Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!/cd6lVY8Z/mQ7QUEKAKGKw.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail From: The Starmaker Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Tricky questions: How old is each planet? What happened with the 5th. planet? Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 11:47:14 -0700 Organization: The Starmaker Organization Message-ID: <6261A6B2.24D0@ix.netcom.com> References: <41ddb03a-b0a9-4e3d-b83b-4b7b5e029220n@googlegroups.com> Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="40568"; posting-host="/cd6lVY8Z/mQ7QUEKAKGKw.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org"; X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220421-4, 04/21/2022), Outbound message X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2 Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:583632 Odd Bodkin wrote: > > Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Tuesday, April 19, 2022 at 12:33:30 PM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote: > >> As modern "astronomy" is stuck with the narrative that planets were created > >> about 4.4 billion years ago, supporting Laplace's nebular theory, two simple > >> questions arise: > >> > >> 1) How old is each planet, since the formation of the Sun (in a form that can > >> be related to this Sun of our days). > >> > >> 2) What happened with the 5th. planet, which should be between Mars and > >> Jupiter, following the Titius–Bode “Law”? > >> > >> Titius pointed out that the mean distance d in astronomical units (AU) from > >> the Sun to each of the six known planets was approximated by the equation > >> > >> d = 0.4 + 0.3 (2ᴷ), where K = −∞, 0, 1, 2, 4, 5 > >> > >> This empirical law is valid nowadays up to Neptune, as this table shows: > >> > >> Planet K Axis (AU) Titius–BodeLaw (AU) > >> Mercury −∞ 0.39 0.4 > >> Venus 0 0.72 0.7 > >> Earth 1 1.00 1.0 > >> Mars 2 1.52 1.6 > >> ? 3 > >> Jupiter 4 5.20 5.2 > >> Saturn 5 9.54 10.0 > >> Uranus 6 19.18 19.6 > >> Neptune 7 30.06 38.8 > >> > >> Einstein's theories have a say on this, relativists? > > > > Of course, relativists run away when asked how the entire Solar Systems > > (and when) was created. > > > > The Sun is surrounded by about 54 other stellar systems, in a radius of 16.3 light years. > > > > As of "today", they are mostly evenly distributed in a spherical volume > > of 18,000 ly³, which gives about 336 ly³ to each one. > > > > In the case of the Solar System, the total mass (as of today) is about > > 2.1E+33 grams, being the Sun 95% of that amount. > > > > About 6 billion years ago, matter was evenly distributed on such volume > > as H atoms (to start with something above protons). > > > > It implied about 30 H atoms/cm³. > > > > HOW DID ALL OF THEM CONDENSED INTO A PROTO-SUN, with a spherical radius > > of 100 AU, and gained ROTATION (momentum)? > > > > Atomic gravity, electrical and/or magnetic forces shrank such isotropic > > distribution into such sphere, that ignited by nuclear fusion? > > > > And how much time took such sphere to transform 30% of its composition into Helium? > > > > Remember that this stage is very much before any possible ejection of 5% > > of the mass of the singularity, to form proto-planets and else. > > > > Of course, GR has no answers about this process. Not even nuclear > > astrophysics can explain this. > > > > BECAUSE THEY DON'T KNOW NOTHING, and cosmologists have been mocking at > > you for 90 years, since the homo Eddington started > > to play with this and his homo-narrative, about 1922. Only Gamow gave > > some hints about 1930, but for 90 years YOU HAVE BEEN > > PLAYED by the parasites that live at your expense, trying to figure how GOD works. > > > > Well, everything you've been told IS FALSE, and if you buy it, you are A > > RETARDED PARTNER IN THE CRIME that modern cosmology is. > > > > Like Bodkin and Moroney, for instance. But they don't work on this for > > free. Fucking paid shill/trolls, without answers at hand. > > > > > > Nice trolling. > > But consider that stellar formation and gas cloud gravitational collapse is > astrophysics, not really cosmology, and does not GR for a treatment. As > such, it’s a little off topic here. Perhaps you could take the astrophysics > question to sci.physics or sci.astronomy or someplace of more general > physics interest. > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables In other words, the odd bodkin is telling you to GET THE FUCK OUT OF MY NEWSGROUP MOTHERFUCKERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!! -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.