On Jun 20, 6:16*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Apr 27, 4:47*am, BradGuth wrote:
Red giant stars are many, and yet still a little hard to come by, as
only a few public images of whatever is within 1000 light years seem
to exist that fit within the color saturated eye-candy profiles that
we’ve been taught to accept. *However, the visible spectrum is
extremely limited as to what is otherwise technically accessible from
just above and below our genetically limited and thus inferior visual
spectrum. (seems entirely odd that our human evolution was so careless
in having discarded so much visual capability, in that other creatures
seem to have a far wider visual spectrum capability that includes some
UV and IR)
“Red GiantStarFound to Have Massive Tail”
*http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Red_G...Have_Massive_T...
*Mira A of several hundred solar radii (UV colorized as bluish): “A
dyingstarsituated 400 light years away from us exhibits an unusual
and massive tail of heated gas that spreads for more than 13 light
years.”
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mira
*http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/galex/20070815/a.html
Sirius B could have been much like an image of Mira A, except a whole
lot larger (1000 solar radii), as viewed in visible and near IR
*http://xmm.esac.esa.int/external/xmm...osium/173770_m...
Mira A and lots more composite observationology from FAS
*http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/docs/rst/Sect20/A6.html
There are many possibilities, as for how Sirius B used to function as
a truly massive (9 solarmass)star, thereby extremely hot and fast
burning prior to becoming a red supergiant, creating an impressive
planetary nebula phase before ending as the little white dwarf. *For
all we know Sirius B was even a variable kind of red giant and then
perhaps a slow nova flashover phase prior to finishing off as the
white dwarf.
These following examples are probably similar or perhaps representing
a slightly smaller version of what the Siriusstar/solar system looked
like once Sirius B had started turning itself from an impressive red
supergiant into a white dwarf of perhaps 1/8th its originalmass,
taking roughly 64~96,000 years for this explosivemassshedding phase
to happen. *A few tens of billions of years later is when such a white
dwarf eventually becomes a black dwarf, kind of black diamond spentstar, in that our universe may or may not be quite old enough to
display such examples.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_nebula
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix_Nebula
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%27s_Eye_Nebula
*http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap031207.html
*http://www.uv.es/jrtorres/index6.html
Betelgeuse has been a massive red giant at 20+ fold themassof our
sun, and likely worth nearly 3 fold themassof the original Sirius B,
and currently expanded to 1000 solar radii, and it'll be truly
impressive nova whenever it transforms into a white dwarf nearly the
size of Jupiter.
The soon to be renewed and improved Hubble should accomplish the
improved spectrum and resolution of most everything, along with other
existing and soon to be deployed telescopes should give us even better
composite examples of what Sirius B used to look like. *This may give
some of us a better interpretation as to what transpired right next
door to us, as well as having unavoidably contributed to some of what
our solar system has to offer.
We seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star
cluster, even though Sirius has been a relatively newish and extremely
vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from another
galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250
million years worth.
It took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at least 120,000 solar
masses in order to produce such a 12+ mass star system, leaving 99.99%
of that molecular mass blown away and to fend for itself, at a place
and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away.
Others might go so far as to suggest a molecular cloud mass of 1.2
million, and others yet would prefer that this terrific cloud had
emerged from a smaller galaxy that encountered our Milky Way.
There's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow
directly affected by and otherwise having become somewhat tidal radius
interrelated with such a nearby mass, at least associated with the
mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar
system.
Lo and behold, it seems the mergers of galactic proportions isn’t
nearly as uncommon as some naysayers might care to think.
The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
*http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...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), our Milky Way is made
up of at least two galactic units, with more on their blue-shifted way
towards encountering us. *Seems hardly fair considering that
everything was supposedly created via one singular big bang, not to
mention that hundreds to thousands of galaxies seem headed into the
Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth.
Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone)
*http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html
Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other
archives (including those of FAS) depicting “colliding galaxies”, soon
to be ESA enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive
orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and
improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories
should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as
massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their
having gown via mergers.
Where's the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they
seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely. *Surely these
brown-nosed clowns, faith-based bigots and closed mindsets of our
Usenet/newsgroup that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much
like my personal Jewish shadow tries to do), are hopefully not
speaking on behalf of FAS.
~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”
Sirius and us are inseparable, at least according to the physics of
gravity.
It’s all infowar tactical lies, deceptions and obfuscation is what
it’s all about. When I’ve merely expected of others to share
information and to otherwise constructively contribute to this topic
and many before, all we ever got at best was a stone cold shoulder,
and otherwise mostly negativity from a certain rabbi none the less.
However, the laws of physics are seldom politically correct or
otherwise faith-based, and they do not lie, and even the best
available science doesn’t support many of those established mainstream
notions.
Gravity Force of Attraction
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html
Cosmic molecular cloud of what created Sirius being at least 1.25e6
solar masses, 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:
(100 ly = 9.46053e17 meters & 50 ly = 4.7303e17 meters)
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) gravitational force of attraction:
2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 7.867e13 m = 1.023e14 N
current (solar system ~ Sirius) gravitational force of attraction:
2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N
Creating the Sirius star/solar system was no small matter of any wussy
molecular cloud. This was extremely big and it would have been
entirely visible to the naked human eye.
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 might suggest
that we use the 50 ly 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 gravitational attraction down to a forth.
Try to remember that this wasn’t a one time kind of cosmic drive-by
event, but most likely worth at least ten million years of persistent
gravity pull before 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 mass) away. Once
again, how can this kind of nearby cosmic event and of such horrific
original mass not have affected our solar system?
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 a 1e6:1 cosmic molecular cloud of 1.25e7
solar masses that created the Sirius star/solar system, and 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).
Now for a little objective perspective. If our current solar system
mass of 2.02e30 kg can still manage to hold onto the highly elliptical
trek of little planetoid Sedna, at the semi-major axis that offers
1.023e14 N, then it sure as hell shouldn’t have any problems
whatsoever with Sirius that’s an all inclusive 3.5 solar masses and
worth 1.417e17 N (1,385 times greater gravitational binding than
Sedna). There’s actually a fair number of TNOs that our solar system
holds onto, further proving how it’s entirely possible that we are
tidal radii associated with the Sirius star/solar system.
~ BG