Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth

"BradGuth" wrote in message ...

I've never used "55 million years ago" (this only proves how totally
bogus you really are).

No, only that I knew that you stated a time that was not very long
ago, and in that thread someone had mentioned that particular
number. In case you didn't notice it WAS a question about
something that I was not positive about since most of what you
type I ignore.

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

Strange leap to gravity, Guthie. Dissembling again?

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.

So, still not willing to answer. I'll take that as a "you don't know", and
I was correct in my original summation of your knowledge regarding
precession. So, next...

Sirius AB:

Right Ascension and Declination: 6h45m8.871s, -16°42'57.99" (epoch 2000.0)
Distance from Sol: 8.601 light-years (2.637 parsecs)
Standard error in distance: 0.4149%
Source for distance: Hipparcos
Celestial (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: -1.612, 8.078, -2.474
Galactic (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: -5.745, -6.275, -1.262
Proper motion: 1.328 arcsec/yr (204.3° from north)
Radial Velocity: -9.4 km/sec
Source for proper motion and radial velocity: Gliese
Galactic (U,V,W) velocity components in km/s: 15.34, 1.109, -11.29

Now, what do you make of this information? You see, part of the
answer to my second request of you is in the above information.
Your choice to ignore the hint I gave you in another thread regarding
Venus is noted and I'm sure, being the Guthie that you are, you will
make the choice to ignore this information, too.

Tsk, tsk. Dense as dense can be, you're a Guthie!

On Nov 13, 10:21*pm, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
I've never used "55 million years ago" (this only proves how totally
bogus you really are).

No, only that I knew that you stated a time that was not very long
ago, and in that thread someone had mentioned that particular
number. *In case you didn't notice it WAS a question about
something that I was not positive about since most of what you
type I ignore.

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

Strange leap to gravity, Guthie. *Dissembling again?

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.

So, still not willing to answer. *I'll take that as a "you don't know", and
I was correct in my original summation of your knowledge regarding
precession. *So, next...

Sirius AB:

Right Ascension and Declination: 6h45m8.871s, -16°42'57.99" (epoch 2000..0)
Distance from Sol: 8.601 light-years (2.637 parsecs)
Standard error in distance: 0.4149%
Source for distance: Hipparcos
Celestial (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: -1.612, 8.078, -2.474
Galactic (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: -5.745, -6.275, -1.262
Proper motion: 1.328 arcsec/yr (204.3° from north)
Radial Velocity: -9.4 km/sec
Source for proper motion and radial velocity: Gliese
Galactic (U,V,W) velocity components in km/s: 15.34, 1.109, -11.29

Now, what do you make of this information? *You see, part of the
answer to my second request of you is in the above information.
Your choice to ignore the hint I gave you in another thread regarding
Venus is noted and I'm sure, being the Guthie that you are, you will
make the choice to ignore this information, too.

Tsk, tsk. *Dense as dense can be, you're a Guthie!

We're now closing in on Sirius at 9.4 km/sec?

That's impressive, in that only a couple of years ago it was 7.6 km/
sec.
If not orbital mechanics and that pesky Newtonian thing, what's going
on?

~ BG

On Nov 13, 10:21*pm, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
I've never used "55 million years ago" (this only proves how totally
bogus you really are).

No, only that I knew that you stated a time that was not very long
ago, and in that thread someone had mentioned that particular
number. *In case you didn't notice it WAS a question about
something that I was not positive about since most of what you
type I ignore.

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

Strange leap to gravity, Guthie. *Dissembling again?

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.

So, still not willing to answer. *I'll take that as a "you don't know", and
I was correct in my original summation of your knowledge regarding
precession. *So, next...

Sirius AB:

Right Ascension and Declination: 6h45m8.871s, -16°42'57.99" (epoch 2000..0)
Distance from Sol: 8.601 light-years (2.637 parsecs)
Standard error in distance: 0.4149%
Source for distance: Hipparcos
Celestial (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: -1.612, 8.078, -2.474
Galactic (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: -5.745, -6.275, -1.262
Proper motion: 1.328 arcsec/yr (204.3° from north)
Radial Velocity: -9.4 km/sec
Source for proper motion and radial velocity: Gliese
Galactic (U,V,W) velocity components in km/s: 15.34, 1.109, -11.29

Now, what do you make of this information? *You see, part of the
answer to my second request of you is in the above information.
Your choice to ignore the hint I gave you in another thread regarding
Venus is noted and I'm sure, being the Guthie that you are, you will
make the choice to ignore this information, too.

Tsk, tsk. *Dense as dense can be, you're a Guthie!

We're now closing in on Sirius at 9.4 km/sec?

That's actually impressive, in that only a few years ago the Radial
Velocity was still reported as -7.6 km/sec, and now it's up to -9.4 km/
s.

If not orbital mechanics and that pesky Newtonian thing of gravity,
what's going on? (why this increase in our radial velocity with
respect to Sirius?)

~ BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message ...

We're now closing in on Sirius at 9.4 km/sec?

That's actually impressive, in that only a few years ago the Radial
Velocity was still reported as -7.6 km/sec, and now it's up to -9.4 km/
s.

If not orbital mechanics and that pesky Newtonian thing of gravity,
what's going on? (why this increase in our radial velocity with
respect to Sirius?)

That number is not current. It was the information that I wanted you
to look at, the coordinates provided, and the motion of each
axis relative to Sol. See below

Information provided by: http://www.stellar-database.com/fields.html

/quote:

Celestial (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: The coordinates of this star in space, relative to our own sun, in units of light-years. The
first ("x") coordinate points toward the Equinox Point. The second ("y") coordinate points toward a spot in the sky at 0
declination and at a right angle to the Equinox Point. The third ("z") coordinate points toward the celestial north pole, at a
declination of +90 degrees. Our sun represents the point [0, 0, 0] in this coordinate system. These coordinates are used to find
the distance between any two stars, instead of just their distance from our own sun.

Note that these coordinates represent the position of the star as it was in the "epoch" given for its right ascension and
declination; centuries from now, most stars will have moved enough that these coordinates will have changed noticeably. Note also
that spatial coordinates will be no more accurate than the distance measurement to the star.

Galactic (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: Similar to Celestial coordinates, but pointing along a set of axes that's not quite so
geocentric. The first ("x") coordinate points directly toward the center of our galaxy (which, in the Earth's night sky, is at a
right ascension of 17h42m4s and a declination of -28°55'). The second ("y") coordinate points along the galactic plane in the
direction of galactic rotation, at right angles to the "x" axis. The third ("z") coordinate points straight out of the plane of the
galaxy, parallel to the galactic north pole, at right angles to both the "x" and "y" axes. As with Celestial coordinates, our sun
represents the point [0, 0, 0] in this coordinate system.

Galactic (U,V,W) velocity components in km/s: How fast the entire star system is changing its first, second, and third spatial
coordinates, in kilometers per second; i.e., how fast the stellar system is moving, and in what direction, relative to our own sun.
Since it takes 9 455 000 million kilometers to span one light-year, a star with a velocity vector of (-1, 0, 0) would take 9 455 000
million seconds (about 300 000 years) to change its spatial coordinates from [5.5, 3.8, -2.3] to [4.5, 3.8, -2.3]. By definition,
the sun's velocity vector is (0, 0, 0).

Note that the sun is in motion relative to the "local standard of rest" within our own galaxy. To get a star's galactic-relative
velocity, you have to add the sun's local-standard-of-rest-relative velocity of (10.4, 14.8, 7.3) to what's listed here for that
star. This is usually only important if you want to guess at how a given star is orbiting the center of the galaxy, which is not a
subject for this text. Note also that the velocity vector will be no more accurate than the distance measurement to the star.

/quote

Regardless, with a closure rate of 7.6 k/sec (closest known number I know; July 2009),
and a distance of 8.5 ly, a fly-by won't happen for about 1.24 trillion years. Of course
both stars, and the Earth, will be toast by then.

Note: Radial velocity is not a heading. It is the apparent line of sight velocity of an
object. That's why I want you to LOOK at the other coordinate numbers and try to
figure some things out from there.

On Nov 14, 12:34*pm, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
We're now closing in on Sirius at 9.4 km/sec?

That's actually impressive, in that only a few years ago the Radial
Velocity was still reported as -7.6 km/sec, and now it's up to -9.4 km/
s.

If not orbital mechanics and that pesky Newtonian thing of gravity,
what's going on? (why this increase in our radial velocity with
respect to Sirius?)

That number is not current. *It was the information that I wanted you
to look at, the coordinates provided, and the motion of each
axis relative to Sol. *See below

Information provided by:http://www.stellar-database.com/fields.html

/quote:

Celestial (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: The coordinates of this star in space, relative to our own sun, in units of light-years. *The
first ("x") coordinate points toward the Equinox Point. *The second ("y") coordinate points toward a spot in the sky at 0
declination and at a right angle to the Equinox Point. *The third ("z") coordinate points toward the celestial north pole, at a
declination of +90 degrees. *Our sun represents the point [0, 0, 0] in this coordinate system. *These coordinates are used to find
the distance between any two stars, instead of just their distance from our own sun.

Note that these coordinates represent the position of the star as it was in the "epoch" given for its right ascension and
declination; centuries from now, most stars will have moved enough that these coordinates will have changed noticeably. *Note also
that spatial coordinates will be no more accurate than the distance measurement to the star.

Galactic (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: Similar to Celestial coordinates, but pointing along a set of axes that's not quite so
geocentric. *The first ("x") coordinate points directly toward the center of our galaxy (which, in the Earth's night sky, is at a
right ascension of 17h42m4s and a declination of -28°55'). *The second ("y") coordinate points along the galactic plane in the
direction of galactic rotation, at right angles to the "x" axis. The third ("z") coordinate points straight out of the plane of the
galaxy, parallel to the galactic north pole, at right angles to both the "x" and "y" axes. *As with Celestial coordinates, our sun
represents the point [0, 0, 0] in this coordinate system.

Galactic (U,V,W) velocity components in km/s: How fast the entire star system is changing its first, second, and third spatial
coordinates, in kilometers per second; i.e., how fast the stellar system is moving, and in what direction, relative to our own sun.
Since it takes 9 455 000 million kilometers to span one light-year, a star with a velocity vector of (-1, 0, 0) would take 9 455 000
million seconds (about 300 000 years) to change its spatial coordinates from [5.5, 3.8, -2.3] to [4.5, 3.8, -2.3]. *By definition,
the sun's velocity vector is (0, 0, 0).

Note that the sun is in motion relative to the "local standard of rest" within our own galaxy. *To get a star's galactic-relative
velocity, you have to add the sun's local-standard-of-rest-relative velocity of (10.4, 14.8, 7.3) to what's listed here for that
star. *This is usually only important if you want to guess at how a given star is orbiting the center of the galaxy, which is not a
subject for this text. *Note also that the velocity vector will be no more accurate than the distance measurement to the star.

/quote

Regardless, with a closure rate of 7.6 k/sec (closest known number I know; July 2009),
and a distance of 8.5 ly, a fly-by won't happen for about 1.24 trillion years. *Of course
both stars, and the Earth, *will be toast by then.

Note: Radial velocity is not a heading. *It is the apparent line of sight velocity of an
object. *That's why I want you to LOOK at the other coordinate numbers and try to
figure some things out from there.

I want to run this in a good simulator, and that's still what I want.

btw, your math is funny.

~ BG

On Nov 14, 12:34*pm, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
We're now closing in on Sirius at 9.4 km/sec?

That's actually impressive, in that only a few years ago the Radial
Velocity was still reported as -7.6 km/sec, and now it's up to -9.4 km/
s.

If not orbital mechanics and that pesky Newtonian thing of gravity,
what's going on? (why this increase in our radial velocity with
respect to Sirius?)

That number is not current. *It was the information that I wanted you
to look at, the coordinates provided, and the motion of each
axis relative to Sol. *See below

Information provided by:http://www.stellar-database.com/fields.html

/quote:

Celestial (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: The coordinates of this star in space, relative to our own sun, in units of light-years. *The
first ("x") coordinate points toward the Equinox Point. *The second ("y") coordinate points toward a spot in the sky at 0
declination and at a right angle to the Equinox Point. *The third ("z") coordinate points toward the celestial north pole, at a
declination of +90 degrees. *Our sun represents the point [0, 0, 0] in this coordinate system. *These coordinates are used to find
the distance between any two stars, instead of just their distance from our own sun.

Note that these coordinates represent the position of the star as it was in the "epoch" given for its right ascension and
declination; centuries from now, most stars will have moved enough that these coordinates will have changed noticeably. *Note also
that spatial coordinates will be no more accurate than the distance measurement to the star.

Galactic (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: Similar to Celestial coordinates, but pointing along a set of axes that's not quite so
geocentric. *The first ("x") coordinate points directly toward the center of our galaxy (which, in the Earth's night sky, is at a
right ascension of 17h42m4s and a declination of -28°55'). *The second ("y") coordinate points along the galactic plane in the
direction of galactic rotation, at right angles to the "x" axis. The third ("z") coordinate points straight out of the plane of the
galaxy, parallel to the galactic north pole, at right angles to both the "x" and "y" axes. *As with Celestial coordinates, our sun
represents the point [0, 0, 0] in this coordinate system.

Galactic (U,V,W) velocity components in km/s: How fast the entire star system is changing its first, second, and third spatial
coordinates, in kilometers per second; i.e., how fast the stellar system is moving, and in what direction, relative to our own sun.
Since it takes 9 455 000 million kilometers to span one light-year, a star with a velocity vector of (-1, 0, 0) would take 9 455 000
million seconds (about 300 000 years) to change its spatial coordinates from [5.5, 3.8, -2.3] to [4.5, 3.8, -2.3]. *By definition,
the sun's velocity vector is (0, 0, 0).

Note that the sun is in motion relative to the "local standard of rest" within our own galaxy. *To get a star's galactic-relative
velocity, you have to add the sun's local-standard-of-rest-relative velocity of (10.4, 14.8, 7.3) to what's listed here for that
star. *This is usually only important if you want to guess at how a given star is orbiting the center of the galaxy, which is not a
subject for this text. *Note also that the velocity vector will be no more accurate than the distance measurement to the star.

/quote

Regardless, with a closure rate of 7.6 k/sec (closest known number I know; July 2009),
and a distance of 8.5 ly, a fly-by won't happen for about 1.24 trillion years. *Of course
both stars, and the Earth, *will be toast by then.

Note: Radial velocity is not a heading. *It is the apparent line of sight velocity of an
object. *That's why I want you to LOOK at the other coordinate numbers and try to
figure some things out from there.

Are you still suggesting that the Newtonian law of gravity doesn't
apply to stars? If so, why are merging or even passing nearby
galaxies morphing one another, and from such great distances of 2r or
even twice their diameter (4r)?

I simply want to run this local stellar relationship in a good
simulator, and that's still pretty much what I want to see in a full
3D interactive format. I believe our elliptical trek is that of a
10:1 or tighter elliptical.

According to this most recent data, Sirius is going to become nearby
within 275,000 years at -9.4 km/s. However, our radial velocity that
has us closing in on Sirius seems to be speeding up, as though we’ve
turned that elliptical corner and we’re headed into the near
straightaway. As of just a few years ago it was reported as –7.6,
then became updated as -9.1 and now it’s –9.4 km/sec.
http://www.stellar-database.com/Scri...tar.exe?ID=600

When will this radial velocity reach -100 km/sec?

Btw, your funny math of "a fly-by won't happen for about 1.24 trillion
years" is every bit as stupendous as perhaps God intended.

~ BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message ...

Btw, your funny math of "a fly-by won't happen for about 1.24 trillion
years" is every bit as stupendous as perhaps God intended.

Bwahahaha, you are such a clown. That number is speculative
since the orbital mechanics will likely change by the time such
an event might occur, and I left out the fact that the "fly by" would
not be close, but rather a possible intercept of two common axis
points. That's why I told you to look at the coordinates involved.
You obviously don't follow things that well. You always fall for the
key things, traps, I lay for you. The first was closure rate, the
second was the "fly by" number. You latched onto the first and
couldn't figure out how the second factored in.

You still don't get it. You see radial velocity and think that it is
the direction, and speed, that the two systems are approaching
each other. Let me posit some straight information:

Sirius and the Sun do not orbit each other. Sirius is not headed in
a straight line toward the Sun. It has a “proper motion” component
in a direction perpendicular to our line of sight. Its current radial
velocity in the line of sight of -7.6 km/sec will moderate over time.
Sirius is currently 8.6 light-years distant. According to my calculation
Sirius will reach a minimum distance of 7.8 light-years around the year
AD 60000. If I were you I'd worry more about the Gliese 710 star system.

There, that is the straight dope, and without any toying, take it as
you will.

Oh, and you might be able to toy around with this:

http://members.nova.org/~sol/chview/index.html

I cannot say what MAY be done with the program, but you might
have fun.

On Nov 15, 10:35*am, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
Btw, your funny math of "a fly-by won't happen for about 1.24 trillion
years" is every bit as stupendous as perhaps God intended.

Bwahahaha, you are such a clown. *That number is speculative
since the orbital mechanics will likely change by the time such
an event might occur, and I left out the fact that the "fly by" would
not be close, but rather a possible intercept of two common axis
points.
Yes my good man of brown-nosed clown status, it's called an elliptical
trek that's continually changing and for the moment only getting
faster and faster as we close that gap and start to round into the
corner, as we either orbit Sirius or that of our mutual barycenter.


That's why I told you to look at the coordinates involved.
You obviously don't follow things that well. *You always fall for the
key things, traps, I lay for you. *The first was closure rate, the
second was the "fly by" number. *You latched onto the first and
couldn't figure out how the second factored in.

You still don't get it. *You see radial velocity and think that it is
the direction, and speed, that the two systems are approaching
each other. *Let me posit some straight information:

You also still don't get it. I want to see this running in a fully
interactive 3D animated simulation, along with all the bells and
whistles to that variables can be applied or revised.


Sirius and the Sun do not orbit each other. *Sirius is not headed in
a straight line toward the Sun.

That's true because, we're the ones moving along with our sun that's
headed back towards Sirius that used to be worth 12.5 Ms (not to
mention the original molecular cloud of 1.25e7 Ms).


*It has a “proper motion” component
in a direction perpendicular to our line of sight. *Its current radial
velocity in the line of sight of -7.6 km/sec will moderate over time.
Sirius is currently 8.6 light-years distant. *According to my calculation
Sirius will reach a minimum distance of 7.8 light-years around the year
AD 60000. *If I were you I'd worry more about the Gliese 710 star system.

I say it could be closer to one LY, because as we all know, nothing
runs in any straight line (not even photons), and otherwise everything
is in an elliptical or distorted version of that orbit path around
something.


There, that is the straight dope, and without any toying, take it as
you will.

Your purely subjective interpretation is noted, as representing
absolutely nothing new, revised or ever at risk. In other words, you
are perfectly failsafe mainstream status quo because you wouldn't dare
think for yourself, much less outside the box.


Oh, and you might be able to toy around with this:

http://members.nova.org/~sol/chview/index.html

I cannot say what MAY be done with the program, but you might
have fun.

I realize it means everything to yourself, but having fun isn't what
I'm looking for, but thanks anyway.

btws, Are you saying that Sirius(B) created no Oort cloud?

Are you saying that when Sirius(B) went nova, that our solar system
and the environment of Earth was entirely unaffected?

~ BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message ...

Yes my good man of brown-nosed clown status, it's called an elliptical
trek that's continually changing and for the moment only getting
faster and faster as we close that gap and start to round into the
corner, as we either orbit Sirius or that of our mutual barycenter.

The don't orbit each other. That being said, the rest of your points
are crap, and will not be addressed.

crap snipped

I realize it means everything to yourself, but having fun isn't what
I'm looking for, but thanks anyway.

Gee, a little creativity might make it work, but applying science is
not your strong point, is it?

btws, Are you saying that Sirius(B) created no Oort cloud?

I made zero reference to "Oort cloud". Sol resides in one. The
origins of this Oort cloud are probably of the stellar remnants left
behind from the super nova that Sol formed in.

Are you saying that when Sirius(B) went nova, that our solar system
and the environment of Earth was entirely unaffected?

There might have been some influence. Nothing in the geological
record indicates anything of note.

What do you make of the Z axis of Sirius?

On Nov 15, 11:52*am, "Nightcrawler" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in ...
Yes my good man of brown-nosed clown status, it's called an elliptical
trek that's continually changing and for the moment only getting
faster and faster as we close that gap and start to round into the
corner, as we either orbit Sirius or that of our mutual barycenter.

The don't orbit each other. *That being said, the rest of your points
are crap, and will not be addressed.

Are you suggesting that our sun was never in the past 300+ MBP
attracted towards the Sirius star system? (because oddly we seem to be
going that way, again)


crap snipped

I realize it means everything to yourself, but having fun isn't what
I'm looking for, but thanks anyway.

Gee, a little creativity might make it work, but applying science is
not your strong point, is it?

That's odd, because I've only mentioned those pesky laws of physics
and best available science that obviously takes a little deductive
interpreting here and there, whereas with you it seems nothing matters
if it revises anything. I take it you worked for GW Bush and company.


btws, *Are you saying that Sirius(B) created no Oort cloud?

I made zero reference to "Oort cloud". *Sol resides in one. *The
origins of this Oort cloud are probably of the stellar remnants left
behind from the super nova that Sol formed in.

How very correct, and those Sirius Oort clouds are exactly or best
swag located where?

Sirius B did its nearby nova thing at roughly 6 Ms, and perhaps not
even as long ago or as far away as published in your mainstream bible
that can't ever be revised.


Are you saying that when Sirius(B) went nova, that our solar system
and the environment of Earth was entirely unaffected?

There might have been some influence. *Nothing in the geological
record indicates anything of note.

Much of the "geological record" had been reset as of the last ice-age,
not to mention after having been impacted by our Selene/moon, or do
you have some other notions as to how that absolutely enormous lunar
south pole crater materialized?.

btw, what would happen to the relatively thin crust of Earth if
merely a near miss from a 7.5e22 kg rock at 2r took place? (at 1 km/s
I got a land/crust tidal morph estimate of roughly 128 meters)


What do you make of the Z axis of Sirius?

The Z axis is relative to those elliptical XY components, all of which
are on the move. However, what's really important is what the XYZ of
Sol is doing.

Unlike yourself, I still sort of believe in the weak force of gravity
(6.7e-11 N), even though other forces are so much stronger.

~ BG