Interstellar space 'full of Jupiter-size orphan planets'

On May 19, 5:08*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
On 5/19/2011 8:38 AM, jacob navia wrote:

I always thought that warp drives work only in another dimension.

Speeding within the Milky Way at almost light speed is impossible
anyway since a single wandering dust of 200 grams hitting the
spaceship has an energy of an atomic bomb of 1.4937 megatons...

That's why you make starships by hollowing out dead white dwarf stars,
so you have a couple of hundred miles of diamond between you and outer
space for the dust particles to run into.
Assuming the shell would support itself, everything inside this literal
"star-ship" would be weightless, so you could actually make the concept
work...although the hollowing out part of it might be a bit much under
its surface gravity field. :-D

Pat

Since everyone seems to be absolutely convinced over
FTL velocities being not achievable, due to the presence
of interstellar dust particles exploding like hydrogen
bombs, then it must be concluded that any interstellar
location will at best be reached at subluminal velocity,
which in this case seems most feasible.

However, in these instances, the space between distant
locations can only be reached by transversing through the
plane of the galaxy, but not purely within an interference-
free zone, with the 3D space that exists, as a projection
into both the upper and lower halves of the galaxy, between
two objects, or locations.

The purest form of FTL flight would use any field that exists
without interfering excitations that result in its carrying infor-
mation from one location above the spiral arm thickness to
another, distant location, that is still above the spiral arm
thickness. This represents the ideal field of transversal.

The field of transversal above or below the plane of the
galaxy would also represent the type of interference-free
zone that achieves instantaneous communication to anywhere
in the (projected plane) of the galaxy. Of course, instantaneous
communication could be achieved to anywhere within the
galaxy's spiral arms, however, one would have to take
into consideration the large number of repeat, brute force
transmissions through this space that might rarely locate
the most clear path of instantaneous communication for
a few seconds, to then become blocked again by
an interfering body a few light years distant.

How far above or below the plane of the galaxy that an
interference free zone" might exist, depends upon the
maximum thickness of the spiral arms, which tend to be
about 1000 LY, meaning that there is approximately 500 LY
above and 500 LY below the plane of the galaxy.
One should also note that this thickness increases to
its maximum, as one approaches the center of the galaxy,
so that the 500 LY thickness is probably more on the
order of 100LY at the outer edges.

Actually, the galactic disk is warped around its edges:

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/relea.../09_warp.shtml

American

"Some rocket scientists are like the TSA of space travel -
way too tight and way too much into micromanaging their
own paranoia"

On May 24, 3:32*am, American wrote:
On May 19, 5:08*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:









On 5/19/2011 8:38 AM, jacob navia wrote:

I always thought that warp drives work only in another dimension.

Speeding within the Milky Way at almost light speed is impossible
anyway since a single wandering dust of 200 grams hitting the
spaceship has an energy of an atomic bomb of 1.4937 megatons...

That's why you make starships by hollowing out dead white dwarf stars,
so you have a couple of hundred miles of diamond between you and outer
space for the dust particles to run into.
Assuming the shell would support itself, everything inside this literal
"star-ship" would be weightless, so you could actually make the concept
work...although the hollowing out part of it might be a bit much under
its surface gravity field. :-D

Pat

Since everyone seems to be absolutely convinced over
FTL velocities being not achievable, due to the presence
of interstellar dust particles exploding like hydrogen
bombs, then it must be concluded that any interstellar
location will at best be reached at subluminal velocity,
which in this case seems most feasible.

However, in these instances, the space between distant
locations can only be reached by transversing through the
plane of the galaxy, but not purely within an interference-
free zone, with the 3D space that exists, as a projection
into both the upper and lower halves of the galaxy, between
two objects, or locations.

The purest form of FTL flight would use any field that exists
without interfering excitations that result in its carrying infor-
mation from one location above the spiral arm thickness to
another, distant location, that is still above the spiral arm
thickness. This represents the ideal field of transversal.

The field of transversal above or below the plane of the
galaxy would also represent the type of interference-free
zone that achieves instantaneous communication to anywhere
in the (projected plane) of the galaxy. Of course, instantaneous
communication could be achieved to anywhere within the
galaxy's spiral arms, however, one would have to take
into consideration the large number of repeat, brute force
transmissions through this space that might rarely locate
the most clear path of instantaneous communication for
a few seconds, to then become blocked again by
an interfering body a few light years distant.

How far above or below the plane of the galaxy that an
interference free zone" might exist, depends upon the
maximum thickness of the spiral arms, which tend to be
about 1000 LY, meaning that there is approximately 500 LY
above and 500 LY below the plane of the galaxy.
One should also note that this thickness increases to
its maximum, as one approaches the center of the galaxy,
so that the 500 LY thickness is probably more on the
order of 100LY at the outer edges.

Actually, the galactic disk is warped around its edges:

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/relea.../09_warp.shtml

American

"Some rocket scientists are like the TSA of space travel -
*way too tight and way too much into micromanaging their
*own paranoia"

NASA is sure beginning to look more like the TSA of space
every day:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEhoVKodDmA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9oMuGXBlSw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ipq_g-DB9Ic

Let Chimera Enterprises supply you with this one!

http://theonematrix.com/ufo-anti-gravity-gift/

American

"You can get a job quick today, as long as they're using
talent scouts for cemeteries."

On Thu, 19 May 2011 16:48:21 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote, perhaps among other things:

On 5/19/2011 1:17 PM, wrote:

Considering that the Earth hasn't been knocked out of it's orbit
by a close encounter with one of these sometime during it's
multi-billion year history, they might be rare in our neck of the
galactic woods.

Here comes Bellus and Zyra!
Waste anything but time! :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Wo...ide_%28film%29

Pat

My brother calls the pair Phloem and Xylem. I always thought Bronson
Alpha & Beta were good enough for me.
--
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell."
-- Ed Abbey

Yes in deed, lots of Jupiter+ stuff and likely a few with Earth sized moons.
However, there should also be losts of smaller stuff just wandering around
by now.

My estimate is 2+ trillion wandering/rogue items of Ceres or larger are
within our 13.7 billion year old galaxy.

When stars like Sirius(B) do their helium flashover into becoming a white
dwarf, whereas even before that demise they 've lost whatever tidal radii
grip on planets and Oort cloud icy debris/planetoids.

http://translate.google.com/#

Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / "Guth Usenet"


"Paul Madarasz" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 May 2011 16:48:21 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote, perhaps among other things:

On 5/19/2011 1:17 PM, wrote:

Considering that the Earth hasn't been knocked out of it's orbit
by a close encounter with one of these sometime during it's
multi-billion year history, they might be rare in our neck of the
galactic woods.

Here comes Bellus and Zyra!
Waste anything but time! :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Wo...ide_%28film%29

Pat

My brother calls the pair Phloem and Xylem. I always thought Bronson
Alpha & Beta were good enough for me.
--
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell."
-- Ed Abbey

On Jun 27, 12:13*pm, Paul Madarasz wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2011 16:48:21 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote, perhaps among other things:

On 5/19/2011 1:17 PM, wrote:

Considering that the Earth hasn't been knocked out of it's orbit
by a close encounter with one of these sometime during it's
multi-billion year history, they might be rare in our neck of the
galactic woods.

Here comes Bellus and Zyra!
Waste anything but time! :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Wo...ide_%28film%29

Pat

My brother calls the pair Phloem and Xylem. *I always thought Bronson
Alpha & Beta were good enough for me.
--
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell."
* * * * * * * * -- Ed Abbey * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

theres evidence the moon was formed by a collision with the earth

On May 24, 3:32*am, American wrote:
On May 19, 5:08*pm, Pat Flannery wrote:









On 5/19/2011 8:38 AM, jacob navia wrote:

I always thought that warp drives work only in another dimension.

Speeding within the Milky Way at almost light speed is impossible
anyway since a single wandering dust of 200 grams hitting the
spaceship has an energy of an atomic bomb of 1.4937 megatons...

That's why you make starships by hollowing out dead white dwarf stars,
so you have a couple of hundred miles of diamond between you and outer
space for the dust particles to run into.
Assuming the shell would support itself, everything inside this literal
"star-ship" would be weightless, so you could actually make the concept
work...although the hollowing out part of it might be a bit much under
its surface gravity field. :-D

Pat

Since everyone seems to be absolutely convinced over
FTL velocities being not achievable, due to the presence
of interstellar dust particles exploding like hydrogen
bombs, then it must be concluded that any interstellar
location will at best be reached at subluminal velocity,
which in this case seems most feasible.

However, in these instances, the space between distant
locations can only be reached by transversing through the
plane of the galaxy, but not purely within an interference-
free zone, with the 3D space that exists, as a projection
into both the upper and lower halves of the galaxy, between
two objects, or locations.

The purest form of FTL flight would use any field that exists
without interfering excitations that result in its carrying infor-
mation from one location above the spiral arm thickness to
another, distant location, that is still above the spiral arm
thickness. This represents the ideal field of transversal.

The field of transversal above or below the plane of the
galaxy would also represent the type of interference-free
zone that achieves instantaneous communication to anywhere
in the (projected plane) of the galaxy. Of course, instantaneous
communication could be achieved to anywhere within the
galaxy's spiral arms, however, one would have to take
into consideration the large number of repeat, brute force
transmissions through this space that might rarely locate
the most clear path of instantaneous communication for
a few seconds, to then become blocked again by
an interfering body a few light years distant.

How far above or below the plane of the galaxy that an
interference free zone" might exist, depends upon the
maximum thickness of the spiral arms, which tend to be
about 1000 LY, meaning that there is approximately 500 LY
above and 500 LY below the plane of the galaxy.
One should also note that this thickness increases to
its maximum, as one approaches the center of the galaxy,
so that the 500 LY thickness is probably more on the
order of 100LY at the outer edges.

Actually, the galactic disk is warped around its edges:

http://berkeley.edu/news/media/relea.../09_warp.shtml

American

"Some rocket scientists are like the TSA of space travel -
*way too tight and way too much into micromanaging their
*own paranoia"

Here again, William Mook has ideas that could prove worthwhile.

Otherwise the IGM of perhaps as great as 0.1 particle or atom/cm3
makes our universe mass worth 3e59 kg. So there's still lots of stuff
in between galaxies that apparently photons need.

The only thing that shouldn’t be losing mass is the universe.

Universe volume = 1e81 m3 = 1e87 cm3
Galaxy volume = 1e60m3 = 1e66 cm3
If the IGM contained just 0.1 molecule/cm3 makes the dark/clear IGM
mass worth 1e86 atoms or at least subatomic particles, and if each
wandering/rogue atom on average was worth 3e-27 kg gives us a total
mass for our universe open-space a whopping value of 3e59 kg. With
our scientific instruments improving towards the cold spectrum, the
quantifying of this dark/clear space of 2.7 K is becoming better
understood as the medium or ether matrix that contains and propagates
everything, because even at .0001 particle/cm3 is still representing a
considerable open space mass of 3e56 kg.

Obviously any galaxy volume of mostly open space that includes
numerous large and small molecular and nebula clouds plus hosting
blown away nebula remainders from most every significant star, as well
as spent star nova and supernova expelled mass and released planets is
going to be populated by an average of something near 100 particles or
atoms/cm3 plus all of its stars, planets and everything else of any
molecular gravity well, although galactic volumes don’t even represent
0.0000000001% of the universe volume, so their open space of even 100/
cm3 (a thousand fold greater average density than the IGM) isn’t going
to affect the total mass of our universe by all that much.

However, the truly gaseous blobs of any significant spherical mass and
whatever elements of metallicity, plus that of the fused solids and
often dim or dark stuff of our metallicity populated galaxy isn’t
exactly insignificant, plus there’s likely a trillion of them stars
(vast majority being red and brown dwarfs) per galaxy. If our galaxy
of supposedly 2e42 kg were representing the average, makes our
perceived universe containing roughly a trillion galaxies worth 2e54
kg plus all of the 3e59 kg of IGM dark/clear stuff = 3.00002e59 kg,
means that at best we humans are pretty insignificant in terms of our
puny mass and post ice-age time of .0001% = 13,700 years (supposedly
ended abruptly 11,712 years ago). So why would any truly advanced ETs
care one way or another what we manage to do to ourselves and our
insignificant planet that’s seriously on its way out of sustaining us,
as well as having a sun that’s a little too big and massive for its
own good?

Supposedly our sun gets rid of 13e13 tonnes of mostly hydrogen per
year, plus those ever increasing amounts of CME losses that are
something much greater than insignificant.

During the previous 11 year cycle: “21,000 flares and 13,000 clouds of
ionized gas, or plasma, exploded from the sun’s surface”, and that’s a
conservative swag without our having objectively known the farside
accounting.

CMEs typically on average toss or eject upwards of 1e13 kg (obviously
some of those extremely large CMEs have been exceeding 1e15 kg), and
there are roughly a thousand of those CMEs every year = 1e13 tonnes,
puts the combined mass loss at 1.4e14 tonnes/year.
http://www.windows2universe.org/sun/cmes.html
http://vanshardware.com/2011/04/larg...upts-from-sun/
http://stereo-ssc.nascom.nasa.gov/be...n_secchi.shtml

Giving this some benefit of doubt and thus not being so conservative
might suggest 1.5e14 tonnes loss per year, as an amount that’s only
going to increase with time unless the sun gets fed a few Jupiter plus
sized gaseous planets every so often, and the odds of that happening
are roughly less than astronomical zilch.

It’s one thing for the usual thermal upwelling and out-gassing planets
losing their core energy and then losing mass due to strong solar
winds, but entirely another matter when their sun is on its way to
becoming a spent/depleted star that can’t possibly hold onto whatever
planets that have also lost some mass without their having lost any
significant orbital velocity. So unless there’s some horrific
electrodynamic force or geomagnetic force taking over where graviton
that’s based entirely upon the collective mass of whatever two or more
given items used to be worth, nothing about the original solar system
of Betelgeuse is going to remain.

http://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1106/23betelgeuse/
“Betelgeuse has shed an amount of material similar to the mass of the
Sun in about 10,000 years, which is flooding the interstellar medium
with oxygen rich dust that will subsequently be used in new star
formation.”

This amounts to an ongoing average mass loss of roughly 2e26 kg/year,
or 6.342e18 kg/sec that’ll only accelerate as this red supergiant
converts itself down into a neutron star, or worse. (probably already
happened because we’re so far away that its final demise is visually
and measurably delayed by 650 years)

No doubt whatever planets that belonged to the Betelgeuse solar system
have already been released as having become wandering/rogue items, and
a massive original star like that must have had at least dozens of
significant planets, plus loads of most everything else that got set
free to roam about the galaxy, and the same argument could be said
about Sirius(B).

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

"bob haller" wrote in message
...
On Jun 27, 12:13 pm, Paul Madarasz wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2011 16:48:21 -0800, Pat Flannery
wrote, perhaps among other things:

On 5/19/2011 1:17 PM, wrote:

Considering that the Earth hasn't been knocked out of it's orbit
by a close encounter with one of these sometime during it's
multi-billion year history, they might be rare in our neck of the
galactic woods.

Here comes Bellus and Zyra!
Waste anything but time! :-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Wo...ide_%28film%29

Pat

My brother calls the pair Phloem and Xylem. I always thought Bronson
Alpha & Beta were good enough for me.
--
"Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell."
-- Ed Abbey

theres evidence the moon was formed by a collision with the earth

-

There's also evidence our planet encountered and then captured our moon.

How the hell do you think we got our Arctic ocean basin and a whole lot more
seasonal tilt?

Haven't you ever noticed that horrific 2500 km by 13+ km deep crater on the
moon?

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / "Guth Usenet"

On May 19, 8:56*am, wrote:
"A team of astronomers has identified a novel
new kind of galactic wanderer - lone, Jupiter-sized
planets expelled from forming solar systems
and drifting in the empty void between the stars.

The researchers, led by Takahiro Sumi of Japan's
Osaka University, spotted 10 such free-floating
"orphan planets" in data from a 2006-7
microlensing survey of our galaxy's centre, which
searched for the tell-tale sign of transiting bodies'
gravitational fields distorting light from distant
stars.

Team member David Bennett, of the University of
Notre Dame in Indiana, explained that this first
sighting in a small portion of the Milky Way
points to enormous numbers of orphans. He
said: "Our survey is like a population census.
We sampled a portion of the galaxy, and based
on these data, can estimate overall numbers in
the galaxy.""

See:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/19/orphan_planets/

Of the Jupiter plus size, there could be at least 100 billion of those
wandering big orphans in our galaxy, and of those below Jupiter mass
there should be at least 1.9 trillion by now, and I think that being
conservative.

So when is our spendy JWST going to fly?

This is exactly what I've been saying all along.
http://www.nature.com/news/2011/1105....2011.303.html
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2011-147

Rogue planets or wandering orphans and their moons simply have to
exist in great numbers by now. As main-sequence stars consume their
fuel and unavoidably blow off considerable mass as they eventually
turn themselves into white dwarfs or neutron stars, whereas there's
simply no way they can possibly hold onto their planets when having a
final mass reduction of at least 4:1and in some cases near 8:1. It
seems even getting near 75% of their progenitor mass isn’t going to be
holding onto whatever planets unless the orbital velocity of such
planets slows way down.

Other nearby or passing stars and especially any rogue neutron stars
could also help pull planets away from their parent star. Otherwise
the only dynamic tidal holding method of planets sticking with their
parent star as it shrivels into a white dwarf is for them planets to
lose a good deal of their orbital velocity, and that’s not likely to
happen.

Our sun is supposedly a third generation star, so there's many planets
from the first two stellar generations that are still out there doing
their rogue interstellar thing of wandering. One of those could be
Tyche or possibly any one of the Sirius(B) planets might not be too
far away, especially nearby as the Sirius Oort cloud is closing in on
our Oort cloud, whereas there’s no telling what could show up as
seemingly out of nowhere.

Some of the surviving gas giants or otherwise extremely icy rock
planets could have earth sized moons and even a few offering
Goldilocks survival potential, but no doubt they’d be cold and cranky
as hell unless they had tunneled deep into the ground for their
geothermal energy.

With a potential 2e12 rogue planets and their moons (some of those
Earth sized) to pick from, with our spendy JWST it shouldn't be all
that hard to locate a few within our galactic neck of the woods, and
keep track of their migrations (possibly even estimate where they
originated from).

Our moon could have easily been worth more than 8e22 kg as an icy
rogue intruder. Such and icy rogue planetoid would actually make for
a very good multigenerational spacecraft that offers terrific
interstellar capability. Otherwise, sorry about my being right again.

http://www.wanttoknow.info/
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

http://groups.google.com/group/googl...t/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://www.wanttoknow.info/
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”