|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On 11/04/09 03:06, BURT wrote:
Too bad we still do not have any platform of science and astronomy instruments parked within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene-L1). The lagrange points aren't as useful as you might think, since your observational field is more limited. What is the limit to the data we can detect? Insufficient data. From where? Using what? In what frequency / area / etc ? |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 10, 7:06*pm, BURT wrote:
On Apr 10, 2:54*pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 10, 2:23*pm, Iordani wrote: BradGuth wrote: There’s more to creating a solar system than meets the eye Hohohohohooo... right you are, *Brad ol' chap... hohohoho With new and improved observations of greatly extended dynamic range, that now includes the UV and IR spectrums, as well as composites offering the X-ray and gamma obtained pixels, in which case our evolutionary deficient eyes can see and deductively interpret via artificially colorized spectrums of what had been previously invisible. Those nifty radar obtained images of the hot surface of Venus are just further observationology icing on the cake, so to speak. Too bad we still do not have any platform of science and astronomy instruments parked within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene-L1). *~ BG What is the limit to the data we can detect? Mitch Raemsch Since there's trillions upon trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being continually created per cubic light year, go figure the amount of cosmic data is nearly endless per any given cubic light year. One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3 Volume of our universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3 Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms Photons/second = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ??.??e???/year ~ BG |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 11, 8:26*am, Mark McIntyre
wrote: On 11/04/09 03:06, BURT wrote: Too bad we still do not have any platform of science and astronomy instruments parked within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene-L1). The lagrange points aren't as useful as you might think, since your observational field is more limited. What is the limit to the data we can detect? Insufficient data. *From where? Using what? In what frequency / area / etc ? Your mindset and obfuscation is noted. Did our God invent box limited thinking and denial to boot? Your taboo of Selene L1 is also noted. ~ BG |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 11, 8:49*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Apr 10, 7:06*pm, BURT wrote: On Apr 10, 2:54*pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 10, 2:23*pm, Iordani wrote: BradGuth wrote: There’s more to creating a solar system than meets the eye Hohohohohooo... right you are, *Brad ol' chap... hohohoho With new and improved observations of greatly extended dynamic range, that now includes the UV and IR spectrums, as well as composites offering the X-ray and gamma obtained pixels, in which case our evolutionary deficient eyes can see and deductively interpret via artificially colorized spectrums of what had been previously invisible. Those nifty radar obtained images of the hot surface of Venus are just further observationology icing on the cake, so to speak. Too bad we still do not have any platform of science and astronomy instruments parked within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene-L1). *~ BG What is the limit to the data we can detect? Mitch Raemsch Since there's trillions upon trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being continually created per cubic light year, go figure the amount of cosmic data is nearly endless per any given cubic light year. One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3 Volume of our universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3 Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms Photons/second = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ??.??e???/year *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - How does this data contribute to our understanding? How do we know how to interpret it? Mitch Raemsch |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 11, 2:04*pm, BURT wrote:
On Apr 11, 8:49*am, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 10, 7:06*pm, BURT wrote: On Apr 10, 2:54*pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 10, 2:23*pm, Iordani wrote: BradGuth wrote: There’s more to creating a solar system than meets the eye Hohohohohooo... right you are, *Brad ol' chap... hohohoho With new and improved observations of greatly extended dynamic range, that now includes the UV and IR spectrums, as well as composites offering the X-ray and gamma obtained pixels, in which case our evolutionary deficient eyes can see and deductively interpret via artificially colorized spectrums of what had been previously invisible. Those nifty radar obtained images of the hot surface of Venus are just further observationology icing on the cake, so to speak. Too bad we still do not have any platform of science and astronomy instruments parked within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene-L1). *~ BG What is the limit to the data we can detect? Mitch Raemsch Since there's trillions upon trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being continually created per cubic light year, go figure the amount of cosmic data is nearly endless per any given cubic light year. One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3 Volume of our universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3 Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms Photons/second = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ??.??e???/year *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - How does this data contribute to our understanding? How do we know how to interpret it? Mitch Raemsch Most of what we need to learn about our solar system, galaxy and universe is accessible in the form of photons, though mostly of them photons we can't see. The trick is in the observationology phase, of deductively interpreting the best we can, and above all never being unwilling to revise past interpretations for the greater good. Eventually physical probes can finish nailing whatever coffins shut, but until then it's up to our subjective observationology to figure out whatever's most likely. ~ BG |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 11, 2:04*pm, BURT wrote:
On Apr 11, 8:49*am, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 10, 7:06*pm, BURT wrote: On Apr 10, 2:54*pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 10, 2:23*pm, Iordani wrote: BradGuth wrote: There’s more to creating a solar system than meets the eye Hohohohohooo... right you are, *Brad ol' chap... hohohoho With new and improved observations of greatly extended dynamic range, that now includes the UV and IR spectrums, as well as composites offering the X-ray and gamma obtained pixels, in which case our evolutionary deficient eyes can see and deductively interpret via artificially colorized spectrums of what had been previously invisible. Those nifty radar obtained images of the hot surface of Venus are just further observationology icing on the cake, so to speak. Too bad we still do not have any platform of science and astronomy instruments parked within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene-L1). *~ BG What is the limit to the data we can detect? Mitch Raemsch Since there's trillions upon trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being continually created per cubic light year, go figure the amount of cosmic data is nearly endless per any given cubic light year. One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3 Volume of our universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3 Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms Photons/second = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ??.??e???/year *~ BG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - How does this data contribute to our understanding? How do we know how to interpret it? Mitch Raemsch According to the Zionist Nazis and their rabbi Saul Levy, nothing has ever changed from the very beginning of cosmic BB time. and nothing cosmic bad will ever happen to us as long as our noses remain sufficiently mainstream brown and our bank accounts empty. However, most of what we need to learn about Eden as well as our solar system, galaxy and universe is accessible in the form of photons, though mostly it's of them photons we can't see. The trick is in the subjective observationology phase, of deductively interpreting the best we can, and above all never being unwilling or too afraid to revise our past interpretations for the greater good. Eventually physical probes can finish nailing whatever coffins shut, but until then it's up to our best subjective observationology to figure out whatever's most likely, and to subsequently act or at least react appropriately. - On average there's trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being continually created and radiated from within each and every cubic light year, go figure the amount of cosmic data that should be nearly endlessly available per any given cubic light year/sec, or for that matter per given m3/sec. One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3 Volume of our expanding universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3 Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms Our sun supposedly radiates 1~2e45 (all inclusive) photons/sec, plus whatever gravitons. Supposedly we have 1e24 significant photon emitting stars within this mostly forever expanding universe of ours (many of them, perhaps more than half, are red dwatfs), and that’s roughly more than 0.5 star per cubic light year, with more stars being created on the fly, so to speak, not to mention trillions upon trillions of other physical interactions taking place throughout our universe that can’t but help generate photons of their own at any given time, plus there are unavoidably secondary/recoil photons and thereby third, forth and so on generations of those kinds of pesky photons to contemplate, and yet the mass of this universe remains unchanged. Universe photons/year = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ??.???e??? photons/year Photons per universe/yr = (1e25 x 1e45) x 31.536e6 = 3.15e77 Per given billion years makes that worth 3.15e86 photons Per 100 billion years = 3.15e87 photons, and so forth. In other words, it can safely said there are far more photons than atoms, especially if you’d care to include photons coexisting within physical matter. ~ BG |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On average there's trillions upon trillions upon trillions of new
photons per second being continually created and radiated from within each and every cubic light year, go figure as to the amount of cosmic data that should be endlessly available per any given cubic light year/ sec, or for that matter per given m3/sec. One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3 Volume of our expanding universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3 Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms Our passive sun supposedly radiates 1~2e45 (all inclusive) photons/ sec, plus whatever mystery gravitons. (update/correction) Supposedly we have 2e24 significant photon emitting stars within this mostly forever expanding universe of ours (many of them, perhaps more than half, are red dwarfs), and that’s suggesting roughly more than 1e-9 star per cubic light year, with more stars being created on the fly, so to speak, not to mention trillions upon trillions upon trillions of other physical interactions taking place throughout our universe that can’t but help generate photons of their own at any given time, plus there are unavoidably secondary/ recoil photons and thereby third, forth and so on generations of those kinds of pesky photons to contemplate, and yet the mass and energy of this universe remains essentially unchanged. For the moment, I’ll use a conservative 1e25 stars of an average 1e45 photons/sec. Universe photons/year = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ??.???e??? photons/year Photons per universe/yr = (1e25 x 1e45) x 31.536e6 = 3.15e77 Per given billion years makes that tally worth 3.15e86 photons Per 100 billion years = 3.15e87 photons, and so forth. In other words, it can be safely said there has been and stall always be far more photons than atoms, especially if you’d care to include those quantum photons coexisting within all forms of physical matter. The relatively recent and sudden creation of the absolutely vibrant and extremely active Sirius star/solar system of 12+ solar mass evolving right next door if not on top of us, so to speak, would have been a darn good example of where such observationology of photons would have been very insightful, especially from the photons we can’t see. ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
BURT wrote:
On Apr 10, 2:54 pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 10, 2:23 pm, Iordani wrote: BradGuth wrote: There’s more to creating a solar system than meets the eye Hohohohohooo... right you are, Brad ol' chap... hohohoho With new and improved observations of greatly extended dynamic range, that now includes the UV and IR spectrums, as well as composites offering the X-ray and gamma obtained pixels, in which case our evolutionary deficient eyes can see and deductively interpret via artificially colorized spectrums of what had been previously invisible. Those nifty radar obtained images of the hot surface of Venus are just further observationology icing on the cake, so to speak. Too bad we still do not have any platform of science and astronomy instruments parked within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene-L1). ~ BG What is the limit to the data we can detect? We have functioning imaging systems from about 40MHz MRAO (radio astronomy aperture synthesis) right up to hard X-rays with Chandra. http://www.mrao.cam.ac.uk/telescopes/clfst/ http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2008/crab/ There was until recently a gap in the Terahertz band where sensors were not available, but new designer materials now solve that problem. They are also rather good for seeing explosives hidden under clothes. I have seen the first Cass A SNR image made in the Terahertz band, but AFAIK it is not presently available on the internet. The limitations for ground based observation are that the sky must be transparent and there must not be too much terrestrial noise. Outside the atmosphere hard UV and other exotic wavebands are accessible. Regards, Martin Brown |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 14, 2:16*am, Martin Brown
wrote: BURT wrote: On Apr 10, 2:54 pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 10, 2:23 pm, Iordani wrote: BradGuth wrote: There’s more to creating a solar system than meets the eye Hohohohohooo... right you are, *Brad ol' chap... hohohoho With new and improved observations of greatly extended dynamic range, that now includes the UV and IR spectrums, as well as composites offering the X-ray and gamma obtained pixels, in which case our evolutionary deficient eyes can see and deductively interpret via artificially colorized spectrums of what had been previously invisible. Those nifty radar obtained images of the hot surface of Venus are just further observationology icing on the cake, so to speak. Too bad we still do not have any platform of science and astronomy instruments parked within the Earth-moon L1 (Selene-L1). *~ BG What is the limit to the data we can detect? We have functioning imaging systems from about 40MHz MRAO (radio astronomy aperture synthesis) right up to hard X-rays with Chandra. http://www.mrao.cam.ac.uk/telescopes...oto/2008/crab/ There was until recently a gap in the Terahertz band where sensors were not available, but new designer materials now solve that problem. They are also rather good for seeing explosives hidden under clothes. I have seen the first Cass A SNR image made in the Terahertz band, but AFAIK it is not presently available on the internet. The limitations for ground based observation are that the sky must be transparent and there must not be too much terrestrial noise. Outside the atmosphere hard UV and other exotic wavebands are accessible. Regards, Martin Brown Too bad our nearby Selene L1 is still so unusually taboo/nondisclosure rated. Wonder what's going to happen when India and/or China set up their science instrument platforms and military outpost/gateway within Selene L1? ~ BG |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 7, 1:20*am, BURT wrote:
How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Just because we can't explain it completely now, doesn't mean that we will be ignorant forever (well, perhaps you will, but that's by choice). -RFH "Any sufficiently advanced technology or science at a given point in time is indistinguishable from magic" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Formation of a Solar System??? | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 36 | March 10th 07 06:01 AM |
Solar system formation. Momentum distribution? | Starboard | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | January 2nd 07 07:05 PM |
UCSD Discovery Suggests 'Protosun' Was Shining During Formation Of First Matter In Solar System | [email protected] | News | 0 | August 11th 05 08:31 PM |
The formation of the Solar System | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 2 | August 13th 04 02:32 PM |