A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » UK Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old July 19th 09, 06:02 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 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:
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”


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


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
  #22  
Old July 21st 09, 10:46 AM 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 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:
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”


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?


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
  #23  
Old July 22nd 09, 02:16 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 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:



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”


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?


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.


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
  #24  
Old July 22nd 09, 10:41 PM posted to alt.astronomy,sci.space.policy,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,uk.sci.astronomy
Mike Collins[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 85
Default Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth

On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:





On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:


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”


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?


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.


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- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Forget about Sirius.
Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ollosites.html
  #25  
Old July 23rd 09, 12:04 AM 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 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote:
On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote:



On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:


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.

  #26  
Old July 23rd 09, 12:05 AM 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 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote:
On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote:



On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:


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.

  #27  
Old July 23rd 09, 10:40 PM posted to alt.astronomy,sci.space.policy,alt.journalism,alt.news-media,uk.sci.astronomy
Mike Collins[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 85
Default Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth

On 23 July, 00:05, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote:





On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:


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”


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?


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.


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- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Forget about Sirius.
Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead.http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ges/apollosite...


Been there, done that.

So far those LROC 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- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


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.
  #28  
Old July 24th 09, 01:23 AM 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 23, 2:40*pm, Mike Collins
wrote:
On 23 July, 00:05, BradGuth wrote:



On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote:


On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:


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”


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?


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.


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- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Forget about Sirius.
Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead.http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ges/apollosite...


Been there, done that.


So far those LROC 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- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


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.


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
  #29  
Old July 24th 09, 05:42 AM 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 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote:
On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote:



On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:


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.

  #30  
Old July 24th 09, 09:50 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 23, 9:42*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 22, 2:41*pm, Mike Collins
wrote:



On 22 July, 14:16, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 21, 2:46*am, BradGuth wrote:


On Jul 15, 10:33*am, BradGuth wrote:


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”


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?


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.


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- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Forget about Sirius.
Try looking at Apollo landing site photographs instead.http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LR...ges/apollosite...


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


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
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Brad Guth is...... OM History 0 December 27th 03 12:34 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.