|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least
according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: "The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote:
Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” Sirius and us(our solar system) are very much indeed inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics pertaining to the mainstream accepted laws of Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics that seems more than sufficient, especially if little Sedna can be turned around at a tidal radii of 1.459e14 m that’s worth merely 2.975e13 N, whereas Sirius at 1.417e17 N (20 thousand fold stronger) and we’ve been gaining on the 3.5 solar mass of Sirius by 7.6 km/sec, plus most likely accelerating towards our next close encounter. It’s pretty much all nothing but a mainstream infowar, a tactical disinformation gauntlet of carefully orchestrated lies, deceptions and systematic obfuscation is what it’s all about. When I’ve merely expected of others to share information and to otherwise constructively ponder and contribute to this topic and many similar ones before, all we ever got at best was a stone cold shoulder, and otherwise mostly negativity and banishment from most, as well as from a certain racist and bigotry spouting rabbi none the less. However, the laws of physics are seldom if ever politically correct or otherwise faith-based, and as such they simply do not lie, and even the best available science doesn’t support many of those established mainstream notions of excluding anything and everything that rocks a given faith-based boat.. Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius) http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html The cosmic molecular cloud of what created Sirius, as being worth at least 1.25e6 solar masses, while at a center to center distance of 100 ly and using our solar system mass of 2.05e30 kg for that same era, we get the following results for 100 ly (9.46053e17 m), 50 ly (4.7303e17 m) and 10 ly (9.46053e16 m). 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 100 ly = 3.819e20 Newtons 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 50 ly = 1.528e21 N 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 10 ly = 3.819e22 N current (sun ~ earth) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 5.974e24 kg at 1.496e11 m = 3.541e22 N current (sun ~ mars) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 6.418e23 kg at 2.2794e11 m = 1.639e21 N current (sun ~ pluto) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 1.305e22 kg at 5.906e12 m = 4.964e16 N current (solar system) ~ Sedna/average gravitational attraction: 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 7.867e13 m = 1.023e14 N current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: 2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N Being that a molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses is going to have a diameter of nearly 100 light years, as such I might suggest that we use the 50 ly parameter for the adjusted distance from the core density of such a molecular cloud, as for mutually binding us at the weak gravity force of 1.528e21 N. Of course by doubling that distance cuts this tidal binding force of radial gravitational attraction down to a forth, whereas even at 500 ly it’s still worth 1.528e19 N, and at the 2.5e37 solar masses brings that 500 ly distance right back up to being worth 1.528e20 N. The cosmic creation of the Sirius star/solar system was no small matter of any wussy little molecular cloud. This was an extremely large cloud and subsequent stellar birthing event of relatively recent times (250~300 MBP), and as such it would have been entirely visible to the naked human eyes of that era (not that any intelligent human via Darwin or intelligent design even existed at that time, although Ed Conrad’s “Man of Coal” seems to be of that era), and as of most recently transforming the red supergiant phase of Sirius B into a white dwarf required a helium flashover (slow nova) about as close as you can safely get, if not a little too close. By way of reading from what others claiming to know more than most anyone else (must be Einstein clones), it seems they’d have no problems with suggesting the 1e6:1 cosmic molecular cloud of having been worth 1.25e7 solar masses that created the Sirius star/solar system, and if still using 2.05e30 kg mass for that of our solar system of that same era results in yet another 10 fold increased force of attraction for that same 50 ly distance, representing 1.528e22 N (nearly half of the sun~earth attraction), and 99.9999% of this 1e6:1 molecular cloud that’s oddly nowhere to be found, by rights should have greatly affected our solar system. Try to remember that this wasn’t a one brief time kind of a cosmic drive-by shooting, but most likely worth at least ten million years of persistent gravity pull before ever having cranked out those impressive Sirius stars, and for at least another million some odd years of having blown everything else (99.999% of that molecular cloud) far away. Once again, how can this kind of nearby cosmic event and of such horrific original mass not have affected our solar system? ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote:
Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force into proper context, it’s always good to draw upon whatever we objectively know to be the case. TNOs like Sedna, multiple thousands of SDOs and even a few of the larger OCOs (Ort Cloud Objects) are no longer hard to find within the radii of our Oort cloud that’s reaching way the hell out there at the tidal radii of 3e16 meters and isn’t exactly going anywhere either, all because of the weak binding force of gravity (“the Sun's orb of physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence”). http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro/tnoslist.html Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna; current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N Whereas Sirius has apparently been holding onto us; current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: 2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5 solar masses is quite capable of its gravitational force holding onto, not to mention as of prior to Sirius B becoming a white dwarf, and of not too long before then of whatever the original molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses has to offer (even at 500 ly it’s a worthy pull or attractive force of 1.528e20 N). As is, that 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you can always trust the mainstream obfuscation from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps simply use one of the following: Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force) http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9 N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius. That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an elliptical Newtonian trek should. In other words, we unavoidably became a Newtonian orbiting part of that same Sirius molecular cloud, and having remained associated with the Sirius star/solar system ever since. The 99.999% remains of that original molecular cloud which gave birth to Sirius is however nowhere in sight, which is rather odd in that our observing instruments having imaged the remains of similar or far less robust clouds at millions of light years away, suggesting that the Sirius B helium flashover may have actually been more like a sustained nova or possibly that of a supernovae which directly affected our terrestrial environment, as having triggered our most recent genetic mutations. As I've said often before, you do not have to take my word on this, because the laws of physics and the Newtonian binding force of gravity are entirely in charge of this one. Only a religious skewed faith that systematically excludes such matters of fact can manage to keep a straight face, as they publicly obfuscate and otherwise remain in such perpetual denial, somewhat like a Pope in denial of what their faith once did to those nice Cathars. (how is it that mainstream religion and their devout minions are never responsible for anything bad happening?) ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
"BradGuth" wrote in message ... On Jul 6, 6:55 am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. snip usual GuthBall frothing As I've said often before, you do not have to take my word on this, GuthBall, no matter how many time you have recited your usual and unintelligible gibberish, it remains just that: the rantings of a total loon. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 6, 9:53*am, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote: Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force into proper context, it’s always good to draw upon whatever we objectively know to be the case. TNOs like Sedna, multiple thousands of SDOs and even a few of the larger OCOs (Ort Cloud Objects) are no longer hard to find within the radii of our Oort cloud that’s reaching way the hell out there at the tidal radii of 3e16 meters and isn’t exactly going anywhere either, all because of the weak binding force of gravity (“the Sun's orb of physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence”). *http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro/tnoslist.html Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna; *current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: *2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N Whereas Sirius has apparently been holding onto us; *current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: *2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5 solar masses is quite capable of its gravitational force holding onto, not to mention as of prior to Sirius B becoming a white dwarf, and of not too long before then of whatever the original molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses has to offer (even at 500 ly it’s a worthy pull or attractive force of 1.528e20 N). As is, that 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you can always trust the mainstream obfuscation from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps simply use one of the following: *Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force) *http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm *http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9 N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius. That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an elliptical Newtonian trek should. In other words, we unavoidably became a Newtonian orbiting part of that same Sirius molecular cloud, and having remained associated with the Sirius star/solar system ever since. The 99.999% remains of that original molecular cloud which gave birth to Sirius is however nowhere in sight, which is rather odd in that our observing instruments having imaged the remains of similar or far less robust clouds at millions of light years away, suggesting that the Sirius B helium flashover may have actually been more like a sustained nova or possibly that of a supernovae which directly affected our terrestrial environment, as having triggered our most recent genetic mutations. As I've said often before, you do not have to take my word on this, because the laws of physics and the Newtonian binding force of gravity are entirely in charge of this one. *Only a religious skewed faith that systematically excludes such matters of fact can manage to keep a straight face, as they publicly obfuscate and otherwise remain in such perpetual denial, somewhat like a Pope in denial of what their faith once did to those nice Cathars. (how is it that mainstream religion and their devout minions are never responsible for anything bad happening?) *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” The Sirius star/solar system as having recently evolved from scratch, as of supposedly 200300 million years ago, and then only most recently its Sirius B having gone soft/slow nova as it converted itself from the original 8.5 solar mass into a red supergiant worth perhaps as much as 5.7 ( 5.3) solar masses, as having an impressive 1000 fold radii, finally got itself down to the helium flashover phase of becoming a white dwarf within perhaps as recently as a few million years ago. In other words, having been close enough as to creating a living hell on Earth with a 2nd sun until after the red supergiant and final helium flashover demise of becoming the nearly invisible white dwarf. The original Sirius B luminosity was likely worth 10,000 times brighter than our sun, and perhaps the combined luminosity of Sirius ABC was likely worth 20,000 times brighter than our sun. However, since so much of its spectrum was UV would mean that the energy received from the Sirius star/solar system was actually worth considerably greater to that of our mostly wet and growing environment of that era. The original location of Sirius and especially that of its terrific molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses (1.25e7) is still not known (as though it materialized out of nowhere), nor has whatever previous proper motions of either us or the remainder of that molecular cloud been plotted or ever so much as virtually identified via supercomputer simulations. Perhaps we have lost any track of such remainders of that molecular cloud because of the horrific Sirius B helium flashover having so extensively blown it all away. Perhaps the public funded mainstream mindset of astrophysics and related science simply doesn’t want us to know exactly whatever such a nearby star/solar system as Sirius could have come from or having done to us. ~ BG |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 6, 6:55*am, BradGuth wrote:
Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their puppet media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our encountering another galaxy), and especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth. First off, it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 125,000 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25 million, while still others yet would prefer a more robust cloud worthy of 12.5 million solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite a stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud of originally near 100 ly diameter is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby mass, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *observationology science (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's our TRACEe3 and the all-knowing expertise from FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely? Surely these brown-nosed clowns of mostly pretend Atheists, as well as republican faith-based bigots and typically closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup cabal that are enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do), are hopefully not representing or otherwise speaking on behalf of our FAS. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” This isn’t even hocus-pocus rocket science, instead it’s just plain old Newtonian physics that a dysfunctional 5th grader should understand. As is, the 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you can always trust the mainstream obfuscation from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps simply use one of the following: Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force) http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9 N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius. That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an elliptical Newtonian trek should. The Sirius star/solar system as having recently evolved from scratch as of supposedly 200300 million years ago, and then only most recently its Sirius B having gone soft/slow nova as it converted itself from the original 8.5 solar mass into a red supergiant worth perhaps as much as 5.7 ( 5.3) solar masses, as having an impressive 1000 fold radii, finally got itself down to the helium flashover phase of becoming a white dwarf within perhaps as recently as a few million years ago. In other words, having been close enough as to creating a living hell on Earth with a second sun until after the red supergiant and final helium flashover demise of becoming the nearly invisible white dwarf. The original Sirius B luminosity was likely worth 10,000 times brighter than our sun, and perhaps the combined luminosity of Sirius ABC was likely worth 20,000 times brighter than our sun. However, since so much of its spectrum was UV would mean that the energy received from the Sirius star/solar system was actually worth something considerably greater to that of our mostly wet and growing environment of that era. The original location of Sirius and especially that of its terrific molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses (1.25e51.25e7) is still not objectively known (almost as though it materialized out of nowhere), nor has whatever previous proper motions of either us or the remainder of that molecular cloud been plotted or ever so much as virtually identified via supercomputer simulations. We have obviously lost any track of such remainders of that terrific molecular cloud because of the Sirius B helium flashover having so extensively blown it all away, and somehow supposedly not having affected us. Perhaps the public funded mainstream mindset of astrophysics and related science simply doesn’t want us to know exactly whatever such a nearby star/solar system as Sirius could have come from, or having done to us. It takes a fairly substantial ratio of mostly hydrogen and some helium consumption, plus a staggering CME loss of roughly causing a third of its original stellar mass to go away, before a star becomes a worthy full blown red giant or supergiant, thereby making the red supergiant of Betelgeuse originally worth an impressive 30+ solar masses. http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegrea...t_to_blow.html Yes indeed, perhaps Betelgeuse should blow our socks off with one hell of a nova or possibly supernovae as it becomes a fairly substantial white dwarf or possibly turns itself into a neutron star, and rather soon if there's an ongoing shrinkage of 1%/year for the past 15 years (actually its helium flashover into becoming a white dwarf or that neutron star has already taken place as of more than 550 years ago). Here’s my further revised/edited version of stellar timelines that’ll offer some alternative interpretation as to the recent birth and rapid evolution of the Sirius star/solar system, and of this process most likely having impacted our relatively nearby and passive solar system. Our sun that supposedly took 100 million years in order to assemble itself, consumes or burns its way through 4.28e9 kg/sec of mostly hydrogen (or rather its more like burning through plus otherwise having been CME tossing away 3e12 kg/sec, and perhaps even 4e12 kg/ sec if it were taking less than 9 billion years of its stellar evolution to become a white dwarf). Supposedly within another 4.5 billion years our sun will have become noticeably expanding into a red giant, and otherwise by at most 7.5 billion from now it should have become a full blown red giant of at least 250 radii before the same kind of measurable shrinkage and helium flashover phase into becoming a white dwarf of perhaps not larger than Mars. On the other hand, the original Sirius B of 8.5 solar masses had an extremely short timeline up until reaching its most recent white dwarf phase, as having obtained this status at roughly 500 times faster stellar evolution than our sun reaching it’s white dwarf phase within roughly 12e9 years (in other words, at merely 4.28e9 kg/sec our sun is almost never going to die off unless something extremely large smacks into it). On the other nearby stellar hand, Sirius B may have evolved itself within as little as 200 million years, before having become the white dwarf as of something less than 64 million years ago. However, Sirius C could have also played an important roll at the same time or before Sirius B evolved into the white dwarf. Perhaps the last thing anyone within mainstream science wants any of us to have is that TRACEe3 taking a much higher resolved look-see. Sirius B had to burn through its fuel and otherwise toss mass away at 4e16 kg/sec, an average mass reduction rate of 4e15 kg/sec. In other words, having to consume roughly 8+ times as much mass in as little as 1/60th the time is what has to represent an extremely vibrant neighbor (as a nearly exploding or slow nova kind of highly terrestrial illuminating star), especially along with the original of Sirius A at perhaps 3+ solar mass and Sirius C at whatever it started out as perhaps worth 1 solar mass, all together representing one heck of a great deal of stellar mass consuming and CMEs tossing sufficient stellar volumes of mostly hydrogen, helium plus a few other plasma elements as considerable mass leaving that vibrant star system, that wasn’t any too far away from us. Now that’s a seriously hot kind of active star system that’s sharing loads of substantial hard-X-rays and gamma, taking place at perhaps less than 10 light years from us, while the red supergiant phase and its helium flashover (aka slow nova) into becoming the little white dwarf happening even closer to us, and perhaps closer yet if there’s any barycenter orbital considerations due to the original molecular cloud of 1.2e6 or greater solar masses that obviously had to exist as of 250~350 million years ago. Our Earth and moon are also in the process of each losing mass, and at the very least we are losing a combined 1e3 kg/sec in addition to the 3e12 kg/sec that our sun is losing. Given the persistent 350~450 km/s of solar wind that’s gently pushing upon us (not to mention the added force of halo CMEs), is suggesting it’s most likely this gradual ongoing loss of such mass and its worth of gravity is what’s causing the majority of our orbital recession (under 15 cm/year) away from the sun. This could actually become a good thing, especially if we could somehow manage to artificially cause Earth and our moon combined to lose 1e4 kg/sec, while our sun keeps getting more into the IR spectrum that’ll eventually become an inflated red giant of 250 times radii, along with fluctuations and the increased loss of mass reaching its highly charged plasma out nearly to the Mars radii, means that Earth needs to get as far away form our sun as possible, and the sooner the better. By then, we’d actually be a whole lot better off as a moon of Saturn or Jupiter. Nothing all that much to worry about: (as long as our fading geomagnetic force doesn’t entirely fail us) http://spaceweather.gmu.edu/index_files/cme.jpg http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/images/lasco-c2-cme.jpg http://www.astronomycast.com/wp-cont...007/04/cme.jpg http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/...ombo1_prev.jpg http://ct.gsfc.nasa.gov/insights/vol13/tele.htm Btw; Sirius A has most likely gone through nearly 30% of it’s original mass, and is about to become an impressive red supergiant of its very own once exceeding a mass reduction of 33% via consumption and CME losses, and of especially accelerated stellar evolution with a nearby Sirius B sucking the hydrogen life out of Sirius A, as such isn’t exactly retarding this process. Fortunately, Sirius A is not going to become nearly as red supergiant as Sirius B, however the helium flashover phase (at a forth the Sirius B mass) may happen a whole lot closer to us, as we’re being pulled along our elliptical Newtonian trek towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and accelerating. Of course, within the next few thousand years there’ll also be considerably less terrestrial magnetosphere and otherwise insufficient energy resources for Eden/Earth to sustain much other than robust bugs, microbes and spores of whatever we’d once had been. That progression is actually a very insignificant cosmic amount of time, especially considering that we’re also eventually headed into the Great Attractor plus way before then nailed by the Andromeda galaxy, so not to worry about such matters is best, even though advancing technology could help salvage our otherwise certain demise. Too bad the previous million years of terrestrial human life had been so utterly wasted, and otherwise perhaps we’ll have better luck next time unless some faith-based cults and their cabals have other intentions. ~ BG |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
In spite of all the usual naysayers, Sirius and our solar system are
clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their parrot media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the truly substantial Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our Milky Way encountering another galaxy), and most likely especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth, and for all we know Sirius C may have been the most massive and thus the first to burn itself out, or having imploded itself into a spent star (possibly neutron or black hole mass of .06 (1.19e29 kg). First off, it’s not that Sirius is all that extra special, other than having evolved so recently and nearby, whereas it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 1.25e5 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. Others of sufficient cosmology expertise might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25e6, while still others yet would prefer having a robust cloud worthy of 1.25e7 solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. In any case, that must have been quite an impressive stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud having been originally near 100 ly diameter that is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby cosmic molecular mass of 1.25e61.25e7, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's still primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and singular Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: "The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of peer reviewed and science journal accepted observationology (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other collaborative peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what our FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's the all-knowing expertise from our FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely, and where exactly are those public funded supercomputer simulations. Surely these brown-nosed clowns, faith-based bigots and closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup proprietors that are continually enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do by trashing everyone in sight) are hopefully not speaking on behalf of our FAS or any other professional group that attempting to constructively contribute on behalf of the greater good. ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 9, 5:46*am, BradGuth wrote:
In spite of all the usual naysayers, Sirius and our solar system are clearly inseparable, at least according to the regular laws of physics, Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics. In spite of whatever those mainstream textbooks and their parrot media has to say, we seem to have become closely associated with the truly substantial Sirius star cluster, even though Sirius has only been a relatively newish and extremely vibrant stellar evolution (quite possibly contributed from our Milky Way encountering another galaxy), and most likely especially terrestrial illuminating of the first 200~250 million years worth, and for all we know Sirius C may have been the most massive and thus the first to burn itself out, or having imploded itself into a spent star (possibly neutron or *black hole mass of .06 (1.19e29 kg). First off, it’s not that Sirius is all that extra special, other than having evolved so recently and *nearby, whereas it took a cosmic molecular cloud worth perhaps at the very least 1.25e5 solar masses in order to produce such a 12.5 mass worthy star system, leaving 99.99% of that molecular mass as supposedly blown away and having to fend for itself, at a place and time when our existing solar system wasn't any too far away. *Others of sufficient cosmology expertise might go so far as to suggest a more than likely molecular cloud mass of 1.25e6, while still others yet would prefer having a robust cloud worthy of 1.25e7 solar masses as having emerged from encountering a smaller galaxy that merged with our Milky Way. *In any case, that must have been quite an impressive stellar birthing process, especially if the remains of this terrific cloud having been originally near 100 ly diameter that is suddenly nowhere to be found. In any case, there's no way that our passive little solar system wasn't somehow directly affected by and otherwise having become tidal radius interrelated with such a nearby cosmic molecular mass of 1.25e61.25e7, and/or at least subsequently associated with the mutual barycenter that's still primarily dominated by the Sirius star/solar system. Lo and behold, it seems that numerous mergers of galactic proportions isn’t nearly as uncommon as some of our perpetual naysayers and singular Big Bang of devout OT thumpers might care to suggest. Our Milky Way Galaxy and its Companions (we are not alone) *http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjansen/l...ocalgroup.html The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored) *http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=20 *http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milkyway-04m.html Local galactic motion simulation: *"The Geneva-Copenhagen survey of the Solar neighbourhood", by B. Nordström et al. *http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en According to several physics and astronomy kinds of *peer reviewed and science journal accepted observationology (deductive interpretation of eye-candy plus other collaborative peer replicated research), our Milky Way is made up of at least two galactic units, with more of the same on their blue-shifted way towards encountering us (namely Andromeda). *Seems hardly fair considering that everything was supposedly created via one singular Big Bang, not to mention that hundreds to perhaps thousands of galaxies seem rather nicely headed into the Great Attractor (including us) for their final demise and/or rebirth. Don’t forget to appreciate those Hubble, KECK and multiple other archives (including those of what our FAS has compiled) depicting “colliding galaxies”, as well as soon to become ESA color/hue enhanced and expanded upon via a trio of their impressive orbital observatories, not to mention whatever the renewed and improved Hubble plus our next generation of orbital observatories should further document. *It may even become hard to find galaxies as massive as ours and Andromeda that are entirely original without their having grown via mergers. Where's the all-knowing expertise from our FAS, telling us whatever they seem to know best or at least suspect is most likely, and where exactly are those public funded supercomputer simulations. *Surely these brown-nosed clowns, faith-based bigots and closed mindsets of our Usenet/newsgroup proprietors that are continually enforcing their mainstream status quo (much like my personal rabbi shadow tries to do by trashing everyone in sight) are hopefully not speaking on behalf of our FAS or any other professional group that attempting to constructively contribute on behalf of the greater good. Sirius and us(our solar system) are very much indeed inseparable, at least according to those regular laws of physics pertaining to the mainstream accepted notions of Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics that seems more than sufficient for everything else we’re told to accept, and especially if little Sedna can be turned around at a tidal radii of 1.459e14 m that’s worth merely 2.975e13 N, whereas Sirius at 8.6 light years and worth 1.417e17 N (20 thousand fold stronger), and to think that we’ve been gaining on this 3.5 solar mass of Sirius by 7.6 km/sec, plus most likely and unavoidably accelerating towards our next close encounter. However, it’s pretty much all nothing but another mainstream infowar, of media damage-control by way of a mainstream tactical disinformation gauntlet of carefully orchestrated lies, deceptions and systematic obfuscation is what it’s apparently all about. When I’ve merely expected of others to share information and to otherwise constructively ponder and contribute to this topic and many similar ones before, all we ever got at best was a stone cold shoulder, and otherwise mostly negativity and banishment, as well as from a certain racist and kosher bigotry spouting potty-mouth rabbi none the less. However, the laws of physics are seldom if ever politically correct or otherwise faith-based, and as such they simply do not lie, and even the best available science doesn’t support many of those established mainstream notions of excluding anything and everything that rocks a given faith-based boat. Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius) http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html The cosmic molecular cloud of what created Sirius, as being worth at least 1.25e6 solar masses, while at a center to center distance of 100 ly and using our solar system mass of 2.05e30 kg for that same era, we get the following results for 100 ly (9.46053e17 m), 50 ly (4.7303e17 m) and 10 ly (9.46053e16 m). 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 100 ly = 3.819e20 Newtons 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 50 ly = 1.528e21 N 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 10 ly = 3.819e22 N current (sun ~ earth) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 5.974e24 kg at 1.496e11 m = 3.541e22 N current (sun ~ mars) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 6.418e23 kg at 2.2794e11 m = 1.639e21 N current (sun ~ pluto) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 1.305e22 kg at 5.906e12 m = 4.964e16 N current (solar system) ~ Sedna/average gravitational attraction: 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 7.867e13 m = 1.023e14 N current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: 2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N Being that a molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses is going to have a diameter of nearly 100 light years, as such I might suggest that we use the 50 ly parameter for the adjusted distance from the core density of such a molecular cloud, as for mutually binding us at the weak gravity force of 1.528e21 N. Of course by doubling that distance cuts this tidal binding force of radial gravitational attraction down to a forth, whereas even at 500 ly it’s still worth 1.528e19 N, and at the 2.5e37 solar masses brings that 500 ly distance right back up to being worth 1.528e20 N. The cosmic creation of the Sirius star/solar system was no small matter of any wussy little molecular cloud. This was an extremely large cloud and subsequent stellar birthing event of relatively recent times (250~300 MBP), and as such it would have been entirely visible to the naked human eyes of that era (not that any intelligent human via Darwin or intelligent design even existed at that time, although Ed Conrad’s “Man of Coal” seems to be of that era), and as of most recently transforming the red supergiant phase of Sirius B into a white dwarf required a helium flashover (slow nova) about as close as you can safely get, if not a little too close. By way of reading from what others claiming to know more than most anyone else (must be Einstein clones), it seems they’d have no problems with suggesting the 1e6:1 cosmic molecular cloud of having been worth 1.25e7 solar masses that created the Sirius star/solar system, and if still using 2.05e30 kg mass for that of our solar system of that same era results in yet another 10 fold increased force of attraction for that same 50 ly distance, representing 1.528e22 N (nearly half of the sun~earth attraction), and 99.9999% of this 1e6:1 molecular cloud that’s oddly nowhere to be found, by rights should have greatly affected our solar system. Try to remember that this wasn’t a one brief time kind of a cosmic drive-by shooting, but most likely worth at least ten million years of persistent gravity pull before that massive molecular cloud ever having cranked out those impressive Sirius stars, and for at least another million some odd years of having blown everything else (99.999% of that molecular cloud) far away. Once again, how can this kind of nearby cosmic event and of such horrific original mass not have affected our solar system? This one shouldn’t be so hard to answer, but then our resident wizards seem unable, and/or unwilling to share and share alike without involving a great deal of bloodshed. ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 9, 5:55*am, BradGuth wrote:
Sirius and us(our solar system) are very much indeed inseparable, at least according to those regular laws of physics pertaining to the mainstream accepted notions of Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics that seems more than sufficient for everything else we’re told to accept, and especially if little Sedna can be turned around at a tidal radii of 1.459e14 m that’s worth merely 2.975e13 N, whereas Sirius at 8.6 light years and worth 1.417e17 N (20 thousand fold stronger), and to think that we’ve been gaining on this 3.5 solar mass of Sirius by 7.6 km/sec, plus most likely and unavoidably accelerating towards our next close encounter. However, it’s pretty much all nothing but another mainstream infowar, of media damage-control by way of a mainstream tactical disinformation gauntlet of carefully orchestrated lies, deceptions and systematic obfuscation is what it’s apparently all about. *When I’ve merely expected of others to share information and to otherwise constructively ponder and contribute to this topic and many similar ones before, all we ever got at best was a stone cold shoulder, and otherwise mostly negativity and banishment, as well as from a certain racist and kosher bigotry spouting potty-mouth rabbi none the less. However, the laws of physics are seldom if ever politically correct or otherwise faith-based, and as such they simply do not lie, and even the best available science doesn’t support many of those established mainstream notions of excluding anything and everything that rocks a given faith-based boat. Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius) *http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm *http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html The cosmic molecular cloud of what created Sirius, as being worth at least 1.25e6 solar masses, while at a center to center distance of 100 ly and using our solar system mass of 2.05e30 kg for that same era, we get the following results for 100 ly (9.46053e17 m), 50 ly (4.7303e17 m) and 10 ly (9.46053e16 m). *2.05e30 kg *and *2.5e36 kg *at 100 ly = 3.819e20 Newtons *2.05e30 kg *and *2.5e36 kg *at * 50 ly = 1.528e21 N *2.05e30 kg *and *2.5e36 kg *at * 10 ly = 3.819e22 N current (sun ~ earth) gravitational force of attraction: *1.989e30 and 5.974e24 kg at 1.496e11 m = 3.541e22 N current (sun ~ mars) gravitational force of attraction: *1.989e30 and 6.418e23 kg at 2.2794e11 m = 1.639e21 N current (sun ~ pluto) gravitational force of attraction: *1.989e30 and 1.305e22 kg at 5.906e12 m = 4.964e16 N current (solar system) ~ Sedna/average gravitational attraction: *2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 7.867e13 m = 1.023e14 N current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: *2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: *2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N Being that a molecular cloud of at least 1.25e6 solar masses is going to have a diameter of nearly 100 light years, as such I might suggest that we use the 50 ly parameter for the adjusted distance from the core density of such a molecular cloud, as for mutually binding us at the weak gravity force of 1.528e21 N. *Of course by doubling that distance cuts this tidal binding force of radial gravitational attraction down to a forth, whereas even at 500 ly it’s still worth 1.528e19 N, and at the 2.5e37 solar masses brings that 500 ly distance right back up to being worth 1.528e20 N. The cosmic creation of the Sirius star/solar system was no small matter of any wussy little molecular cloud. *This was an extremely large cloud and subsequent stellar birthing event of relatively recent times (250~300 MBP), and as such it would have been entirely visible to the naked human eyes of that era (not that any intelligent human via Darwin or intelligent design even existed at that time, although Ed Conrad’s “Man of Coal” seems to be of that era), and as of most recently transforming the red supergiant phase of Sirius B into a white dwarf required a helium flashover (slow nova) about as close as you can safely get, if not a little too close. By way of reading from what others claiming to know more than most anyone else (must be Einstein clones), it seems they’d have no problems with suggesting the 1e6:1 cosmic molecular cloud of having been worth 1.25e7 solar masses that created the Sirius star/solar system, and if still using 2.05e30 kg mass for that of our solar system of that same era results in yet another 10 fold increased force of attraction for that same 50 ly distance, representing 1.528e22 N (nearly half of the sun~earth attraction), and 99.9999% of this 1e6:1 molecular cloud that’s oddly nowhere to be found, by rights should have greatly affected our solar system. Try to remember that this wasn’t a one brief time kind of a cosmic drive-by shooting, but most likely worth at least ten million years of persistent gravity pull before that massive molecular cloud ever having cranked out those impressive Sirius stars, and for at least another million some odd years of having blown everything else (99.999% of that molecular cloud) far away. *Once again, how can this kind of nearby cosmic event and of such horrific original mass not have affected our solar system? This one shouldn’t be so hard to answer, but then our resident wizards seem unable, and/or unwilling to share and share alike without involving a great deal of bloodshed. In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force of well established orbital mechanics into proper context, that which an average bloke can understand, it’s always good to draw upon whatever we objectively know and collectively accept as being the case. TNOs like Sedna, multiple thousands of SDOs and even a few of the larger OCOs (Ort Cloud Objects) are no longer hard to find within the radii of our vast Oort cloud that’s reaching way the hell out there at the tidal radii of 3e16 meters, and isn’t exactly going anywhere either, all because of the weak binding Newtonian force of gravity (“the Sun's orb of physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence”). http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro/tnoslist.html Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna; current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N Whereas instead Sirius has apparently been holding onto us; current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: 2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5 solar masses is quite capable of its gravitational force holding onto, not to mention as of prior to Sirius B having lost so much of it’s mass by having been such a red supergiant and becoming a white dwarf, and of not too long before then of whatever the original molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses had to offer (even at 500 ly it’s still a worthy pull or attractive force of 1.528e20 N). As is, that 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you can always trust the mainstream obfuscation from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps simply use one of the following: Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force) http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9 N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius. That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an elliptical Newtonian trek should. In other words, we unavoidably became a Newtonian orbiting part or member of that same Sirius molecular cloud, and having remained associated with the Sirius star/solar system ever since. The 99.999% remains of that original molecular cloud which gave birth to Sirius is however nowhere in sight, which is rather odd in that our observing instruments having imaged the cosmic remains of similar and/or far less robust clouds at millions of light years away, suggesting that the Sirius B helium flashover may have actually been more like a sustained nova or possibly that of a supernovae which directly affected our terrestrial environment, as likely having triggered our final ice age thaw and most recent genetic mutations. As I've said often before, you do not have to take my word on this, because the laws of physics and the unavoidable Newtonian binding force of gravity are entirely in charge of this one. Only a religious skewed faith-based nutcase that systematically excludes such matters of fact can manage to keep a straight face, as they publicly obfuscate and otherwise remain in such perpetual denial, somewhat like a Pope in denial of what their supposed Christian faith once did to those nice Cathars (and yet how is it that mainstream religion and their devout minions are never responsible for anything bad or unjust happening?). ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet" |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth
On Jul 9, 6:06*am, BradGuth wrote:
In order to put this tidal radius grip or Newtonian binding force of well established orbital mechanics into proper context, that which an average bloke can understand, it’s always good to draw upon whatever we objectively know and collectively accept as being the case. TNOs like Sedna, multiple thousands of SDOs and even a few of the larger OCOs (Ort Cloud Objects) are no longer hard to find within the radii of our vast Oort cloud that’s reaching way the hell out there at the tidal radii of 3e16 meters, and isn’t exactly going anywhere either, all because of the weak binding Newtonian force of gravity (“the Sun's orb of physical, gravitational, or dynamical influence”). *http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/astro/tnoslist.html Considering that we're still managing to hold onto Sedna; *current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: *2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N Whereas instead Sirius has apparently been holding onto us; *current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: *2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N Now try to imagine whatever else the Sirius star/solar system of 3.5 solar masses is quite capable of its gravitational force holding onto, not to mention as of prior to Sirius B having lost so much of it’s mass by having been such a red supergiant and becoming a white dwarf, and of not too long before then of whatever the original molecular cloud of 1.25e7 solar masses had to offer (even at 500 ly it’s still a worthy pull or attractive force of 1.528e20 N). As is, that 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you can always trust the mainstream obfuscation from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps simply use one of the following: *Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force) *http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm *http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9 N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius. That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an elliptical Newtonian trek should. In other words, we unavoidably became a Newtonian orbiting part or member of that same Sirius molecular cloud, and having remained associated with the Sirius star/solar system ever since. The 99.999% remains of that original molecular cloud which gave birth to Sirius is however nowhere in sight, which is rather odd in that our observing instruments having imaged the cosmic remains of similar and/or far less robust clouds at millions of light years away, suggesting that the Sirius B helium flashover may have actually been more like a sustained nova or possibly that of a supernovae which directly affected our terrestrial environment, as likely having triggered our final ice age thaw and most recent genetic mutations. As I've said often before, you do not have to take my word on this, because the laws of physics and the unavoidable Newtonian binding force of gravity are entirely in charge of this one. *Only a religious skewed faith-based nutcase that systematically excludes such matters of fact can manage to keep a straight face, as they publicly obfuscate and otherwise remain in such perpetual denial, somewhat like a Pope in denial of what their supposed Christian faith once did to those nice Cathars (and yet how is it that mainstream religion and their devout minions are never responsible for anything bad or unjust happening?). This isn’t even hocus-pocus rocket science, instead it’s just plain old Newtonian physics that a dysfunctional 5th grader should understand. As is, the 1.417e17 N worth of the Sirius tidal radii holding force represents a 4763:1 greater grip than we have on Sedna. Of course you can always trust the mainstream obfuscation and perpetual denial from our resident newsgroup rabbi, or you can always do the math yourself, or perhaps simply use either one of the following: Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius force) http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/ca...alculator.html Not to further nitpick, however there’s 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) of 112 km diameter and perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg that’s hanging all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.404e14 m) that’s worth merely 1.709e9 N, and even it’s not going away from our solar system tidal radius. That’s representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating as an elliptical Newtonian trek should. The Sirius star/solar system as having recently evolved from scratch as of supposedly 200300 million years ago, and then only most recently its Sirius B having gone soft/slow nova as it converted itself from the original 8.5 solar mass into a red supergiant worth perhaps as much as 5.7 ( 5.3) solar masses, as having that impressive 1000 fold radii, finally got itself down to the helium flashover phase of suddenly becoming a white dwarf within perhaps as recently as a few million years ago. In other words, having been close enough as to creating a living hell on Earth with a second sun until after the red supergiant and final helium flashover demise of becoming the nearly invisible white dwarf. The original Sirius B luminosity was likely worth 10,000 times brighter than our sun, and perhaps the combined luminosity of Sirius ABC was likely worth 20,000 times brighter than our sun. However, since so much of its spectrum was UV would mean that the energy received from the Sirius star/solar system was actually worth something considerably greater to that of our mostly wet and growing environment of that era. The original location of Sirius and especially that of its terrific molecular cloud of perhaps 1.25e6 solar masses (1.25e51.25e7) is still not objectively known (almost as though it materialized out of nowhere and just as suddenly vanished), nor has whatever previous proper motions of either us or the remainder of that molecular cloud been plotted or ever so much as virtually identified via supercomputer simulations. We have obviously lost any observable track of such remainders of that terrific molecular cloud, because of the Sirius B helium flashover having apparently so extensively blown it all away, and somehow supposedly not having affected us. Perhaps the public funded mainstream mindset of astrophysics and related science simply doesn’t want the rest of us village idiots to know exactly whatever such a nearby star/solar system as Sirius could have come from, or having done to us. It takes a fairly substantial ratio of mostly hydrogen and some helium consumption, plus a staggering CME loss of roughly causing a third of its original stellar mass to go away, before a star becomes a worthy full blown red giant or supergiant, thereby making the red supergiant of Betelgeuse originally worth an impressive 30+ solar masses. http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegrea...t_to_blow.html Yes indeed, perhaps Betelgeuse should eventually blow our socks off with one hell of a nova or possibly supernovae climax as it becomes a fairly substantial white dwarf or possibly turns itself into a neutron star, and rather soon if there's an ongoing shrinkage of 1%/year for the past 15 years (actually its helium flashover into becoming a white dwarf or that of a neutron star has already taken place as of more than 550 years ago, because it’s 600 light years away from us). Here’s my further revised/edited version of stellar timelines that’ll offer some alternative interpretation as to the recent birth and rapid evolution of the Sirius star/solar system, and of this process most likely having impacted our relatively nearby and passive solar system. Our sun that supposedly took 100 million years in order to assemble itself, consumes or burns its way through 4.28e9 kg/sec of mostly hydrogen (or rather its more like burning through plus otherwise having been CME tossing away 3e12 kg/sec, and perhaps even 4e12 kg/ sec if it were taking less than 9 billion years of its stellar evolution to becoming a white dwarf). Supposedly within another 4.5 billion years our sun will have noticeably expanded into a red giant, and otherwise by at most 7.5 billion from now it should have become a full blown red giant of at least 250 radii before the exact same kind of measurable shrinkage and helium flashover phase into becoming a white dwarf of perhaps not larger than Mars. On the other hand, the original Sirius B of 8.5 solar masses had an extremely short timeline up until reaching its most recent white dwarf phase, as having obtained this status at roughly 500 times faster stellar evolution than our sun reaching it’s white dwarf phase within roughly 12e9 years (in other words, at merely 4.28e9 kg/sec our sun is almost never going to die off unless something extremely large smacks into it). On the other nearby stellar hand, Sirius B may have evolved itself within as little as 150 million years, before having become the white dwarf as of something less than 64 million years ago. However, Sirius C could have also played an important roll at the same time or before Sirius B evolved into the white dwarf. Perhaps the last thing anyone within mainstream science wants any of us to have is that TRACEe3 taking a much higher resolved look-see. Sirius B had to burn through its fuel and otherwise toss mass away at 1.6e16 kg/sec, perhaps an average mass reduction rate of 4e15 kg/ sec. In other words, having to consume roughly 8+ times as much mass in as little as 1/60th the time is what has to represent an extremely vibrant stellar neighbor (as a nearly exploding or slow nova kind of highly terrestrial UV illuminating star), especially along with the original of Sirius A at perhaps 3+ solar mass and Sirius C at whatever it started out as perhaps worth 1 solar mass, all together representing one heck of a great deal of stellar mass consuming and CMEs tossing sufficient stellar volumes of mostly hydrogen, helium plus a few other heavier plasma elements as representing considerable mass leaving that vibrant star system, and wasn’t any too far away from us. Now that’s a seriously hot kind of active star system that’s sharing loads of substantial hard-X-rays and gamma, taking place at perhaps less than 10 light years from us, while the red supergiant phase and its helium flashover (aka slow nova) into becoming the little white dwarf happening even closer to us, and perhaps closer yet if there’s any barycenter orbital considerations due to the original molecular cloud of 1.2e6 or greater solar masses that obviously had to exist as of 250~350 million years ago. Our Earth and moon are also in the process of each losing mass, and at the very least we are losing a combined 1e3 kg/sec in addition to the 3e12 kg/sec that our sun is losing. Given the persistent 350~450 km/s of solar wind that’s gently pushing upon us (not to mention the added force of halo CMEs), is suggesting it’s most likely this gradual ongoing loss of such mass and its worth of gravity is what’s causing the majority of our orbital recession (under 15 cm/year) away from the sun. This could actually become a good thing, especially if we could somehow manage to artificially cause Earth and our moon combined to lose 1e4 kg/sec, while our sun keeps getting more into the IR spectrum that’ll eventually become an inflated red giant of 250 times radii, along with fluctuations and the increased loss of mass reaching its highly charged plasma out nearly to the Mars radii, means that Earth needs to get as far away form our sun as possible, and the sooner the better. By then, we’d actually be a whole lot better off as a moon of Saturn or Jupiter. Nothing all that much to worry about: (as long as our fading geomagnetic force doesn’t entirely fail us) http://spaceweather.gmu.edu/index_files/cme.jpg http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/images/lasco-c2-cme.jpg http://www.astronomycast.com/wp-cont...007/04/cme.jpg http://soho.nascom.nasa.gov/gallery/...ombo1_prev.jpg http://ct.gsfc.nasa.gov/insights/vol13/tele.htm Btw; Sirius C could have been the original big one of 10 solar masses, and Sirius A has most likely gone through nearly 30% of it’s original mass and is about to become an impressive red supergiant of its very own once exceeding a mass reduction of 33% via consumption and CME losses, of especially accelerated stellar evolution with a nearby Sirius B sucking the hydrogen life out of Sirius A, as such isn’t exactly retarding this process. Fortunately, Sirius A is not going to become nearly as red supergiant as Sirius B, however the helium flashover phase (at a forth the Sirius B mass) may happen a whole lot closer to us, as we’re being pulled along our elliptical Newtonian trek towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and accelerating. Of course, within the next few thousand years there’ll also be considerably less terrestrial geomagnetic sustained magnetosphere, and otherwise insufficient energy resources for Eden/Earth to sustain much other than robust bugs, microbes and spores of whatever we’d once had been. That kind of human genetic progression is actually a very insignificant cosmic amount of time (having existed as an intelligent species within less than 0.1% of Eden thus far, and only formally educated in physics and science within the last 0.0001%) , especially special terminal considering that we’re also headed into the Great Attractor, plus way before then getting nailed by the Andromeda galaxy, so not to worry about such matters is best, even though advancing technology could help salvage our otherwise certain demise. Too bad the previous million years of terrestrial human life had been so utterly wasted, as otherwise perhaps we’ll have better luck next time unless some faith-based cults and their cabals have other intentions. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Brad Guth is...... | OM | History | 0 | December 26th 03 11:34 PM |