system that has our passive little solar system within its tidal
radii, not to mention that our radial trek has us closing in at 7.6 km/
s, and otherwise increasing that velocity with the passing of each and
every year.
~ BG
On Aug 24, 11:07 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
Saul Levy
BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Your reasoning (BULLSHIT!) is FUCKED UP!
Saul Levy
On Sun, 2 Aug 2009 09:08:48 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>No wonder electron emitting stars can't so easily smack
>into one another.
>
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
As I've pointed out and given you the necessary tools, you merely need
to do the math in order to ponder and figure out how unavoidably
influenced our solar system has been, by the much greater mass of the
relatively nearby Sirius star/solar system.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Saul Levy
VILLAGE IDIOT that you are!
Saul Levy
On Mon, 3 Aug 2009 16:36:44 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>So, what's insurmountable or unusual about Sirius holding onto us?
>
> ~ BG
BradGuth
As I've pointed out multiple times and given you the necessary tools
and internet links, whereas you merely need to do the math in order to
ponder and figure out how unavoidably influenced our solar system has
been, as dominated by the much greater mass of the relatively nearby
Sirius star/solar system, and especially while it was a red
supermassive influence, and greater yet as of before then.
Saul Levy
Do you KNOW what EVIDENCE MEANS?
Do some research, MORON!
Saul Levy
On Wed, 2 Sep 2009 12:07:37 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>As I've pointed out multiple times and given you the necessary tools
>and internet links, whereas you merely need to do the math in order to
>ponder and figure out how unavoidably influenced our solar system has
>been, as dominated by the much greater mass of the relatively nearby
>Sirius star/solar system, and especially while it was a red
>supermassive influence, and greater yet as of before then.
>
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
Notice how only Jews and pretend-Atheists are upset enough about this
topic to send in their Alpha brown-nosed clowns, on order to apply as
much damage control as possible.
What is it they don't want us to know?
~ BG
BradGuth
As I've pointed out multiple times and having given you folks the
necessary tools and internet links, whereas you merely need to do the
math in order to ponder and figure out how unavoidably influenced our
solar system has been, as dominated by the much greater mass of the
relatively nearby Sirius star/solar system, and especially while it
was a red supermassive influence, and of greater mass yet as of before
then (not to mention the original molecular cloud of <12.5e6 Ms).
Oops, 250~275 million years ago; what exactly happened on Earth, and
then again more recently?
BradGuth
Interesting, to see how deathly frightened so many folks are these
days. It's almost as though Hitler was still alive and kicking at
those willing to do the math, and otherwise willing to use a deductive
method of connecting the dots. Forbid any free thoughts of revising
history or the scientific record in order to reflect the best
available truths, because you'll only lose your job and benefits, as
such would even scare the Pope to death.
~ BG
Saul Levy
lmfjao!
BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Saul Levy
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 18:26:33 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>As I've pointed out multiple times and having given you folks the
>necessary tools and internet links, whereas you merely need to do the
>math in order to ponder and figure out how unavoidably influenced our
>solar system has been, as dominated by the much greater mass of the
>relatively nearby Sirius star/solar system, and especially while it
>was a red supermassive influence, and of greater mass yet as of before
>then (not to mention the original molecular cloud of <12.5e6 Ms).
>
>Oops, 250~275 million years ago; what exactly happened on Earth, and
>then again more recently?
>
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
Visit "alt.astronomy" if you want to see what our resident rabbi
thinks. Apparently the Newtonian laws of gravity are not kosher
enough.
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/
8527f0ff70420af5?hl=en#>
~ BG
Saul Levy
I'm sure you love him too!
BAWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Saul Levy
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 12:44:19 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Interesting, to see how deathly frightened so many folks are these
BradGuth
Visit "alt.astronomy" if you want to see for yourself what our
resident rabbi
thinks. Apparently the Newtonian laws of gravity are not kosher
enough.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/8527f0ff70420af5?hl=en#
Mention the original molecular mass of Sirius, gravity and tidal radii
in the same context, and all the kosher brown-nosed clowns come out to
play.
~ BG
Saul Levy
Saul Levy
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 22:04:27 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>On Sep 8, 12:44�pm, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 24, 11:07�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Now we have a new and improved gauntlet of a topic/author taboo and/or
>> > �~ BG
>>
>> > On Jul 6, 6:55�am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
> ~ BG
American
We want the whole enchilada, not just the crumbs that dribble from the
emperor's table. Apparently some want to remain ignorant that
(Newton's) hypotheses didn't evolve from another's hypothesis, it
evolved by solving a conjecture that he had with collaboration with
others along with some of his (and perhaps others') observations.
Newton completely lacked the tools of faster discernment, such as
computers to solve equations, mathematical tables, etc., just as there
are many "fringe group" scientists or willing entrepreneurs that are
practically pregnant with expectation that if they just had a small
laboratory or production line to manufacture a prototype of some kind,
that their ideas would not have been quashed by selfish politicians
with an axe to grind.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/8527f0...
>
> Mention the original molecular mass of Sirius, gravity and tidal radii
> in the same context, and all the kosher brown-nosed clowns come out to
> play.
>
Samson slaughtered over 3,000 Philistines in the Temple of Dagon.
Perhaps the Philistines were misusing what the Dagon had given them in
terms of knowledge - and the bigger God Yahwah served it to them a la
catre?
>
> ~ BG- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
American
> > > ~ BG
No, not enough, Brad.
We want the whole enchilada, not just the crumbs that dribble from
the
emperor's table. Apparently some want to remain ignorant that
(Newton's) hypotheses didn't evolve from another's hypothesis, it
evolved by solving a conjecture that he had with collaboration with
others along with some of his (and perhaps others') observations.
Newton completely lacked the tools of faster discernment, such as
computers to solve equations, mathematical tables, etc., just as
there
are many "fringe group" scientists or willing entrepreneurs that are
practically pregnant with expectation that if they just had a small
laboratory or production line to manufacture a prototype of some
kind,
that their ideas would not have been quashed by selfish politicians
with an axe to grind.
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/8527f0...
> Mention the original molecular mass of Sirius, gravity and tidal radii
> in the same context, and all the kosher brown-nosed clowns come out to
> play.
Samson slaughtered over 3,000 Philistines in the Temple of Dagon.
Perhaps the Philistines were misusing what the Dagon had given them
in
terms of knowledge - and the bigger God Yahwah served it to them a la
carte?
American
BradGuth
So, where exactly are these nifty Gods when you need them?
Are you one of their terrestrial minions? and if so, what have you
accomplished?
I'm looking for honest collaboration and other observationology
talent. (got any?)
~ BG
American
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sure, what happened after reconstruction?
What happens with transnationalist treaties when the U.S. was/is
supposed to shoulder reparations, when TITHING would have solved
problems internationally without having to depend so much on
international banking cartels being just so many busybodies with their
hard-earned loot?
Why did real Americans LEAVE the continent of Europe, as well as
imperialist England anyway?
Wasn't it a result of recognizing the fact that ourselves, as 'grains
of sand' were receiving an otherworldly promise of dominion over the
entire earth?
If this is true, then why fund ANY NATION, INCLUDING OUR OWN for that
matter, that magnifies itself as some extreme social political monster
that must impose its will over the entire earth?
American
BradGuth
You'll have to ask our resident rabbi Saul Levy, because supposedly he
knows everything that William Mook doesn't know. Between those two,
nothing should go unanswered, much less outside of whatever's kosher
approved.
~ BG
American
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I doubt that.
I'll take any blockhead with just a whit of common sense and a few
dollars to spare, to at least get the ball rolling on a few new ideas
- perhaps something larger than HO scale would suffice - at least to
demonstrate the whole concept of electrogravitic propulsion.
If you wait too long than somebody - perhaps an Iraqi, or even Afghan,
Iranian or Venezuelan (oops) might supplant your idea - particularly
when there are just so many channels that it takes to get an idea
patented and/or approved by the ruling establishment.
Of course I'm exaggerating a bit on the ethnicity of those interested,
but it's just the politics of some very useful ideas that are left
hanging - one shouldn't have to always be looking behind themselves as
well as covering their tracks so much when the name of the inventor's
game should've been "yankee ingenuity". You can't tell me that the
world has been asleep for so long that only "exported" American
ingenuity makes the difference here.
American
BradGuth
>
> I'll take any blockhead with just a whit of common sense and a few
> dollars to spare, to at least get the ball rolling on a few new ideas
> - perhaps something larger than HO scale would suffice - at least to
> demonstrate the whole concept of electrogravitic propulsion.
>
> If you wait too long than somebody - perhaps an Iraqi, or even Afghan,
> Iranian or Venezuelan (oops) might supplant your idea - particularly
> when there are just so many channels that it takes to get an idea
> patented and/or approved by the ruling establishment.
>
> Of course I'm exaggerating a bit on the ethnicity of those interested,
> but it's just the politics of some very useful ideas that are left
> hanging - one shouldn't have to always be looking behind themselves as
> well as covering their tracks so much when the name of the inventor's
> game should've been "yankee ingenuity". You can't tell me that the
> world has been asleep for so long that only "exported" American
> ingenuity makes the difference here.
>
> American
What has any of this got to do with the Sirius star/solar system?
"Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable"
~ BG
Saul Levy
That's all.
Saul Levy
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 12:40:05 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>You'll have to ask our resident rabbi Saul Levy, because supposedly he
>knows everything that doesn't know. Between those two,
American
>
> - Show quoted text -
Remember I said that Samson slaughtered over 3,000 Philistines in the
Temple of Dagon? Well, if you look at some of the posts *way back*
about The "Dogon Tribe from Sirius B" (Dogon is mispelled - it should
be "Dagon"), you'll find a connection of biblical proportion.
In the same sense that the "Dagon" are the servants of man today, our
own population of transnationalist legalists, bureaucrats, and
attorneys are in the business of halting anything that smacks of
"localized revolutionary technology", mainly because most or all of
these people either don't understand or could give a crap about the
intracacies of how a new technology might become disseminated into our
own popular culture, and are in it only for the "quick fix" for
manipulating markets or controlling the behavior of entire industries,
IMO.
Even the book of John is under assault by our government today in
terms of a government-run health plan - an awkward and impossible
question that must be asked is "Has the Chosen One returned from
heaven to grant all believers on the earth HIS version of eternal life
through a health care plan?" (The answer is obviously NOT, since the
"Chosen One" has definitely NOT returned, and any "offers" to make
health care affordable by humanist masses will become DOOMED by their
own adherents.
Who are these adherents of the lie being perpetrated by our own
"humanist" government?
The "Satrap" in all of this has been at work quite recently conning
the state-run-media programmed, rubiconed believers into what the
auctioned rate securities should have been - mainly because most or
all of the "Satrap" state-run-media-programmed rubiconed robot
economists, as well as their worshipping the almighty-quick-fix-dollar
followers have completely forgot what revolutionary innovation should
have been, barring any/all of the statists-at-large, with their piles
of illegally comitted Federal Reserve Notes.
What exactly IS the alternative to re-establishing at the helm the
financial lending institutions to their former glory? (Not internet
banking - internet banking is for porno-junkies - at least 33% of
internet commerce is based on such).
What America needs now is g-wave transmissions - practically
instantaneous across the galaxy - for an earth empire-expanding
technology. Think I'm kidding? (Do a sequestered search sometime, and
see how the major search engines have double-meaninged search terms,
invalidated a patented or researched/developed claim, or even bought-
off the manufacturer in the interests of a conglomorate (involving
interlocking corporate directorships), and you'll see just how "viral"
the whole idea of promise market potential has become.
Nuke-pulsed units can be manufactured as totally non-lethal, both EM
wise, and for fuel handling.
Skip all earth-bound shovel-ready projects, as well as the build-
America Bonds. (We've built enough here already - What we need are
flying cars (ref. Moller, electro-gravitic, or otherwise).
Here's the catch: both government must stop expanding in favor of
these revolutionary technologies (as a dependent-phobe of "big oil")
and "big oil" must stop expanding at the expense of devolving our
technological prowess as an advanced species.
REAL Americans don't need the greek statues of antiquated technology
"feeble minded" to continue to pillage and rape our promise-market
potential in favor of creating fear-mongering, emperor-worshipping,
and technologically backwards civilization - nor do Americans need
land-marginalizers or money-changers to dictate to us through the
state-run media complex, what the REAL needs are, that an
intelligently expanding population requires for the future of its own
species.
It was the progressive Woodrow Wilson that gave into the bankers in
sequestering, and eventually oppressing, most or all of the innovative
R&D that would have led to an energy-independent America.
American
Call your Senate and demand an investigation into ACORN for
registering prostitutes and pimps - as well as 13, 13-year-olds (who
would become registered by our government as DEPENDENTS), and then
used to funnel the monies from registrant's taxed incomes into
congressional campaigns - the SAME campaigns that are being used to
promote HR 3200!
(What ever happened to HR 3400????)
The silver lining to the greatest spiritual darkness in all of human
history is about to unfold.
Call your Senate today and demand an investigation!
Saul Levy
Dogon smogon! What they are CLAIMED to have done is MEANINGLESS
MADE-UP DRIVEL!
The Philistines, like RAGHEADS today, only deserve to be EXTERMINATED!
Woodrow Wilson was just another BRAIN-DEAD LIBERAL! WORTHLESS!
Energy independant, my ASS!
Saul Levy
Saul Levy
NOT A GOOD THING AT ALL!
Saul Levy
BradGuth
So, you are in favor of keeping everything going exactly as is, as in
going down the nearest toilet, except of course for the rich and
powerful that'll always find yet another sneaky way to collect yet
another dollar for each and every flush of that toilet.
I'm not exactly sure of where you're going with this off-topic rant of
yours. Are you from Sirius C, or from some other off-world planet or
moon where folks are only good and honest?
~ BG
Saul Levy
PAST EACH OTHER! lmfjao!
What an INSANE FUCKTARD YOU ARE, GOOFBALL!
You continue to show that you KNOW NOTHING ABOUT ASTRONOMY!
No, Sirius and the Sun are NOT IN ORBIT with each other!
In 200,000 years or so you'll see that for yourself. In the meantime,
you are an IDIOT!
Saul Levy
BradGuth
Perhaps our God and master creator is merely breaking wind, again.
“What IS It? Mystery Noise in Space”
http://channels.isp.netscape.com/whatsnew/package.jsp?name=fte/spacenoise/spacenoise&floc=wn-nx
It's very, very far away, but astronomers have detected what is
essentially a noise that is so loud coming from outer space that it
can only be described as a roar.
And they have no idea what is causing it.
Space.com reports that the strange cosmic sound is booming six times
louder than expected. Since sound waves can't travel well in the
vacuum that is space, the sound must be a radio wave. Lots of objects
in space--from stars to quasars and even our own Milky Way--emit radio
waves. But this sound is different. There is "something new and
interesting going on in the universe," Alan Kogut of NASA's Goddard
Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland told his colleagues
gathered at the 213th meeting of the American Astronomical Society in
Long Beach, California.
(end quote)
Perhaps it’s just the usual dark/clear matter or energy of the
forthcoming comet Wormwood, or the black carbon sooty ice of the
Sirius B Oort cloud that’s interacting with our black ice populated
Oort cloud. However, as rabbi Saul and other kosher approved mindsets
would say, there’s never anything to worry about, as well as no
further point in bugging our NASA, DARPA or the likes of JPL among
dozens of other public funded research groups that have more important
matters to contend with, such as butt covering and defending their
public funded job/grant security w/benefits.
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
Saul Levy
Saul Levy
On Tue, 1 Sep 2009 21:22:56 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <brad...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>As I've pointed out and given you the necessary tools, you merely need
>to do the math in order to ponder and figure out how unavoidably
>influenced our solar system has been, by the much greater mass of the
>relatively nearby Sirius star/solar system.
>
> Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / �Guth Usenet�
BradGuth
> It's very, very far away, but astronomers have detected what is
> essentially a noise that is so loud coming from outer space that it
> can only be described as a roar.
>
> And they have no idea what is causing it.
>
> Space.com reports that the strange cosmic sound is booming six times
> louder than expected. Since sound waves can't travel well in the
> vacuum that is space, the sound must be a radio wave. Lots of objects
> in space--from stars to quasars and even our own Milky Way--emit radio
> waves. But this sound is different. There is "something new and
> interesting going on in the universe," Alan Kogut of NASA's Goddard
> Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland told his colleagues
> gathered at the 213th meeting of the American Astronomical Society in
> Long Beach, California.
>
> (end quote)
>
> Perhaps it’s just the usual dark/clear matter or energy of the
> forthcoming comet Wormwood, or the black carbon sooty ice of the
> Sirius B Oort cloud that’s interacting with our black ice populated
> Oort cloud. However, as rabbi Saul and other kosher approved mindsets
> would say, there’s never anything to worry about, as well as no
> further point in bugging our NASA, DARPA or the likes of JPL among
> dozens of other public funded research groups that have more important
> matters to contend with, such as butt covering and defending their
> public funded job/grant security w/benefits.
Invisible noise from space is electromagnetic as well as extreme IR
photons that become created when icy Oort clouds interact with one
another.
The recent and sudden birth of the Sirius star/solar system, and of
course the aftermath of Sirius B becoming a white dwarf is a perfectly
good example of what noise the evolution of such nearby stars should
represent, not to mention the remainders of its original molecular
cloud of <12.5e6 Ms that got blown away by the births of such vibrant
stars.
BradGuth
Even though gravity is an extremely weak force, when there's enough
matter associated with a given star/solar system to affect another
star/solar system, and it's especially so if such mass is nearby and
already heading towards one another, as is the case with us and
Sirius.
~ BG
BradGuth
>
> Even though gravity is an extremely weak force, when there's enough
> matter associated with a given star/solar system to affect another
> heading towards one another, as is the case with us and Sirius.
It seems our weak force of gravity attraction to the Sirius star/solar
system is obviously so much greater than say icy Sedna, and yet others
here insist that we're not in the least bit gravity tidal associated
to that impressive star system. What gives?
Sirius and us(our solar system) are very much indeed inseparable, at
least according to those regular laws of physics pertaining to the
mainstream accepted notions of Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics
that seems more than sufficient for everything else we’re told to
accept, and especially if little Sedna can be turned around at a tidal
radii of 1.459e14 m that’s worth merely 2.975e13 N, whereas Sirius at
8.6 light years and worth 1.417e17 N (20 thousand fold stronger tidal
radii), and to think that we’ve been gaining on this 3.5 solar mass of
Sirius by 7.6 km/sec, plus most likely and unavoidably accelerating
towards our next close cosmological encounter.
However, it’s pretty much all nothing but another mainstream infowar,
of media damage-control by way of a mainstream tactical disinformation
gauntlet of carefully orchestrated lies and conditional physics, plus
deceptions and systematic obfuscation is apparently what it’s all
about. When I’ve merely expected of others to share information and
to otherwise constructively ponder and contribute to this topic and
many similar ones before, all we ever got at best was a stone cold
shoulder, and otherwise mostly negativity and banishment, as well as
from a certain racist and kosher bigotry spouting potty-mouth rabbi
none the less. However, the laws of physics are seldom if ever
politically correct or otherwise faith-based, and as such they simply
do not lie, and even the best available science doesn’t support many
of those established mainstream notions of excluding anything and
everything that rocks a given faith-based boat.
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
The cosmic molecular cloud of what created Sirius, as being worth at
least 1.25e6 solar masses, while at a center to center distance of 100
ly and using our solar system mass of 2.05e30 kg for that same era, we
get the following results for 100 ly (9.46053e17 m), 50 ly (4.7303e17
m) and 10 ly (9.46053e16 m).
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 100 ly = 3.819e20 Newtons
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 50 ly = 1.528e21 N
2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 10 ly = 3.819e22 N
current (sun ~ earth) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 5.974e24 kg at 1.496e11 m = 3.541e22 N
current (sun ~ mars) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 6.418e23 kg at 2.2794e11 m = 1.639e21 N
current (sun ~ pluto) gravitational force of attraction:
1.989e30 and 1.305e22 kg at 5.906e12 m = 4.964e16 N
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/average gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 7.867e13 m = 1.023e14 N
current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N
current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction:
2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
Not to further nitpick, however there’s also 2005-VX3 / damocloid
(asteroid) of 112 km diameter as perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg,
that’s hanging all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.4e14 m) that’s worth
merely 1.71e9 N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system's
tidal radius. That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1
greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be
headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as
any elliptical Newtonian trek should.
Being that a molecular cloud of perhaps at least 1.25e6 solar masses
is going to have a diameter of nearly 100 light years, as such I might
suggest that we use the 50 ly parameter for the adjusted distance from
the core density of such a molecular cloud, as for mutually binding us
at the weak gravity force of 1.528e21 N. Of course by doubling that
distance cuts this tidal binding force of radial gravitational
attraction down to a forth, whereas even at 500 ly it’s still worth
1.528e19 N, and at the 2.5e37 solar masses brings that 500 ly distance
right back up to being worth 1.528e20 N.
The cosmic creation of the Sirius star/solar system was no small
matter of any wussy little molecular cloud. This was an extremely
large cloud and subsequent stellar birthing event of relatively recent
times (250~300 MBP), and as such it would have been entirely visible
to the naked human eyes of that era (not that any intelligent human
via Darwin or intelligent design even existed at that time, although
Ed Conrad’s “Man of Coal” seems to be of that era), and as of most
recently transforming the red supergiant phase of Sirius B into a
white dwarf required a helium flashover (slow nova) about as close as
you can safely get, if not a little too close.
By way of reading from what others claiming to know more than most
anyone else (must be Einstein clones), it seems they’d have no
problems with suggesting the 1e6:1 cosmic molecular cloud of having
been worth 1.25e7 solar masses that created the Sirius star/solar
system, and if still using 2.05e30 kg mass for that of our solar
system of that same era results in yet another 10 fold increased force
of attraction for that same 50 ly distance, representing 1.528e22 N
(nearly half of the sun~earth attraction), and 99.9999% of this 1e6:1
molecular cloud that’s oddly nowhere to be found, by rights should
have greatly affected our solar system.
Try to remember that this wasn’t a one brief time kind of a cosmic
drive-by shooting, but most likely worth at least ten million years of
persistent gravity pull before that massive molecular cloud ever
having cranked out those impressive Sirius stars, and for at least
another million some odd years of having blown everything else
(99.999% of that molecular cloud) far away. Once again, how can this
kind of nearby cosmic event and of such horrific original mass not
have affected our solar system?
This one shouldn’t be so hard to answer, but then our resident wizards
seem unable, and/or unwilling to share and share alike without
involving a great deal of their kosher mainstream damage-control of
obfuscation and if need be bloodshed.
BradGuth
headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating,
exactly as any elliptical Newtonian orbital trek should.
(typo correction) Being that a molecular cloud of perhaps at the very
least 1.25e6 solar masses is going to have a diameter of nearly 100
light years, as such I might suggest that we use the 50 ly parameter
for the adjusted distance from the core density of such a molecular
cloud, as for mutually binding into us at the weak gravity force of
1.528e21 N. Of course by doubling that distance cuts this tidal
binding force of radial gravitational attraction down to a forth,
whereas even at 500 ly it’s still worthy of 1.528e19 N, and at the
1.25e7 solar masses brings that 500 ly distance right back up to being
worth 1.528e20 N.
The cosmic creation of the Sirius star/solar system was by no means
any small matter of a wussy little molecular cloud. This was an
extremely large cloud and subsequent nearby stellar birthing event of
relatively recent times (250~300 MBP), and as such it would have been
something entirely visible to the naked human eyes of that era (not
that any intelligent human via Darwin or intelligent proto-design of
humans even existed at that time, although Ed Conrad’s “Man of Coal”
seems to be within that era), and as of most recently transforming the
red supergiant phase of Sirius B into a white dwarf required a
substantial helium flashover (slow nova) about as close as you can
safely get, if not a little too close.
By way of reading from what others claiming to know more than most
anyone else (must be Einstein clones), it seems they’d have no
problems with suggesting the 1e6:1 cosmic molecular cloud ratio of
having been worth 1.25e7 solar masses that created the Sirius star/
solar system, and if still using 2.05e30 kg mass for that of our solar
system of that same era results in yet another 10 fold increased force
of attraction for that same 50 ly distance, representing 1.528e22 N
(nearly half of the sun~earth attraction), and 99.9999% of this 1e6:1
molecular cloud that’s oddly nowhere to be found, by rights should
have greatly affected our solar system.
Try to remember that this wasn’t a one brief kind of a cosmic drive-by
shooting, but most likely worth at least a million years of persistent
gravity pull before that massive molecular cloud ever having cranked
out those impressive Sirius stars, and for at least another million
some odd years of having blown everything else (99.999% of that
molecular cloud) far away. Once again, how can this kind of nearby
cosmic event and of such horrific original mass not have affected our
solar system?
This one about our being unavoidably attracted and tidal influenced
via the impressive Sirius star/solar system shouldn’t be so hard to
answer, but then our resident wizards seem rather unable, and/or