Future life to Orbit White Dwarfs

Daffy Duck Wit No reason planets are not captured. Bert

In article ,
(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Daffy Duck Wit No reason planets are not captured. Bert


Apart from the near infintesimal chance that a planet thrown from a
system interacts with another?

--
Got mail? I did ;-) Three and counting.
Got proof? Not yet, still waiting.

"Phineas T Puddleduck" wrote in message
news
In article ,
(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Daffy Duck Wit No reason planets are not captured. Bert


Apart from the near infintesimal chance that a planet thrown from a
system interacts with another?

Not to mention conservation of energy issues.

In article ,
Phineas T Puddleduck wrote:

snip

Or perhaps you can think of a way life can survive 10^11 solar
luminosity's aimed at it from around 1 AU...

An extra-thick tinfoil hat?

--
Odysseus

On Apr 10, 7:10 pm, "Greg Neill" wrote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" wrote in messagenews
In article ,
(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Daffy Duck Wit No reason planets are not captured. Bert

Apart from the near infintesimal chance that a planet thrown from a
system interacts with another?

Not to mention conservation of energy issues.


Considering those conservation of energy issues, how do you explain
how objects are captured by and spiral into black holes? (honest
question)

Double-A

Daffy Duck Wit The fact that smaller objects entering a large objects
gravity field start taking a curved path helps the capture theory. A
closed curve and its in orbit. Over time the orbit gets rounder,and
rounder. This has been shown to us. When we hit that large comet the
explosion had nothing going into orbit,only fine dust going 100s of
miles into space. That has to tell even a duck head something Bert

In article ,
(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Daffy Duck Wit The fact that smaller objects entering a large objects
gravity field start taking a curved path helps the capture theory. A
closed curve and its in orbit. Over time the orbit gets rounder,and
rounder. This has been shown to us. When we hit that large comet the
explosion had nothing going into orbit,only fine dust going 100s of
miles into space. That has to tell even a duck head something


The fact you're an idiot.



--
Got mail? I did ;-) Three and counting.
Got proof? Not yet, still waiting.

"Double-A" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Apr 10, 7:10 pm, "Greg Neill" wrote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" wrote in
messagenews

In article ,
(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Daffy Duck Wit No reason planets are not captured. Bert

Apart from the near infintesimal chance that a planet thrown from a
system interacts with another?

Not to mention conservation of energy issues.


Considering those conservation of energy issues, how do you explain
how objects are captured by and spiral into black holes? (honest
question)

The matter in black hole accretion disks lose orbital
energy via frictional heating. Objects passing by at
moderate distances will not be captured unless they
happen to encounter other objects along the way and
have their trajectories altered to intersect the hole
or its accretion disk. Near misses can tear apart
objects due to tidal stresses.

Of course, the great gravity of supermassive black
holes causes everything in its vicinity to orbit at
relatively high speeds, so that the encounter and
collision rates are higher, too.

In article ,
"Greg Neill" wrote:

The matter in black hole accretion disks lose orbital
energy via frictional heating. Objects passing by at
moderate distances will not be captured unless they
happen to encounter other objects along the way and
have their trajectories altered to intersect the hole
or its accretion disk. Near misses can tear apart
objects due to tidal stresses.

Of course, the great gravity of supermassive black
holes causes everything in its vicinity to orbit at
relatively high speeds, so that the encounter and
collision rates are higher, too.

What that man said ^ ;-)

You can also factor in the increasing deviation from Newtonian mechanics
with SMBH as well. There's a greater dwell time near periastron as well
for any object coming in close due to the extra term in the
gravitational potential - the term Mercury proved so well.... ;-)

--
Got mail? I did ;-) Three and counting.
Got proof? Not yet, still waiting.

Double-A My critics are just jumping on a medium stars lifecycle when
it balloons out to be a "red giant" I'm going with the spacetime when
the sun looses this outer layer to space and what is left is a white
dwarf. that is destined to give of photons for another 100 billion
years. White dwarf stars are part of binaries. Have a picture of
a white dwarf that is only the length of are solar system away from its
companion. There is that famous "Algol system" I have always had
the idea that a white dwarf creates this condition.(does the eclipse)
Double-A fact is a white dwarf can last 10 times longer than my age for
the universe. Like old soldiers they just fad away. Life needs
heat,and white dwarfs take their time to cool. Bert