View Single Post
  #3  
Old July 6th 09, 05:53 PM posted to alt.astronomy,sci.space.policy,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,uk.sci.astronomy
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth

On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth 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.

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/l...ocalgroup.html

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 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”


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/ca...alculator.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?)

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”