Chapt35 Binary Star evidence #400 Atom Totality 4th ed

Chapter 35 Binary Star evidence
Subject: my mistake the age of Alpha Centauri C as only 1 billion yrs;
Dirac New Radioactivities predicts neighboring galaxies of 1/2 age




Looks like I made a mistake in my haste to post. Here is a reliable
enough source:


--- quoting ---
http://everything2.com/title/Alpha+Centauri


* * * * * * * * * *| *Sun * | A * * *| B * * *| C * * * |
* * * * * * * * * *+--------+--------+--------+---------+
Color * * * * * * *| Yellow | Yellow | Orange | Red * * |
Spectral Type * * *| G2 * * | G2 * * | K1 * * | M5 * * *|
Surface Temp * * * | 5800 K | 5800 K | 5300 K | 2700 K *|
Mass (solar) * * * | 1.00 * | 1.09 * | 0.90 * | 0.1 * * |
Radius (solar) * * | 1.00 * | 1.2 * *| 0.8 * *| 0.2 * * |
Brightness (solar) | 1.00 * | 1.54 * | 0.44 * | 0.00006 |
Distance (ly) * * *| 0.00 * | 4.35 * | 4.35 * | 4.22 * *|
Age (b years) * * *| 4.6 * *| 5 - 6 *| 5 - 6 *| ~1? * * |


--- end quoting ---


My mistake was thinking that Alpha Centauri C was older than 6
billion
years
when in fact it is the opposite direction in age and only about 1
billion years old.


Barnard's Star 10 billion years old


Lalande 21185 Star 10 billion years old


Sirius A
Sirius B binary stars of different ages

What that pattern implies is that neighboring stars are vastly
differing in ages
and that defeats the Nebular Dust Cloud theory as a fake theory.

And the Big Bang theory is also trashcanned when comparing the ages
of neighboring galaxies. We see galaxies twice as old as a neighbor
galaxy. If the Big Bang were a true theory, we would have homogenous
and uniform ages involved. Just like a people survey. If we were to
survey a
group of people of various ages from age 7 to 70, we know they could
not
have come from the same birth since their ages are different.
Likewise, if the
Big Bang were true we would see a uniformity in ages and not a mixed
bag of
ages, ditto for Nebular Dust Cloud theory.

There is something special about the reckoning of age of a star or
planet in the Dirac New Radioactivities for which the Nebular Dust
Cloud theory is
handicapped.


In the Nebular Dust Cloud theory, once a protostar becomes formed
from
the Dust Cloud is the starting-clock for the age of that star. So our
Sun and
Jupiter according to the Nebular Dust Cloud theory were borne the
same age of 4.5
billion years ago.


However, the Sun and Jupiter in the Dirac New Radioactivities of
cosmic rays and gamma ray burst being funnelled and focused on a
special seed-dot can have the Sun as 10 billion
years old and the Main Sequence determination giving the Sun an age
of
4.5 billion years
but where the seed-dot of the Sun started 10 billion years ago.
Likewise, Jupiter could have
been totally nonexistent from 10 to 5.5 billion years ago and only
started to exist 4.5 billion
years ago while the Sun was already in existence for 5.5 billion
years.

So the MAIN SEQUENCE of stellar evolution needs total revision and
updating
under a Dirac New Radioactivities growth of a star.


This is what most astronomers have never considered for their star
and
exoplanet considerations. They seem to only have the Nebular Dust
Cloud and Main Sequence
determination of ages of stars and planets. Under Dirac New
Radioactivities
we revamp the Main Sequence Evolution.


In the Dirac New Radioactivities, the age of stars and planets takes
on a whole new complexity of factors.


So that in the case of Alpha Centauri A and B. That one could have
been borne 10 billion
years ago and the other borne 9 billion years ago, and where Alpha
Centauri C was
borne 6 billion years ago and just made it into star status as a
"flare star" and that the
flare star of its lifespan is only 1 billion years old.


You see, with the Nebular Dust Cloud theory, Alpha Centauri C is
considered as 1 billion
years old as its total lifespan and that before 1 billion years
there
was nothing there. But
to Dirac New Radioactivities, that there was a planet borne 6
billion
years ago which would
slowly grow into becoming the red dwarf star of Alpha Centauri C and
only flare in its
1 billion time span as a star.


So Alpha Centauri C is much like what Jupiter will likely evolve
into,
in that Jupiter is
probably already 4.5 billion years old and that in another 2 billion
years Jupiter will have
accumulated alot more of gamma ray bursts and cosmic rays and
swallowed up Neptune
and other planets so that by 2 more billion years, our Jupiter will
begin to shine as a flare
star similar to Alpha Centauri C.


So where the Dust Cloud theorists seem to have a one track mind of
birth and age of
stars and planets, the Dirac New Radioactivities theory is so wide
open in possibilities
and where the data and facts and evidence of stars and planets favor
the Dirac New
Radioactivities.


Now I wonder if I can extend Dirac New Radioactivities to galaxies as
a whole? That given
a galaxy, whether its neighbors, usually vary by 2X the age of that
given galaxy? So that the
Big Bang with Nebular Dust Clouds would predict that given any
galaxy,
its neighbors should
all be uniform age. So that if the Milky Way was 10 billion years
old,
that its closest neighbors
should all be about 10 billion years old if the Big Bang with
Nebular
Dust Cloud is true. But if the Atom Totality with Dirac New
Radioactivities is true than picking any galaxy, its neighbors
should
invariably have galaxies that are 1/2 the age of the former. And so
if
anyone wants to
claim that "migration" is a key part of the Nebular Dust Cloud
theory
would have an extremely
difficult time of inputing "migration" when the Milky Way is found
to
have neighboring galaxies
that are only 5 billion years old.


Archimedes Plutonium
http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies