|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw
On Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 11:11:27 AM UTC-4, Steve Willner wrote:
The advantage of the K2 observations is that observing the same event from Earth and from K2 gives the parallax of the lens. Kepler is something like an AU from Earth, and the event will be seen at different times from the different locations. The K2 Campaign 9 will, apparently, resolve 2 important issues. 1. Whether "free-floating planets" exist in the region observed. 2. If FFPs do exist, whether they are planets, or as Monty Python would say, something completely different. Here is a link to the new preprint with the details: http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.01059 Results will be interesting one way or the other or none of the above. RLO http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw
On Thursday, May 5, 2016 at 2:23:56 AM UTC-6, Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:
The K2 Campaign 9 will, apparently, resolve 2 important issues. 1. Whether "free-floating planets" exist in the region observed. 2. If FFPs do exist, whether they are planets, or as Monty Python would say, something completely different. Here is a link to the new preprint with the details: http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.01059 Results will be interesting one way or the other or none of the above. RLO http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw Yes, they will. If you look at the fraction of stars in each size category, 75% of all stars are type M while type O stars are less than one in a million. If you extend the curve to smaller objects without some arbitrary cutoff, there are bazillions of free-floating objects out there. Not a sanguine thought for interstellar travel :-( Gary |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw
In article , Gary
Harnagel writes: Yes, they will. If you look at the fraction of stars in each size category, 75% of all stars are type M while type O stars are less than one in a million. If you extend the curve to smaller objects without some arbitrary cutoff, there are bazillions of free-floating objects out there. Not a sanguine thought for interstellar travel :-( That is a very big "if". There are fewer giant redwoods and sequoias than smaller trees. IF one extends that curve to smaller trees without some arbitrary cutoff, then there must be billions and billions of 1-inch tall trees. But there aren't. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw
On Saturday, May 7, 2016 at 9:06:53 AM UTC-6, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
In article , Gary Harnagel writes: Yes, they will. If you look at the fraction of stars in each size category, 75% of all stars are type M while type O stars are less than one in a million. If you extend the curve to smaller objects without some arbitrary cutoff, there are bazillions of free-floating objects out there. Not a sanguine thought for interstellar travel :-( That is a very big "if". There are fewer giant redwoods and sequoias than smaller trees. IF one extends that curve to smaller trees without some arbitrary cutoff, then there must be billions and billions of 1-inch tall trees. But there aren't. You need to count the tree seeds, too :-) But we KNOW that there is no astronomical cutoff. How many asteroids are in the Kuiper belt? How many in the Oort cloud? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud "The outer Oort cloud may have trillions of objects larger than 1 km" And the Oort cloud may well extend half way to Alpha Centauri, and Alpha will have its own Oort cloud, too. As an aside, might not the dimming of KIC8462852 be caused by an Oort cloud object wandering into the path of Kepler? There are "... billions with absolute magnitudes[15] brighter than 11 (corresponding to approximately 20-kilometre (12 mi) diameter)" A 20 km object at .03 lightyear would result in the 22% drop in light output .... Gary |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw
In article , Gary
Harnagel writes: Yes, they will. If you look at the fraction of stars in each size category, 75% of all stars are type M while type O stars are less than one in a million. If you extend the curve to smaller objects without some arbitrary cutoff, there are bazillions of free-floating objects out there. Not a sanguine thought for interstellar travel :-( That is a very big "if". There are fewer giant redwoods and sequoias than smaller trees. IF one extends that curve to smaller trees without some arbitrary cutoff, then there must be billions and billions of 1-inch tall trees. But there aren't. You need to count the tree seeds, too :-) The original claim was that because at larger masses there are more less massive than more massive objects, then there must be a huge number at even lower masses. But one cannot just extrapolate arbitrarily far... But we KNOW that there is no astronomical cutoff. How many asteroids are in the Kuiper belt? How many in the Oort cloud? ....since as Jonathan pointed out, there has to be a turnover (even if there is not a sharp cutoff) at some point. As an aside, might not the dimming of KIC8462852 be caused by an Oort cloud object wandering into the path of Kepler? There are "... billions with absolute magnitudes[15] brighter than 11 (corresponding to approximately 20-kilometre (12 mi) diameter)" A 20 km object at .03 lightyear would result in the 22% drop in light output .... Presumably .03 lightyear from Kepler, not from KIC8462852? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw
On Monday, May 9, 2016 at 8:38:07 AM UTC-6, Phillip Helbig (undress to repl=
y) wrote: In article , Gary Harnagel writes:=20 Yes, they will. If you look at the fraction of stars in each size category, 75% of all stars are type M while type O stars are less t= han one in a million. If you extend the curve to smaller objects witho= ut some arbitrary cutoff, there are bazillions of free-floating object= s out there. Not a sanguine thought for interstellar travel :-( =20 That is a very big "if". There are fewer giant redwoods and sequoias than smaller trees. IF one extends that curve to smaller trees witho= ut some arbitrary cutoff, then there must be billions and billions of 1-inch tall trees. But there aren't. =20 You need to count the tree seeds, too :-) =20 The original claim was that because at larger masses there are more less= =20 massive than more massive objects, then there must be a huge number at=20 even lower masses. But one cannot just extrapolate arbitrarily far... Except we're not extrapolating: But we KNOW that there is no astronomical cutoff. How many asteroids a= re in the Kuiper belt? How many in the Oort cloud? =20 ...since as Jonathan pointed out, there has to be a turnover (even if=20 there is not a sharp cutoff) at some point. I wonder what this figures out to be for a volume of radius halfway to Alpha Centauri: "The dust density in the local interstellar medium of the Local Bubble is approximately 10-6 =D7 dust grain/m3 with each grain having a mass of approximately 10-17 kg" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_dust Hmmm, that comes out to about 10^42! It looks like maybe there isn't a cutoff but a "cut-up" As an aside, might not the dimming of KIC8462852 be caused by an Oort cloud object wandering into the path of Kepler? There are =20 "... billions with absolute magnitudes[15] brighter than 11 (correspond= ing to approximately 20-kilometre (12 mi) diameter)" =20 A 20 km object at .03 lightyear would result in the 22% drop in light output .... =20 Presumably .03 lightyear from Kepler, not from KIC8462852? Um, yes :-) Gary |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw
In article ,
Gary Harnagel writes: As an aside, might not the dimming of KIC8462852 be caused by an Oort cloud object wandering into the path of Kepler? There are According to the paper Abstract at http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/content/457/4/3988 the dimming lasted "between 5 and 80 d." An occultation by an Oort Cloud or Kuiper Belt object would last a fraction of a second. There is a published claim of two such detections http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/150 Figure 5 in the paper shows the light curve of the second (then new) one, which is dominated by diffraction. Further searches are in progress but very difficult from the ground. A proposed space mission to look for OCO/KBO occultations was not selected but presumably could be proposed again. -- Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls. Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123 Cambridge, MA 02138 USA |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 1:49:45 PM UTC-6, Steve Willner wrote:
In article , Gary Harnagel writes: As an aside, might not the dimming of KIC8462852 be caused by an Oort cloud object wandering into the path of Kepler? There are According to the paper Abstract at http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/content/457/4/3988 the dimming lasted "between 5 and 80 d." An occultation by an Oort Cloud or Kuiper Belt object would last a fraction of a second. There is a published claim of two such detections http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0004-637X/761/2/150 Figure 5 in the paper shows the light curve of the second (then new) one, which is dominated by diffraction. Further searches are in progress but very difficult from the ground. A proposed space mission to look for OCO/KBO occultations was not selected but presumably could be proposed again. -- Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls. Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123 Cambridge, MA 02138 USA Thanks, I hadn't considered the relative motion between Kepler and a purported Oort cloud object. Gary |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Testing the theory of Mr Oldershaw | Phillip Helbig | Research | 1 | April 16th 16 07:37 AM |
Experimental Testing of the Unified Field Theory | bkh99 | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | March 14th 10 06:31 PM |
Experimental Testing of the Unified Field Theory | bkh99 | Astronomy Misc | 0 | March 14th 10 03:48 AM |
MECO theory to replace black-hole theory #41 ;3rd edition book: ATOMTOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 8 | May 20th 09 01:17 AM |
NASA Gravity Probe B Mission, Testing Einstein's Theory of Gravity Completes First Year in Space | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | May 4th 05 10:07 PM |