|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
defining planets; Pluto a planet and UB313; How the Atom Totality theory defines planets
In the news tonight was the issue of scientists defining what a planet
is. And it appears that a group of astronomers are in favor of Mr. Binzel's proposal that gravity forming a "gravitational spherical shaped object" would be the crux of the definition. Some who object to this definition cite the lack of origin and evolution of the astro body and they would claim a planet is only those formed from the Solar Nebular Dust Cloud. And Pluto would not be a planet in this scheme. Let me offer my definition of a planet according to the Atom Totality theory. Which says that solar systems are formed from the accretion of cosmic ray particles shot from the Nucleus of the Atom Totality. So the Nebular Dust Cloud is a fake theory. Our Sun and Earth grew from constant accretion of what Dirac called "new radioactivity" in his book Directions in Physics. With that in mind, the proper definition of a PLANET is as follows: Definition of Planet: we take Titius Bode spacings. Each solar system may have similar or different spacings. Recall Titius Bode spacings are like harmonic spacing, or like spectral lines writ on the size of astro bodies. So, then, once we know what the Titius Bode spacing of our Solar System is approximate to, then we look to see if a astro object occupies that spacing. Any astro body that is not in that spacing is not a planet. Caveat: to the above definition. In that the mechanics of solar systems is one of a forming of binary stars and so some planets will begin to wander off their course of the Titius Bode spacings and eventually rendezous in a collision with Jupiter to form a binary star. Every solar system in the Cosmos will have a spacing of its planets, some different from our solar system, and the definition of a planet is a object which fits into a spacing. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
defining planets; Pluto a planet and UB313; How the Atom Totality theory defines planets
a_plutonium wrote: In the news tonight was the issue of scientists defining what a planet is. And it appears that a group of astronomers are in favor of Mr. Binzel's proposal that gravity forming a "gravitational spherical shaped object" would be the crux of the definition. Some who object to this definition cite the lack of origin and evolution of the astro body and they would claim a planet is only those formed from the Solar Nebular Dust Cloud. And Pluto would not be a planet in this scheme. Let me offer my definition of a planet according to the Atom Totality theory. Which says that solar systems are formed from the accretion of cosmic ray particles shot from the Nucleus of the Atom Totality. So the Nebular Dust Cloud is a fake theory. Our Sun and Earth grew from constant accretion of what Dirac called "new radioactivity" in his book Directions in Physics. With that in mind, the proper definition of a PLANET is as follows: Definition of Planet: we take Titius Bode spacings. Each solar system may have similar or different spacings. Recall Titius Bode spacings are like harmonic spacing, or like spectral lines writ on the size of astro bodies. So, then, once we know what the Titius Bode spacing of our Solar System is approximate to, then we look to see if a astro object occupies that spacing. Any astro body that is not in that spacing is not a planet. Caveat: to the above definition. In that the mechanics of solar systems is one of a forming of binary stars and so some planets will begin to wander off their course of the Titius Bode spacings and eventually rendezous in a collision with Jupiter to form a binary star. Every solar system in the Cosmos will have a spacing of its planets, some different from our solar system, and the definition of a planet is a object which fits into a spacing. Archimedes Plutonium www.iw.net/~a_plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies What's in a name? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Toward a Rational Definition of what is a Planet | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 7 | September 29th 05 03:16 AM |
Toward a rational Definition of what is a Planet | [email protected] | Research | 6 | August 31st 05 11:01 PM |
43 Zodiacal Constellations | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 4th 05 11:31 AM |
10th Planet "Discovered" | Jim Burns | Space Shuttle | 1 | July 30th 05 05:12 PM |