Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth

On Nov 13, 9:49*am, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
I'll need some help with that. *Care to offer your services, and to
share in the credits?

Do you really want your bubble burst that bad?


Brad never explains how the Alpha Centauri system, Barnard's Star,
Wolf 359, and Lalande 21185, all closer to us than Sirius, fit into
this supposedly gravitationally linked up system.

Double-A.

On Nov 13, 9:49*am, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
I'll need some help with that. *Care to offer your services, and to
share in the credits?

Do you really want your bubble burst that bad?

What bubble? This is purely constructive research and deductive
reasoning, whereas we the public already own multiple spendy
supercomputers as is, as well as those machines having been public
funded for their housing, energy, necessary software and willing
programmers, and it's not like each and every one of those computers
are booked solid for doing anything all that important anyway.
Perhaps this could even be roughly accomplished on a good PC or MAC.

As far as I can tell, this is the only prudent trial-and-error
simulation method of reasonably back-tracking our association with
that terrific star system, going all the way back to its horrific
molecular cloud of perhaps at least 1.25e6 Ms (12.5e6 Ms) that gave
such multiple stellar births so recently and nearby to us (damn near
right on top of us).

How can our wussy and relatively low mass solar system not have become
tidal radii associated with such a nearby and substantial mass, or
having otherwise avoided the subsequent gauntlet of whatever the Sirius
(B) demise lost track of?

~ BG

On Nov 13, 10:42*am, Double-A wrote:
On Nov 13, 9:49*am, "Nightcrawler" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in ...
I'll need some help with that. *Care to offer your services, and to
share in the credits?

Do you really want your bubble burst that bad?

Brad never explains how the Alpha Centauri system, Barnard's Star,
Wolf 359, and Lalande 21185, all closer to us than Sirius, fit into
this supposedly gravitationally linked up system.

Double-A.

I'm sure those do matter, but it's also the UV spectrum of
illumination and the sudden demise of Sirius(B) that seems to fit the
time-line of terrestrial geology events, and even of direct benefit as
to the vast biodiversity that got a serious cosmic advantage from our
elliptical orbit of such a vibrant star system, because it sure as
hell it wasn't from what our early sun had to offer.

I'm thinking that we used to get to within 0.1 ly, though nowadays
it's perhaps at best getting us to within one ly. Eventually
(millions of years from now) we might go our separate ways and never
see one another again, especially if Sirius(B) merges with Sirius(A)
and there's one hell of a nasty nova that becomes a singular large
white dwarf or more likely that of a neutron star.

~ BG

"Double-A" wrote in message ...

Brad never explains how the Alpha Centauri system, Barnard's Star,
Wolf 359, and Lalande 21185, all closer to us than Sirius, fit into
this supposedly gravitationally linked up system.

It's called goofy fixation.

"BradGuth" wrote in message ...

I'm sure those do matter, but it's also the UV spectrum of
illumination and the sudden demise of Sirius(B) that seems to fit the
time-line of terrestrial geology events, and even of direct benefit as
to the vast biodiversity that got a serious cosmic advantage from our
elliptical orbit of such a vibrant star system, because it sure as
hell it wasn't from what our early sun had to offer.

This crap is funny.

You are aware that your time lines are screwed up, don't you? The
entire Sirius system is younger than life on earth.

Our solar system is 4 billion years older than the Sirius system.

Sol = ~4.5 billion years.

Sirius et al = ~250 million years.

Permian period = ~300 million years.

Permian extinction = ~251 million years.

Sirius B collapse = ~150 million years.

Idiot.

On Nov 13, 12:26*pm, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
I'm sure those do matter, but it's also the UV spectrum of
illumination and the sudden demise of Sirius(B) that seems to fit the
time-line of terrestrial geology events, and even of direct benefit as
to the vast biodiversity that got a serious cosmic advantage from our
elliptical orbit of such a vibrant star system, because it sure as
hell it wasn't from what our early sun had to offer.

This crap is funny.

You are aware that your time lines are screwed up, don't you? *The
entire Sirius system is younger than life on earth.

Our solar system is 4 billion years older than the Sirius system.

Sol = ~4.5 billion years.

Sirius et al = ~250 million years.

Permian period = ~300 million years.

Permian extinction = ~251 million years.

Sirius B collapse = *~150 million years.

Idiot.

Feel the negativity from the Nightcrawler intellectual black hole
that's just sucking everything in. It's like mainstream obfuscation
and denial on steroids, except a whole lot better.

You and others of your stick-in-the-mud kind are suggesting that a
molecular cloud of 1.25e61.25e7 Ms just materialized out of nowhere
and parked nearby as of 250~300 MYBP, and that it had absolutely no
affect upon our passive little solar system of just slightly over one
solar mass, as that terrific Sirius star system was getting produced
and then having blown off the remaining 99.9999% of the molecular
residual mass?

Now that’s what I’d call conditional as well as politically and
especially faith-based correct physics.

BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message ...

Feel the negativity from the Nightcrawler intellectual black hole
that's just sucking everything in. It's like mainstream obfuscation
and denial on steroids, except a whole lot better.

You and others of your stick-in-the-mud kind are suggesting that a
molecular cloud of 1.25e61.25e7 Ms just materialized out of nowhere
and parked nearby as of 250~300 MYBP, and that it had absolutely no
affect upon our passive little solar system of just slightly over one
solar mass, as that terrific Sirius star system was getting produced
and then having blown off the remaining 99.9999% of the molecular
residual mass?

Now that's what I'd call conditional as well as politically and
especially faith-based correct physics.

Translation: I got nothing.

See, Guthie, you go off on a tangent when cornered. You claim that
a system that didn't exist before life was formed on earth was responsible
for SOOOO much in our system, including dumping off a planet and a
moon, yet all of this happened in the last 100, our so, million years.

Of course pointing out the facts is negative, to you, since accepting
the facts means that you probably need to have yourself checked into
a clinic for a mental examination.

I think it is extremely humorous that you mentioned bi-polar, recently.
You exhibit the signs of someone I knew in my youth who went off of
his meds. That dude was worth a lot of laughs, then, as you are now.

Oh, and study up on nebulae and stellar formation, idiot.

On Nov 13, 3:36*pm, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
Feel the negativity from the Nightcrawler intellectual black hole
that's just sucking everything in. *It's like mainstream obfuscation
and denial on steroids, except a whole lot better.

You and others of your stick-in-the-mud kind are suggesting that a
molecular cloud of 1.25e61.25e7 Ms just materialized out of nowhere
and parked nearby as of 250~300 MYBP, and that it had absolutely no
affect upon our passive little solar system of just slightly over one
solar mass, as that terrific Sirius star system was getting produced
and then having blown off the remaining 99.9999% of the molecular
residual mass?

Now that's what I'd call conditional as well as politically and
especially faith-based correct physics.

Translation: I got nothing.

See, Guthie, you go off on a tangent when cornered. *You claim that
a system that didn't exist before life was formed on earth was responsible
for SOOOO much in our system, including dumping off a planet and a
moon, yet all of this happened in the last 100, our so, million years.

Please bother to quote, because otherwise you're blowing that same old
smoke out your ass (again). Where have I mentioned those "100, our
so, million years"?


Of course pointing out the facts is negative, to you, since accepting
the facts means that you probably need to have yourself checked into
a clinic for a mental examination.

I think it is extremely humorous that you mentioned bi-polar, recently.
You exhibit the signs of someone I knew in my youth who went off of
his meds. *That dude was worth a lot of laughs, then, as you are now.

Oh, and study up on nebulae and stellar formation, idiot.

Been there and done that. Now it's your turn to knock my socks off.
Run the damn simulations that you'd claim are so easy to accomplish.

~ BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message ...

Please bother to quote, because otherwise you're blowing that same old
smoke out your ass (again). Where have I mentioned those "100, our
so, million years"?

Sorry, but that wasn't in "this" thread. Didn't you state that the moon
did its little glance off of the earth about 55 million years ago? Or, was
that thousand? Anyway, I stated the 100 million as a round about
number. I forgot to add the ~. Sue me.

Still doesn't change the fact that you are obfuscating about the facts
regarding the time line. Here's some simple math for you. What's
the speed necessary to travel 8 light years in 250 million years?


Been there and done that. Now it's your turn to knock my socks off.
Run the damn simulations that you'd claim are so easy to accomplish.

Damn, Brad, you must have been a terrible student. Every time an
instructor would ask you to do something you would refuse and demand
that they do it for you.

Precession ring a bell? Come on Brad. Please explain why Venus does
not have precession. It's a simple, two sentence, at the most, answer.

On Nov 13, 7:28*pm, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
Please bother to quote, because otherwise you're blowing that same old
smoke out your ass (again). *Where have I mentioned those "100, our
so, million years"?

Sorry, but that wasn't in "this" thread. *Didn't you state that the moon
did its little glance off of the earth about 55 million years ago? *Or, was
that thousand? *Anyway, I stated the 100 million as a round about
number. *I forgot to add the ~. *Sue me.

I've never used "55 million years ago" (this only proves how totally
bogus you really are). I've said multiple times, roughly 13,000 BP
for the last time our moon encountered Earth in a lithobraking and
seasonal tilt causing way. Before then it was merely a near miss each
time. The sky finally started to clear as of 11,711 BP.


Still doesn't change the fact that you are obfuscating about the facts
regarding the time line. *Here's some simple math for you. *What's
the speed necessary to travel 8 light years in 250 million years?

Amazing, you're still pretending that the Newtonian law of gravity
doesn't apply?


Been there and done that. *Now it's your turn to knock my socks off.
Run the damn simulations that you'd claim are so easy to accomplish.

Damn, Brad, you must have been a terrible student. *Every time an
instructor would ask you to do something you would refuse and demand
that they do it for you.

Precession ring a bell? *Come on Brad. *Please explain why Venus does
not have precession. *It's a simple, two sentence, at the most, answer.

So, you can't do this gravity thing unless it relates to sustaining
your faith-based mainstream status quo. Why am I not surprised.

~ BG