![]() |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
(Rick Sobie) wrote in message news:W3jSb.332577$X%5.21232@pd7tw2no...
http://www.members.shaw.ca/rsobie/Mo..._Glactica.html Wow for a second time! still not bad ideas, could even be worth a shot at others terraforming the likes of Earth, Mars and Venus. Along those lines, here's a little something other that's worth doing, or at least considering, especially if this 110,000 year timeline of the Sirius orbit plays anything into your "Battle Star" scheme of things. Don't ask me what the heck Sirius/abc is orbiting, as I have no idea whatsoever, although it's fairly certain that at one time Sirius was sufficiently close by our solar system to have sufficiently illuminated and thereby boosted the photosynthesis levels, in order to so have subsequently affected the reduction of CO2, though upon a 110,000 year cycle seems every bit as possible as not. This following rant may be a little too much, as in over the heads of folks generally opposing anything that's going against their "status quo", such as thinking of Sirius as sort of a "once upon a time" NEO in relationship to our solar system is certainly outside the big box. "Sirius (A1Vm) delivers UV cycle of life for Mars, Earth and Venus" I've recently acquired an understanding about Sirius, that of roughly every 110,000 years is when the Sirius/abc group of stars gets seriously close by, perhaps a little too close for comfort should that encounter achieve much under 0.01 ly. Latest Sirius entry, with graphics (Feb. 03, 2004): http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm LUMINOSITY is but a comparison of a star's intrinsic brightness compared to the Sun (where Sun's luminosity = 1) whereas Sirius offers somewhat of an ultra white "A1Vm" main sequence star of 23 ~ 26 times brighter than our Sun, although that's still as perceived by human vision and not inclusive of the UV spectrum. The spectral type "A1Vm" implies an effective temperature of 9600+K and a mass roughly twice that of the sun. Based upon a visual perception, at 0.01 ly is where Sirius might come across as offering a magnitude 16, as compared to our solar magnitude of 27 seems like Sirius is still a non issue. However, the peak energy spectrum of just Sirius/a is supposedly 314 nm instead of the visible 500 nm of our sun, and as such offering many magnitude advantages over what our sun has to deliver, where perhaps that's worth another magnitude 10 on top of the visible magnitude 16, plus now having such worthy illuminations that are more often than not coming at us from two directions at the same time. I'm thinking about this visual+UV spectrum magnitude should place Sirius at an equivalent energy level of perhaps 26 when taking into account those rather enormous energy factors of UV and near UV spectrums are included. Keeping further in mind that Sirius/b suggest an effective temperature of about 32,000+K, thus making it way hotter than our sun, so much so that even this tiny star emits about 900 times more radiant energy per square meter of surface than our sun does. In other words, Sirius/b is mostly UV/abc central, with only a relatively small percentage offered as visible and IR spectrum. The lesser perceived visual luminosity factor as compared to Sirius/a represents that Sirius/b has a relatively small surface area, that is to say, that the star is in deed highly compact and thereby classified as a white dwarf. None the less, Sirius/b would surely only add further insult to injury whenever this Sirius star system were within cruising range as passing our solar system at a mere 0.01 ly, especially whenever within 3/4 of the internal 50 year cycle where Sirius/b appears to reside along side of, or between Sirius/a and that of our solar system. Even though, for some God forsaken reason(s), Mars still remains our mainstream media and astronomy focus, thus representing such a spendy freaking joke, while we're entirely ignoring the greater implications as for considering upon those of Sirius terraforming the likes of Venus, that which would have been so much easier accomplished as of 40,000 years ago, and/or of 150,000 years past and so forth, as this sort of near juncture must also have offered a fairly similar opportunity for that of doing Earth and even Mars, just as our CO2 counts were indirectly reduced by this horrific influx of UV illuminating as a gift of life, creating at times the global environment of nearly 24/7 photosynthesis as being delivered by the likes of Sirius, along with our normal solar contributions. Obviously this added UV influx wasn't essential for Earth, as it would have been for Mars and perhaps even benefitting Venus. At nearest juncture (say 0.01 ly), Sirius would have created a gravitational pull upon Pluto, that would have badly skewed it's orbit, whereas Pluto might even have thawed out for a mere few hundred or so years worth, clearly making it an unworthy candidate of terraforming regardless of whatever applied technology. In other words, you don't bother seeding any planet that's having to go into ultra sub-freezing and irradiated to death mode for the next 100,000+ years, as what would be the point? The prospect of terraforming Mars on the other hand may have been worth a shot, even though lesser gravity being responsible for a thinner atmosphere holding capability would have left all those on Mars with a somewhat serious dilemma of surviving those incoming meteorites, along with much greater cosmic radiation levels, though if initially there were sufficient planetary mineral and thus natural energy solutions, even life on a relatively cold and irradiated planet could have managed, at least up until the last drop of accessible energy had been extracted. Consider if you well; upon the very nature of any planet capable of hosting a sufficient degree of cloud cover, especially if that cloud cover could be artificially induced into including additional mass, as well as filtering agents, such as sulphur. As now you've created a global environmental shield surround that's not only become nearly meteorite proof but also quite nicely filtering out a good deal of those bad UV and of buffering and/or shedding those more lethal radiation spectrums, yet allowing more than a sufficient spectrum bandwidth of 350~450 nm to slip through, giving the much needed surface illuminations, while essentially blocking the direct impact of the horrific IR as well as for diminishing the undesirable influx of UV/abc to a point where sufficiently advanced life becomes survivable, in spite of those horrific side effects of creating a rather massive greenhouse. If you've got surplus energy, you can certainly deal with a little too much heat and even of not enough O2, although without such a sufficient global atmospheric density as your primary shield, all the energy in the universe isn't going to save your butt from the gauntlet of solar and cosmic influx, not to be forgetting about those pesky meteorites, like all those strewn about Mars, and of worse off being of what's impacting our moon. Without having such a dense atmosphere and accommodating cloud cover, sunrise on Venus wouldn't represent the mere 5~10% increase in their ambient, but more than likely several hundred percent, creating an intolerable infernal differential that even highly educated folks would be hard pressed to deal with. As in addition to those wild day/night thermal variation, there'd be a horrifically wide spectrum influx of solar and cosmic radiation to fend off. So thereby, as for being parked closer to a sun, especially of any Sirius class sun, the thicker and denser your atmosphere the better, plus having an extremely slow planetary rotation can be just as essential if remaining nocturnal becomes another facet of your survival equation. If our relatively minor solar system can somehow manage to host such a clouded planet like Venus, then it's entirely possible that something other created and/or modified for the likes of orbiting Sirius could have survived in spite of our ignorance (imagine that, the thought of folks actually smarter then GW Bush). BTW; There's still way more than a darn good chance of there being other life of some sort existing on Venus: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm Some good but difficult warlord readings: SADDAM HUSSEIN and The SAND PIRATES http://mittymax.com/Archive/0085-Sad...andPirates.htm David Sereda (honest ideas and notions upon UV energy), for best impact on this one, you'll really need to barrow his video tape: http://www.ufonasa.com The latest round of insults to this Mars/Moon/Venus class action injury: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-what-if.htm Some other recent file updates: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-gwb-moon.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-interplanetary.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-illumination.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-moon-02.htm http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sedna, space probes?, colonies? what's next? | TKalbfus | Policy | 265 | July 13th 04 12:00 AM |
Space Calendar - January 27, 2004 | Ron | Astronomy Misc | 7 | January 29th 04 09:29 PM |
NEWS: The allure of an outpost on the Moon | Kent Betts | Space Shuttle | 2 | January 15th 04 12:56 AM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ | Nathan Jones | Astronomy Misc | 5 | November 7th 03 08:53 PM |
The Apollo Hoax FAQ v4 | Nathan Jones | Astronomy Misc | 1 | November 4th 03 11:52 PM |