What if (on Sun Wobble)

On Feb 23, 6:36*am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
AA *I would hive remembered Gallilio. *My brain keeps telling me his
name began with a "C" * He was living around the 1850s I think he lived
in England *I never heard of Gallilio hunting for Neptune.. *AA while at
the library see when Uranus was discovered? * TreBert


Uranius was discovered on March 13, 1781 by the great astronomer Sir
William Herschel of England. It is technically visible to a sharp
naked eye on a clear night, but had gone unnoticed by the ancients.

Double-A

"BradGuth" wrote in message...
...
On Feb 23, 7:09 am, "Painius" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message...
...

What's the current 105~110 thousand year wobble of our solar system
related to?

That's one i haven't heard of, Brad. Do you have a
reference to share that i can read?

That's why I was asking, since you and others of your all-knowing kind
that insist upon obfuscating whenever possible in order to exclude the
massive and nearby Sirius star/solar system that we're headed towards
and used to be worth 7~9 solar masses, and to otherwise exclude our
using public owned supercomputers for orbital simulations of such
potential stellar motions. Therefore, what else have we in the local
stellar area that's offering ~105,000 year stellar motion cycle, that
offers the required mass, energy outflux and desirable spectrum for
having kept our solar system and our local environment so into its
tidal radius grip?

Are you going to suggest that Earth was at multiple times
overpopulated with arrogant, greedy and corrupt humans that were
sufficiently energy inefficient and polluting in order to accommodate
each and every ice age thaw?

Are you going to suggest that our orbit varies its radius by +/- 2% on
a 105,000 some odd year cycle?

Are you going to otherwise suggest that our sun periodically cycles
and gradually becomes extra active every 105,000 some odd years?

Are you also going to keep suggesting that nothing of rogue planets or
moons ever gets acquired into our solar system, or into any other
stellar/solar system?

Obviously you are a mainstream status quo insider of superior
obfuscation and denial, along with all the usual ulterior motives and
some kind of hidden agendas, as otherwise you would not be so into
obfuscating and otherwise you'd be diligently working on our side.

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

Brad, i wasn't obfuscating or trying to be all knowing. I
was just asking you where you had heard or read that
our Solar system experiences a wobbling cycle that has
a period of 105 to 110 thousand years. There is no
reason that i can see for you to be rude to me. If you
don't want to answer the question, just say so. Or if you
want to continue to be secretive, to obfuscate and to
seem all knowing, that's okay too.

You must really dislike yourself a lot! There's no reason
to, you know. There is much to like about you.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: "A neurosis is a secret that you don't know
you are keeping." Kenneth Tynan

P.P.S.: http://Astronomy.painellsworth.net
http://PoisonFalls.painellsworth.net
http://TheInternetStory.painellsworth.net

On Feb 23, 12:05*pm, "Painius" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message...

...



On Feb 23, 7:09 am, "Painius" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message...
....

What's the current 105~110 thousand year wobble of our solar system
related to?

That's one i haven't heard of, Brad. Do you have a
reference to share that i can read?

That's why I was asking, since you and others of your all-knowing kind
that insist upon obfuscating whenever possible in order to exclude the
massive and nearby Sirius star/solar system that we're headed towards
and used to be worth 7~9 solar masses, and to otherwise exclude our
using public owned supercomputers for orbital simulations of such
potential stellar motions. *Therefore, what else have we in the local
stellar area that's offering ~105,000 year stellar motion cycle, that
offers the required mass, energy outflux and desirable spectrum for
having kept our solar system and our local environment so into its
tidal radius grip?

Are you going to suggest that Earth was at multiple times
overpopulated with arrogant, greedy and corrupt humans that were
sufficiently energy inefficient and polluting in order to accommodate
each and every ice age thaw?

Are you going to suggest that our orbit varies its radius by +/- 2% on
a 105,000 some odd year cycle?

Are you going to otherwise suggest that our sun periodically cycles
and gradually becomes extra active every 105,000 some odd years?

Are you also going to keep suggesting that nothing of rogue planets or
moons ever gets acquired into our solar system, or into any other
stellar/solar system?

Obviously you are a mainstream status quo insider of superior
obfuscation and denial, along with all the usual ulterior motives and
some kind of hidden agendas, as otherwise you would not be so into
obfuscating and otherwise you'd be diligently working on our side.

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

Brad, i wasn't obfuscating or trying to be all knowing. *I
was just asking you where you had heard or read that
our Solar system experiences a wobbling cycle that has
a period of 105 to 110 thousand years. *There is no
reason that i can see for you to be rude to me. *If you
don't want to answer the question, just say so. *Or if you
want to continue to be secretive, to obfuscate and to
seem all knowing, that's okay too.

You must really dislike yourself a lot! *There's no reason
to, you know. *There is much to like about you.

You know darn good and well what I think has to do with our cycles of
ice ages and subsequent thaws, so don't even bother playing dumb.

The same question applies, of which you've elected to turn around
making little old me the bad guy, as though I'm supposed to know
everything in a purely objective matter of fact kind of way none the
less, just like you and others of your kind did each and every time
there's any chance of us outsiders rocking that mainstream good ship
LOLLIPOP of yours.

Since there's nothing remotely as close to the mass, spectrum of
energy and as nearby as the 3.5 solar all-inclusive mass of Sirius,
that was not so long ago worth 7 to 9 solar masses, is what to me
represents our most likely stellar motion relationship that's in
charge of such dynamic terrestrial cycles.

But since you've continually excluded Sirius means that yourself and
others of your kind must have some other likely stellar candidates.
So, why don't you share and share alike, or is that kind of swag or
best educated guess still asking too much?

What if the Sirius B hydrogen and helium flashover had taken place
place just 11,721 years ago, and its IR thermal affects reaching us by
11,711 years ago?

Or, what if an icy Selene with an albedo of 0.85 arrived just 11,711
years ago?

What caused the massive south pole crater on Selene? and where
exactly is that other item matching up with the same kind of impact?

~ BG

Double -A Galllio died in 1543 and that is over 200 years before Uranus.
So you can see he did not have Neptune on his mind. But like when you
have a person's name and f0rgot it You can drive yourself crazy,and for
me its a very short drive TreBert

From Painius, replying to 'BG':

I was just asking you where you had
heard or read that our Solar system
experiences a wobbling cycle that has a
period of 105 to 110 thousand years.

I think he's referrin' to the presumed "oscillation" of the solar
system's pathway above and below the galactic plane, theorized also to
trigger mass extinctions on a regular basis.

On Feb 23, 2:37*pm, (oldcoot) wrote:
From Painius, replying to 'BG':

I was just asking you where you had
heard or read that our Solar system
experiences a wobbling cycle that has a
period of 105 to 110 thousand years.

I think he's referrin' to the presumed "oscillation" of the solar
system's pathway above and below the galactic plane, *theorized also to
trigger mass extinctions on a regular basis. * *

That's a whole lot closer and at least worth considering, but what
about Sirius ABC?

What if the Sirius B hydrogen and helium flashover had taken place
place just 11,721 years ago, and its IR thermal affects reaching us by
11,711 years ago?

Or, what if an icy Selene with an albedo of 0.85 arrived just 11,711
years ago?

What sort of encounter caused the massive south pole crater on
Selene? and where exactly is that other item matching up with the
same kind of impact?

~ BG

On Feb 23, 2:37*pm, (oldcoot) wrote:
From Painius, replying to 'BG':

I was just asking you where you had
heard or read that our Solar system
experiences a wobbling cycle that has a
period of 105 to 110 thousand years.

I think he's referrin' to the presumed "oscillation" of the solar
system's pathway above and below the galactic plane, *theorized also to
trigger mass extinctions on a regular basis. * *

Why are all the public owned supercomputers and their orbital
simulators officially taboo?

~ BG

"oldcoot" wrote in message...
...
From Painius, replying to 'BG':

I was just asking you where you had
heard or read that our Solar system
experiences a wobbling cycle that has a
period of 105 to 110 thousand years.

I think he's referrin' to the presumed "oscillation" of the solar
system's pathway above and below the galactic plane, theorized also to
trigger mass extinctions on a regular basis.

Possibly, but that's only supposed to happen 2.7 times per
galactic year (~225 - 250 million Earth years)...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun#Loc...hin_the_galaxy

If one divides 225 by 2.7, it means that the Sun and Solar
system oscillate above and below the galactic plane with
a period of about 83.3 million years--much longer than
Brad's period of 105 to 110 thousand years.

So i think he's referring to the minor ice ages that have
taken place during the Pleistocene period. Apparently, he
believes that close passages of Sol and Sirius may have
caused these ice ages and deposited such things as the
Moon and Venus in our Solar system. Since he does not
appear to understand orbital dynamics any better than i
do, he doesn't accept the explanation given by a poster to
sci.astro several weeks ago, to wit...

The blue-shifted radial velocity between Sol and Sirius can
be plugged into an orbital-dynamics formula, which shows
without a doubt that Sirius cannot possibly be in any kind
of orbital relationship with the Sun.

Being a lover of math, i tend to go with this reality. YMMV

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: "Convinced myself, I seek not to convince."
E. A. Poe

P.P.S.: http://Astronomy.painellsworth.net
http://PoisonFalls.painellsworth.net
http://TheInternetStory.painellsworth.net

Whad-dever.

Still looks like teamwork to me, especially when one considers
that, while the calculating astronomers, Le Verrier and Adams,
are given the "credit" for the discovery of planet Neptune, many
of the others, whom you call "actual discoverers" of various
planets and other Solar system objects, have also been given
honorable mention in several historical texts. And all of these
great astronomers had "gofers", such as those with "junior
author status", at their sides to help with the more mundane
duties of astronomy.

You're just being argumentative on this issue. Or *maybe*...

Maybe *you* are still at issue with something in your past that
is the root cause of your "denial"? hth-lmfaao!

"Saul Levy" wrote in message...
...

There were no teams, Paine!

I used to be one of those and discoveries were NOT left for me to
find. My ex-boss at Kitt Peak was very nice and fair and gave me
junior author status on all of our papers. Many astronomers to this
day hate to give full credit for such things.

The actual discoverers were AT DIFFERENT OBSERVATORIES from where the
calculations were made. Often in DIFFERENT COUNTRIES! Your TEAMS are
ROMANTIC NONSENSE!

Saul Levy


On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:29:29 GMT, "Painius"
wrote:

"Saul Levy" wrote in message...
. ..

Not quite correct, Paine!

There were NO TEAMS back then. Both Le Verrier and Adams spread the
word about their calculations and OTHER ASTRONOMERS did the searching
for Neptune.

And i consider that teamwork, Saul. Besides, didn't those
astronomers back then have assistants and "go fers" and
such? people to do much of the legwork, footwork, etc?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: "Convinced myself, I seek not to convince."
E. A. Poe

P.P.S.: http://Astronomy.painellsworth.net
http://PoisonFalls.painellsworth.net
http://TheInternetStory.painellsworth.net

On Feb 27, 1:55*pm, "Painius" wrote:
Whad-dever.

Still looks like teamwork to me, especially when one considers
that, while the calculating astronomers, Le Verrier and Adams,
are given the "credit" for the discovery of planet Neptune, many
of the others, whom you call "actual discoverers" of various
planets and other Solar system objects, have also been given
honorable mention in several historical texts. *And all of these
great astronomers had "gofers", such as those with "junior
author status", at their sides to help with the more mundane
duties of astronomy.

You're just being argumentative on this issue. *Or *maybe*...

Maybe *you* are still at issue with something in your past that
is the root cause of your "denial"? *hth-lmfaao!

"Saul Levy" wrote in message...

...







There were no teams, Paine!

I used to be one of those and discoveries were NOT left for me to
find. *My ex-boss at Kitt Peak was very nice and fair and gave me
junior author status on all of our papers. *Many astronomers to this
day hate to give full credit for such things.

The actual discoverers were AT DIFFERENT OBSERVATORIES from where the
calculations were made. *Often in DIFFERENT COUNTRIES! *Your TEAMS are
ROMANTIC NONSENSE!

Saul Levy

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 18:29:29 GMT, "Painius"
wrote:

"Saul Levy" wrote in message...
. ..

Not quite correct, Paine!

There were NO TEAMS back then. *Both Le Verrier and Adams spread the
word about their calculations and OTHER ASTRONOMERS did the searching
for Neptune.

And i consider that teamwork, Saul. *Besides, didn't those
astronomers back then have assistants and "go fers" and
such? people to do much of the legwork, footwork, etc?

happy days and...
* *starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth


And don't forget Foucault. (You know, the pendulum guy?) It was his
more accurate calculation of the speed of light that helped his boss
Le Verrier at the Paris Observatory confirm a more accurate distance
between the Earth and Sun, and consequently increase the acccuracy of
the calculations pinpointing Neptune! Now that's teamwork!

Double-A