Chapt35 Binary Star Age evidence #401 Atom Totality 4th ed

CHAPTER ON BINARY STAR AGES Chapt35

So, let the looking and research into binary star ages, begin.

proving Earth is 2X older than
Jupiter; twin stars are mostly 2X age different?? ATOM TOTALITY
(Atom Universe) THEORY REPLACES BIG BANG THEORY IN PHYSICS


Nope, I do not think this method is going to be as productive as
zircon dating or core dating
or radioactive element abundance. The trouble with binary stars as
much
of astronomy has the trouble
of such huge distances away and the unwarranted assumptions that
goes
into the data. When
astronomy can not tell whether a star is a binary system in many
cases, then that leads
to little confidence on my part that binary stars can tell us age
differences.


If we find a zircon crystal from Vesta asteroid that measures the age
of the Solar System at
8 billion years old is about the best evidence we can find. Or if we
find Earth having twice
as much radioactive elements like thorium or uranium than does
Jupiter
in parts per billion
would be strong evidence.


Another search for ages of companion stars in binary systems


http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000PhDT.........7P


http://www.astrophysicsspectator.com...aryPulsar.html


One of those sites mentions an age difference of 1 billion years of
companion stars.
But that is not a large enough difference for what I am looking for.


So I think that binary stars can be supporting evidence that Earth is
twice as old
as Jupiter, but I suspect binary star studies cannot be the primary
lead evidence.


oldest star in the Milky Way discovered to date

a_plutonium wrote:
Google is doing a good job of matching interests of what I write
and
what is advertised.
This one caught my eye.
--- quoting http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...ent-star_N.htm
Long before our solar system formed and even before the Milky Way
assumed its final spiral shape, a
star slightly smaller than the Sun blazed into life in our galaxy,
formed from the newly scattered remains
of the first stars in the universe.
Employing techniques similar to those used to date archeological
remains here on Earth, scientists
have learned that a metal-poor star in our Milky Way called HE 1523
is
13.2 billion years old-just
slightly younger than 13.7 billion year age of the universe. Our
solar
system is estimated to be
only about 4.6 billion years old.
The findings are detailed in the May 10 issue of Astrophysical
Journal.
--- end quoting http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...ent-star_N.htm
I am excited by this discovery but will be even more excited
because
the Atom Totality theory predicts stars in our
Milky Way Galaxy that are older than the alleged age of the Cosmos
13.7 billion years.
In the Atom Totality theory ages of stars and galaxies are
layered.
Some ages are from the Plutonium Atom Era,
some from the previous Uranium Atom Era, some from the prior
Thorium
Atom Era. So that the age of
13.7 billion years was merely the Plutonium Atom extension onto a
prior older cosmos of the Uranium Atom
Totality.
So what does this mean for the oldest stars in our galaxy? It
means
that in the future, there will be found a
star that is 15 billion years old, and in the future a star that
clocks up an age of 19 to 20 billion years will be
found. Such discoveries will bring crisis to the Big Bang
believers
and they will be robustly adamant that the
researchers made mistakes. But they did not make mistakes. The
trouble
is that the Big Bang theory is a fake.
And closer to home, according to the Atom Totality theory, our own
Solar System displays this same layering
of ages in that the Sun and inner planets date back to the prior
Uranium Atom Totality and can be as old as
20 billion years, whereas the outer planets of Jupiter and beyond
are
of the recent Plutonium Atom Era and
are only 4-5 billion years old. So when experimentalists can
accurately date the Sun and inner planets compared
to the outer planets, be not surprized when the data says that the
Sun
and Earth are closer to 10 billion
years old and Jupiter and Saturn are only 5 billion years old.
But can I claim this layering truth now from the given 13.2
billion
years? Can I claim victory for the Atom Totality
theory, right here, and right now? I think so. Because in the Big
Bang
theory requires billions of years for the
explosion to have coalesced the material to form a star and not
just a
mere 0.5 billion years. In other words,
our present understanding of solar dynamics does not allow for a
star
forming in 0.5 billion years immediately
after the Big Bang explosion. That picture conjures up the image
that
the explosion had pre-made stars.
So I think I can count victory right here and right now. And the
icing
on the cake will be when researchers report
a star that is 20 billion years old in our galaxy.

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