asteroid close approach, 2011 Nov 08

On 11/7/11 12:04 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
On Nov 6, 3:26 pm, Sam wrote:

The Oort cloud is a hypothesized spherical cloud of comets which may lie
roughly 50,000 AU, or nearly a light-year, from the Sun. The outer limit
of the Oort cloud defines the cosmographical boundary of the Solar
System and the region of the Sun's gravitational dominance.

If the Sirius system (which has no detectable planets) even has an
Oort cloud, why would you expect it to be bigger than our own. Please
articulate a scientific argument and not just bull****.

Those Sirius stars started off at a combined mass of perhaps as great
as 25e30 kg, and at least one of them turned into a WD.

So, where in the same cosmos as us did 18e30 kg go?

Probably never existed, especially since there is no evidence.

On Nov 6, 10:04*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Those Sirius stars started off at a combined mass of perhaps as great
as 25e30 kg, and at least one of them turned into a WD.

So, where in the same cosmos as us did 18e30 kg go?

I give up, where did you conjure up the mass of that original cloud?
Even if you are correct, do you really think that Sirius A & B were
born all by their lonesome selves? Don't you think it much more likely
that several hundred other stars were born from that cloud? After all,
that's what we see when we look around out there, hundreds and
hundreds of star clusters, most of them very young, because the old
clusters have evaporated, that is, their members have wandered away...
read this, learn something that is likely very accurate...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_cluster

.... and I would suggest to you that virtually no stars are created
outside of a cluster, that is to say, the Sirius stars had siblings.

That same Wiki article will explain to you just what happened to the
rest of that collapsed dust cloud. There really isn't much mystery
here, the same thing has happened millions upon billions of times all
over the universe.

\Paul A

On Nov 2, 3:57*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:

I've got more realistic worries to concern myself with. It's been
millions of years since the last asteroidal collision large enough to
have global effects, and is likely to be millions of years before the
next. There's a very good chance there will be no humans on Earth when
it happens.

That would be bad management.

We should be wisely preparing to ensure that the human race will
continue to exist, even after the Sun goes off the Main Sequence. We
are intelligent beings, not mute beasts heedless of their place in the
Universe, so we should be able to do this.

John Savard

On Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:31:58 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote:

That would be bad management.

Indeed. And entirely consistent with the history of the human race,
which has never demonstrated any ability to manage for the future...
at least, not beyond a few years. I see nothing to suggest this will
change before circumstances take us out of the picture.

On Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:31:58 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote:
On Nov 2, 3:57*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:


We should be wisely preparing to ensure that the human race will
continue to exist, even after the Sun goes off the Main Sequence. We
are intelligent beings, not mute beasts heedless of their place in
the
Universe, so we should be able to do this.

And how could we prevent ourselves to evolve into something else? A
few billion years is a looooooooooong time, and evolution won't stop.

On Nov 7, 8:18*pm, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:31:58 -0800 (PST), Quadibloc
wrote:

That would be bad management.

Indeed. And entirely consistent with the history of the human race,
which has never demonstrated any ability to manage for the future...
at least, not beyond a few years. I see nothing to suggest this will
change before circumstances take us out of the picture.

You're doing the race down. The essence of life is survival. There
will be no human race at that time but our descendants will still be
around somewhere. As will the descendants of rats and mice.

On Nov 7, 7:33*am, palsing wrote:
On Nov 6, 10:04*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

Those Sirius stars started off at a combined mass of perhaps as great
as 25e30 kg, and at least one of them turned into a WD.

So, where in the same local cosmos as us did 18e30 kg go?

I give up, where did you conjure up the mass of that original cloud?
Even if you are correct, do you really think that Sirius A & B were
born all by their lonesome selves? Don't you think it much more likely
that several hundred other stars were born from that cloud? After all,
that's what we see when we look around out there, hundreds and
hundreds of star clusters, most of them very young, because the old
clusters have evaporated, that is, their members have wandered away...
read this, learn something that is likely very accurate...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_cluster

... and I would suggest to you that virtually no stars are created
outside of a cluster, that is to say, the Sirius stars had siblings.

That same Wiki article will explain to you just what happened to the
rest of that collapsed dust cloud. There really isn't much mystery
here, the same thing has happened millions upon billions of times all
over the universe.

\Paul A

Actually the initial molecular/nebula cloud of a million fold greater
than the combined Sirius a+b+c) stellar mass of perhaps 12.5 Ms,
(25e30 kg x 1e6) = 2.5e37 kg. Of course if more than three stars had
been created by that original metallicity cloud of mostly hydrogen and
helium, then its all-inclusive mass was likely something greater than
2.5e37 kg, and each of those extra stars most likely had created some
orbital items and each their very own Oort cloud.

BTW; part of that cloud most likely also surrounded our solar system
for a period of time.

However if you want to here only parrot speak, then you can do your
own math from whatever your mainstream status quo has to offer.
Obviously you have no idea as to where those Sirius planets,
planetoids, moons and asteroids went, so instead you and others of
your kind just pretend they never existed in the first place.

I put the Sirius Oort cloud radius at roughly 8 ly and worth something
like a hundred fold the mass of our Oort cloud, but you can always
pretend that such Oort clouds are only unique to our solar system. If
pretending is your thing, we might as well go all the way.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Nov 7, 6:46*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 11/7/11 12:04 AM, Brad Guth wrote:

On Nov 6, 3:26 pm, Sam *wrote:
The Oort cloud is a hypothesized spherical cloud of comets which may lie
roughly 50,000 AU, or nearly a light-year, from the Sun. The outer limit
of the Oort cloud defines the cosmographical boundary of the Solar
System and the region of the Sun's gravitational dominance.

If the Sirius system (which has no detectable planets) even has an
Oort cloud, why would you expect it to be bigger than our own. Please
articulate a scientific argument and not just bull****.

Those Sirius stars started off at a combined mass of perhaps as great
as 25e30 kg, and at least one of them turned into a WD.

So, where in the same cosmos as us did 18e30 kg go?

* *Probably never existed, especially since there is no evidence.

You'd like that. Just because a really big and nearby star poops out
and tosses off most of its mass doesn't count. That's a good one.

Are you still suggesting that only our solar system has planets,
planetoids, moons, asteroids and any kind of Oort cloud?

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Nov 7, 3:25*pm, Brad Guth wrote:

... I put the Sirius Oort cloud radius at roughly 8 ly and worth something
like a hundred fold the mass of our Oort cloud...

I would sure like to see the math (or even just the verbal argument)
you used to come to this conclusion.

On Mon, 7 Nov 2011 14:59:55 -0800 (PST), Mike Collins
wrote:

You're doing the race down. The essence of life is survival. There
will be no human race at that time but our descendants will still be
around somewhere. As will the descendants of rats and mice.

Maybe, maybe not. We're pretty resilient, but we're an isolated
species. The right mass extinction event (including of our own making)
can certainly finish us off. There are far more species in the fossil
record that died out without leaving descendent species than there are
otherwise. And even if we do evolve, it might be into something
relatively unintelligent, meaning that our descendents might be
incapable of planning for the future- or even understanding the
concept.