Re: Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus
From: Brad Guth (bradguth_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 01/23/05
- Next message: Brad Guth: "Re: Lunar/Moon Space Elevator, plus another ISS within the CM"
- Previous message: Damon Hill: "Re: Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus"
- In reply to: Eric Chomko: "Re: Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus"
- Next in thread: Brad Guth: "Re: Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 08:03:37 +0000 (UTC)
Some times (more often than not) I'm just so tired that my three
remaining brain cells can't spell worth a darn to save my own soul, much
less get my sentax in order.
"Albedo shift from a core sample?"
Not really. I believe I can relocate the research accomplished by others
that was based upon what moonlight and earthshine had been accomplishing
as of a thousand some odd years ago, or something like that, and of what
it's become like as of today that's been suggested as worth -5% from the
norm.
"Sirius isn't the closest star system, Alpha Centauri is. Based upon
your logic we must be in orbit with AC as well."
I really don't think so, as within my limited "logic" is based upon
proper stellar motions and of the available timeline by which our solar
system could manage to orbit something much like Sirius, that at this
time we're still moving away from Sirius at a fairly good clip. However,
Alpha Centauri could certainly play as another gravitational role in
forming and/or influencing the elliptical orbit that we're taking in
relationship to the massive Sirius star system (of it's entirety
including Kuiper and Oort zone debris being 3.5 the mass of our solar
system).
"Sirius is a fairly large star system that is close to us. THAT makes it
the brightest star in the sky. Surely, you are aware of Rigel in the
constellation Orion and how much bigger and brighter it is than Sirius?
Thanks for that feedback. However, it seems our motion with respect to
such other and/or bigger and brighter stars like Rigel isn't playing
along with the perceived 105,000 year timeline. Rigel being a
bluish-white supergiant is certainly a worthy contender, however being
900 light years away and 55,000 ~ 58,000 times the luminosity of our sun
is offering that performance at more than 100 fold the distance from
what Sirius and it's gravity and more ideal illumination influence
contributes. Gravity goes by the square of the distance, whereas the
mass of Rigel is truly great. However, dividing that influence by 1.1e-4
represents the gravity affect isn't exactly taking the lead-point on
this stellar trek.
Rigel being so much brighter than Sirius should represent coming to
within 1.0 l.y. would certainly have managed to illuminate the
environments on behalf of those diatoms. However, size and brightness of
a star are not nearly as important as for being as close by as Sirius
has been, like perhaps closer than 0.01 light year sort of makes the
case for considering Sirius.
Where's the insurmountable evidence that entirely eliminates Sirius?
Why are you so objecting to Sirius?
"Sirius is 26 times as bright as our sun, according to Pat
Moore'sastronomy guide."
I believe "26 times" represents the human visual brightness and not the
actual shifted spectrum energy that's offset by roughly 150 nm towards
the UV spectrum, that which we hardly perceive squat in terms of
lumens/watt or whatever visual basis, but diatoms absolutely thrive upon
such near-UV energy, and nocturnals see just fine and dandy by such
starlight illumination. Thus essentially the sun never goes down.
"Look I'm no Bush fan, but I fail to see how politics fits into the
discussion.
Our country has managed to self inflict the entire world with at least
several trillion dollars/euros worth of our 9/11 fiasco, by way of
systematically dog-wagging, spinning and hyping the hype, of pushing so
much disinformation-R-us and of creating that which isn't over until our
fat lady sings. You do realise he's planning upon going nuclear over
this global energy domination fiasco.
You simply can't blow off those sorts of hundreds of billions of hard
earned dollars/euros and of whatever humanity that gets in the way at
the same time, without impacting the basic funding needs of science and
physics research.
Regards, Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
-- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
- Next message: Brad Guth: "Re: Lunar/Moon Space Elevator, plus another ISS within the CM"
- Previous message: Damon Hill: "Re: Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus"
- In reply to: Eric Chomko: "Re: Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus"
- Next in thread: Brad Guth: "Re: Space Policy Sucks, while there's Life on Venus"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
