 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Astronomy Forum » Sirius and us, Newtonian inseparable / FAS & Brad Guth... |
|
Page 4 of 7 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| BradGuth... |
 Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 3:24 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 18, 7:28 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]This one has become almost as good as my other topics of:
"The Big Idea / Geoengineering “Shading The Earth” / Brad Guth
(Shading The Earth with our moon)"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/6a4353...
-
"The 1~10% hollow moon / Brad Guth"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/b88503...
-
"The Secret Radar Pixels of Venus / by Brad Guth"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/8a40c1...
Apparently those Newtonian and other laws of physics are conditional,
as based upon the faith-based politics and special interest group
mindset of the day. No wonder the deductive science of
observationology remains as taboo/nondisclosure rated, and otherwise
always forbid whatever revisionism.
Everything from shading Earth with our moon to appreciating the other
intelligent life existing/coexisting on Venus, and of course those
"Cosmological Ice Ages" are each examples where those laws of physics
and best available science do not count, and otherwise our public
Usenet/newsgroups becomes a kosher free-for-all kind of food fight.
[/quote]
Why can't the Newtonian laws of gravity be applied for how our solar
system has been affected by the massive and vibrant Sirius star system
that we're once again headed towards?
Imagine the molecular cloud of 12.5e6 Ms that supposedly gave birth to
those Sirius stars, and how that amount of nearby mass should have
affected us.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:33 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 15, 6:54 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sep 21, 7:02 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 24, 11:07 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Now we have a new and improved gauntlet of a topic/author taboo and/or
banishment enforced policy, or rather media infowar tactic, even if it
means forcing mainstream to ignore any fix to our badly GW traumatized
environment and of its unique biodiversity we call Eden/Earth, or
merely on behalf of improving it’s use of government and our limited
resources. The biggest forbidden topics have to do with discussing
other forms of off-world intelligent life, because such isn’t supposed
to exist unless it’s of a subhuman Zionist/Jewish species that we get
to dominate and profit from. (isn't that special)
All we seem to get nowadays is the usual Republican Zionist Nazi
replies of change nothing and otherwise do nothing, because apparently
nothing is bad with the way everything is, and besides nothing
seriously bad is ever going to happen, and even if it should we mere
humans couldn't have done anything positive or constructive for the
better.
In other Usenet/newsgroup words of cult/cabal wisdom; Change nothing,
revise nothing and above all do nothing about learning, exploring,
researching or forbid any public sharing of whatever knowledge,
because we (those in charge) supposedly like everything exactly as it
is.
~ BG
On Jul 6, 6:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> 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/localgroup/localgroup.html
The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.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”
Even though gravity is an extremely weak force, when there's enough
matter associated with a given star/solar system to place an affect
another nearby star/solar system, and it's especially so if such mass
is as nearby as our solar system and Sirius as already heading
elliptically towards one another, as is the case with us and Sirius.
Cosmological Ice Ages (by Henry Kroll)
The example ratio of 8.3e7:1 is how much greater our solar system
remains via Newtonian force, as having been attracted to the existing
Sirius star/solar system, than otherwise associated with 2005-VX3
being the item (damocloid/asteroid) of 112 km diameter that’s forever
attracted to our sun. This Sirius:XV3 ratio of 8.3e7:1 is just
another Newtonian matter of objective and peer accepted fact that you
and others can take to the bank (unless it’s a kosher bank, in which
case you're not allowed to deposit anything that’s not of their
mainstream faith-based approval, because according to their long
standing policy and subsequent rules applied to everyone else, Eden/
Earth is always alone and supposedly all there is for accommodating
any complex biodiversity, and everything about our environment is
strictly terrestrial and somehow having nothing whatsoever to do with
human or external factors because, apparently their Eden/Earth has
been given unlimited and renewable resources of everything we need as
is, except for an inflated price).
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Individual mass and velocity are of course significant and the most
dominate of trajectory factors, and then it gets especially complex
whenever there's more than two given bodies of mass to consider that
are each in proper motion to one another. This however doesn't
exclude our interacting with the Sirius star system, or otherwise
obfuscate/exclude what the weak force of gravity and the subsequent
laws of Newtonian orbital mechanics has to say.
[/quote]
Would anyone care to explain why our solar system has not been
attracted or otherwise influence by the relatively nearby Sirius star
system?
It seems once an elliptical trek is established, that it's pretty hard
to break that orbital habit, especially if the other mass was so much
more substantial to begin with.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:17 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 24, 5:33 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 15, 6:54 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 21, 7:02 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 24, 11:07 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Now we have a new and improved gauntlet of a topic/author taboo and/or
banishment enforced policy, or rather media infowar tactic, even if it
means forcing mainstream to ignore any fix to our badly GW traumatized
environment and of its unique biodiversity we call Eden/Earth, or
merely on behalf of improving it’s use of government and our limited
resources. The biggest forbidden topics have to do with discussing
other forms of off-world intelligent life, because such isn’t supposed
to exist unless it’s of a subhuman Zionist/Jewish species that we get
to dominate and profit from. (isn't that special)
All we seem to get nowadays is the usual Republican Zionist Nazi
replies of change nothing and otherwise do nothing, because apparently
nothing is bad with the way everything is, and besides nothing
seriously bad is ever going to happen, and even if it should we mere
humans couldn't have done anything positive or constructive for the
better.
In other Usenet/newsgroup words of cult/cabal wisdom; Change nothing,
revise nothing and above all do nothing about learning, exploring,
researching or forbid any public sharing of whatever knowledge,
because we (those in charge) supposedly like everything exactly as it
is.
~ BG
On Jul 6, 6:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> 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/localgroup/localgroup.html
The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.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”
Even though gravity is an extremely weak force, when there's enough
matter associated with a given star/solar system to place an affect
another nearby star/solar system, and it's especially so if such mass
is as nearby as our solar system and Sirius as already heading
elliptically towards one another, as is the case with us and Sirius.
Cosmological Ice Ages (by Henry Kroll)
The example ratio of 8.3e7:1 is how much greater our solar system
remains via Newtonian force, as having been attracted to the existing
Sirius star/solar system, than otherwise associated with 2005-VX3
being the item (damocloid/asteroid) of 112 km diameter that’s forever
attracted to our sun. This Sirius:XV3 ratio of 8.3e7:1 is just
another Newtonian matter of objective and peer accepted fact that you
and others can take to the bank (unless it’s a kosher bank, in which
case you're not allowed to deposit anything that’s not of their
mainstream faith-based approval, because according to their long
standing policy and subsequent rules applied to everyone else, Eden/
Earth is always alone and supposedly all there is for accommodating
any complex biodiversity, and everything about our environment is
strictly terrestrial and somehow having nothing whatsoever to do with
human or external factors because, apparently their Eden/Earth has
been given unlimited and renewable resources of everything we need as
is, except for an inflated price).
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Individual mass and velocity are of course significant and the most
dominate of trajectory factors, and then it gets especially complex
whenever there's more than two given bodies of mass to consider that
are each in proper motion to one another. This however doesn't
exclude our interacting with the Sirius star system, or otherwise
obfuscate/exclude what the weak force of gravity and the subsequent
laws of Newtonian orbital mechanics has to say.
Would anyone care to explain why our solar system has not been
attracted or otherwise influence by the relatively nearby Sirius star
system?
It seems once an elliptical trek is established, that it's pretty hard
to break that orbital habit, especially if the other mass was so much
more substantial to begin with.
~ BG
[/quote]
Most certainly Sirius(B) was not some massive and vibrant star of <9.5
Ms w/o planets, and those planets would not have existed w/o moons.
When Sirius(B) burned through a third of its mass (mostly hydrogen
consumption) is when Sirius(B) became a red supergiant of perhaps 6
Ms, much of which (nearly half of that mass) was likely helium. The
final nova phase of its helium flashover into becoming the little
white
dwarf is when all those remaining planets and their moons got turned
loose as well as blown away by that horrific nova class of solar wind.
The Newtonian laws of gravity and being in just the right spot at the
right time is what likely happened, giving us the planet Venus and our
Selene/moon. As we once again close in on the Sirius star system, we
get to deal with the vast Oort cloud of debris from that Sirius(B)
nova. Fortunately, the elliptical trek that we're on with the
dominate Sirius star system has been growing, gradually giving greater
distance on every cycle, and the environment of Earth adapted to suit.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:09 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 15, 5:54 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sep 21, 7:02 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 24, 11:07 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Now we have a new and improved gauntlet of a topic/author taboo and/or
banishment enforced policy, or rather media infowar tactic, even if it
means forcing mainstream to ignore any fix to our badly GW traumatized
environment and of its unique biodiversity we call Eden/Earth, or
merely on behalf of improving it’s use of government and our limited
resources. The biggest forbidden topics have to do with discussing
other forms of off-world intelligent life, because such isn’t supposed
to exist unless it’s of a subhuman Zionist/Jewish species that we get
to dominate and profit from. (isn't that special)
All we seem to get nowadays is the usual Republican Zionist Nazi
replies of change nothing and otherwise do nothing, because apparently
nothing is bad with the way everything is, and besides nothing
seriously bad is ever going to happen, and even if it should we mere
humans couldn't have done anything positive or constructive for the
better.
In other Usenet/newsgroup words of cult/cabal wisdom; Change nothing,
revise nothing and above all do nothing about learning, exploring,
researching or forbid any public sharing of whatever knowledge,
because we (those in charge) supposedly like everything exactly as it
is.
~ BG
On Jul 6, 6:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> 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/localgroup/localgroup.html
The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.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.
~BradGuthBrad_GuthBrad.GuthBradGuth BG / “GuthUsenet”
Even though gravity is an extremely weak force, when there's enough
matter associated with a given star/solar system to place an affect
another nearby star/solar system, and it's especially so if such mass
is as nearby as our solar system and Sirius as already heading
elliptically towards one another, as is the case with us and Sirius.
Cosmological Ice Ages (by Henry Kroll)
The example ratio of 8.3e7:1 is how much greater our solar system
remains via Newtonian force, as having been attracted to the existing
Sirius star/solar system, than otherwise associated with 2005-VX3
being the item (damocloid/asteroid) of 112 km diameter that’s forever
attracted to our sun. This Sirius:XV3 ratio of 8.3e7:1 is just
another Newtonian matter of objective and peer accepted fact that you
and others can take to the bank (unless it’s a kosher bank, in which
case you're not allowed to deposit anything that’s not of their
mainstream faith-based approval, because according to their long
standing policy and subsequent rules applied to everyone else, Eden/
Earth is always alone and supposedly all there is for accommodating
any complex biodiversity, and everything about our environment is
strictly terrestrial and somehow having nothing whatsoever to do with
human or external factors because, apparently their Eden/Earth has
been given unlimited and renewable resources of everything we need as
is, except for an inflated price).
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Individual mass and velocity are of course significant and the most
dominate of trajectory factors, and then it gets especially complex
whenever there's more than two given bodies of mass to consider that
are each in proper motion to one another. This however doesn't
exclude our interacting with the Sirius star system, or otherwise
obfuscate/exclude what the weak force of gravity and the subsequent
laws of Newtonian orbital mechanics has to say.
~ BG
[/quote]
So, why is the Newtonian law of gravity not apply to Sol and Sirius?
(but of course it does)
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:19 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Why is it so unusually dark and quiet in here?
On Nov 5, 11:09 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 15, 5:54 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 21, 7:02 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 24, 11:07 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Now we have a new and improved gauntlet of a topic/author taboo and/or
banishment enforced policy, or rather media infowar tactic, even if it
means forcing mainstream to ignore any fix to our badly GW traumatized
environment and of its unique biodiversity we call Eden/Earth, or
merely on behalf of improving it’s use of government and our limited
resources. The biggest forbidden topics have to do with discussing
other forms of off-world intelligent life, because such isn’t supposed
to exist unless it’s of a subhuman Zionist/Jewish species that we get
to dominate and profit from. (isn't that special)
All we seem to get nowadays is the usual Republican Zionist Nazi
replies of change nothing and otherwise do nothing, because apparently
nothing is bad with the way everything is, and besides nothing
seriously bad is ever going to happen, and even if it should we mere
humans couldn't have done anything positive or constructive for the
better.
In other Usenet/newsgroup words of cult/cabal wisdom; Change nothing,
revise nothing and above all do nothing about learning, exploring,
researching or forbid any public sharing of whatever knowledge,
because we (those in charge) supposedly like everything exactly as it
is.
~ BG
On Jul 6, 6:55 am, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> 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/localgroup/localgroup.html
The Hipparcos Space Astrometry Mission: (mainstream media ignored)
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.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.
~BradGuthBrad_GuthBrad.GuthBradGuth BG / “GuthUsenet”
Even though gravity is an extremely weak force, when there's enough
matter associated with a given star/solar system to place an affect
another nearby star/solar system, and it's especially so if such mass
is as nearby as our solar system and Sirius as already heading
elliptically towards one another, as is the case with us and Sirius.
Cosmological Ice Ages (by Henry Kroll)
The example ratio of 8.3e7:1 is how much greater our solar system
remains via Newtonian force, as having been attracted to the existing
Sirius star/solar system, than otherwise associated with 2005-VX3
being the item (damocloid/asteroid) of 112 km diameter that’s forever
attracted to our sun. This Sirius:XV3 ratio of 8.3e7:1 is just
another Newtonian matter of objective and peer accepted fact that you
and others can take to the bank (unless it’s a kosher bank, in which
case you're not allowed to deposit anything that’s not of their
mainstream faith-based approval, because according to their long
standing policy and subsequent rules applied to everyone else, Eden/
Earth is always alone and supposedly all there is for accommodating
any complex biodiversity, and everything about our environment is
strictly terrestrial and somehow having nothing whatsoever to do with
human or external factors because, apparently their Eden/Earth has
been given unlimited and renewable resources of everything we need as
is, except for an inflated price).
Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius)
http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm
http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html
Individual mass and velocity are of course significant and the most
dominate of trajectory factors, and then it gets especially complex
whenever there's more than two given bodies of mass to consider that
are each in proper motion to one another. This however doesn't
exclude our interacting with the Sirius star system, or otherwise
obfuscate/exclude what the weak force of gravity and the subsequent
laws of Newtonian orbital mechanics has to say.
So, why is the Newtonian law of gravity not apply to Sol and Sirius?
(but of course it does)
[/quote]
If the Newtonian 6.7e-11 law of gravity applies, then where's the
problem with our sun being attracted to the still impressive mass of
the Sirius star system of 3.5 Ms (it used to be worth <12.5 Ms)?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Saul Levy... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 1:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
It must have something to do with how EMPTY YOUR HEAD IS, GOOFYSHIT!
lmfjao!
Saul Levy
On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 20:19:45 -0800 (PST), BradGuth
<bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]Why is it so unusually dark and quiet in here?
[/quote]
http://www.aanda.org/content/view/71/42/lang,en |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 7:20 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 13, 8:26 am, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde... at (no spam) dirtcheap.net> wrote:
[quote]"Hagar" <ha... at (no spam) sahm.name> wrote in messagenews:ILWdnVNXF_cj42DXnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d at (no spam) giganews.com...
Waiting with bated breath ... and please, provide links to substantiate any
replies ... a lunatic's rantings and wet dreams are not considered evidence.
Great, you really want more meandering gibberish?
Hey, Guthie, provide current vectors and back-plots for the Sirius and
Sol star systems.
Plot the courses and provide an image for us to gander at.
[/quote]
I'll need some help with that. Care to offer your services, and to
share in the credits?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Double-A... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 8:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 13, 9:49 am, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde... at (no spam) dirtcheap.net> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:422c200a-27a3-4c5f-8492-0794d4653458 at (no spam) m33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
I'll need some help with that. Care to offer your services, and to
share in the credits?
Do you really want your bubble burst that bad?
[/quote]
Brad never explains how the Alpha Centauri system, Barnard's Star,
Wolf 359, and Lalande 21185, all closer to us than Sirius, fit into
this supposedly gravitationally linked up system.
Double-A. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:02 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 13, 9:49 am, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde... at (no spam) dirtcheap.net> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:422c200a-27a3-4c5f-8492-0794d4653458 at (no spam) m33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
I'll need some help with that. Care to offer your services, and to
share in the credits?
Do you really want your bubble burst that bad?
[/quote]
What bubble? This is purely constructive research and deductive
reasoning, whereas we the public already own multiple spendy
supercomputers as is, as well as those machines having been public
funded for their housing, energy, necessary software and willing
programmers, and it's not like each and every one of those computers
are booked solid for doing anything all that important anyway.
Perhaps this could even be roughly accomplished on a good PC or MAC.
As far as I can tell, this is the only prudent trial-and-error
simulation method of reasonably back-tracking our association with
that terrific star system, going all the way back to its horrific
molecular cloud of perhaps at least 1.25e6 Ms (<12.5e6 Ms) that gave
such multiple stellar births so recently and nearby to us (damn near
right on top of us).
How can our wussy and relatively low mass solar system not have become
tidal radii associated with such a nearby and substantial mass, or
having otherwise avoided the subsequent gauntlet of whatever the Sirius
(B) demise lost track of?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 9:24 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 13, 10:42 am, Double-A <double... at (no spam) hush.com> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 13, 9:49 am, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde... at (no spam) dirtcheap.net> wrote:
"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:422c200a-27a3-4c5f-8492-0794d4653458 at (no spam) m33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
I'll need some help with that. Care to offer your services, and to
share in the credits?
Do you really want your bubble burst that bad?
Brad never explains how the Alpha Centauri system, Barnard's Star,
Wolf 359, and Lalande 21185, all closer to us than Sirius, fit into
this supposedly gravitationally linked up system.
Double-A.
[/quote]
I'm sure those do matter, but it's also the UV spectrum of
illumination and the sudden demise of Sirius(B) that seems to fit the
time-line of terrestrial geology events, and even of direct benefit as
to the vast biodiversity that got a serious cosmic advantage from our
elliptical orbit of such a vibrant star system, because it sure as
hell it wasn't from what our early sun had to offer.
I'm thinking that we used to get to within 0.1 ly, though nowadays
it's perhaps at best getting us to within one ly. Eventually
(millions of years from now) we might go our separate ways and never
see one another again, especially if Sirius(B) merges with Sirius(A)
and there's one hell of a nasty nova that becomes a singular large
white dwarf or more likely that of a neutron star.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Hagar... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 10:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:313c14be-c2ab-4380-aed9-c6ca18b2cec4 at (no spam) u25g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Why is it so unusually dark and quiet in here?
Because we're discussing the extent of your stupidity, you loon.
The Sirius Star System is 8.6 LY distant.
Sirius A is about twice as massive as our Sun, extending its gravitational
field outwards to about 4LYs.
Sirius B became a White Dwarf 120 million years ago.
The Sun's gravitational influence extends about 2 LY.
There is speculation of a third companion to the system but it has as yet
eluded astronomers.
So, GuthBall, explain one more time how Sirius exerts any influence on
our Solar System, and/or the process by which our Moon was ejected
from the Sirius Star System and successfully captured by Earth in its
present almost perfectly circular orbit (and how did it not become another
planet around the Sun.
Waiting with bated breath ... and please, provide links to substantiate any
replies ... a lunatic's rantings and wet dreams are not considered evidence. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nightcrawler... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:26 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Hagar" <hagen at (no spam) sahm.name> wrote in message news:ILWdnVNXF_cj42DXnZ2dnUVZ_vKdnZ2d at (no spam) giganews.com...
[quote]Waiting with bated breath ... and please, provide links to substantiate any
replies ... a lunatic's rantings and wet dreams are not considered evidence.
[/quote]
Great, you really want more meandering gibberish?
Hey, Guthie, provide current vectors and back-plots for the Sirius and
Sol star systems.
Plot the courses and provide an image for us to gander at. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:50 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 13, 12:26 pm, "Nightcrawler" <Dirtyde... at (no spam) dirtcheap.net> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:b42935ee-ed8f-49be-a7c8-303b39e950ff at (no spam) s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
I'm sure those do matter, but it's also the UV spectrum of
illumination and the sudden demise of Sirius(B) that seems to fit the
time-line of terrestrial geology events, and even of direct benefit as
to the vast biodiversity that got a serious cosmic advantage from our
elliptical orbit of such a vibrant star system, because it sure as
hell it wasn't from what our early sun had to offer.
This crap is funny.
You are aware that your time lines are screwed up, don't you? The
entire Sirius system is younger than life on earth.
Our solar system is 4 billion years older than the Sirius system.
Sol = ~4.5 billion years.
Sirius et al = ~250 million years.
Permian period = ~300 million years.
Permian extinction = ~251 million years.
Sirius B collapse = ~150 million years.
Idiot.
[/quote]
Feel the negativity from the Nightcrawler intellectual black hole
that's just sucking everything in. It's like mainstream obfuscation
and denial on steroids, except a whole lot better.
You and others of your stick-in-the-mud kind are suggesting that a
molecular cloud of 1.25e6<1.25e7 Ms just materialized out of nowhere
and parked nearby as of 250~300 MYBP, and that it had absolutely no
affect upon our passive little solar system of just slightly over one
solar mass, as that terrific Sirius star system was getting produced
and then having blown off the remaining 99.9999% of the molecular
residual mass?
Now that’s what I’d call conditional as well as politically and
especially faith-based correct physics.
BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nightcrawler... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 12:49 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message news:422c200a-27a3-4c5f-8492-0794d4653458 at (no spam) m33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
[quote]I'll need some help with that. Care to offer your services, and to
share in the credits?
[/quote]
Do you really want your bubble burst that bad? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Nightcrawler... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 2:59 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Double-A" <double-a3 at (no spam) hush.com> wrote in message news:50112f15-fff7-4987-b129-19a00a917bb7 at (no spam) k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
[quote]Brad never explains how the Alpha Centauri system, Barnard's Star,
Wolf 359, and Lalande 21185, all closer to us than Sirius, fit into
this supposedly gravitationally linked up system.
[/quote]
It's called goofy fixation. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Dec 09, 2009 9:44 pm
|
|