Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #678071 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-03-24 14:41 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-03-24 18:25 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 70 — 7 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Black Hole Event Horizon "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-03-24 14:41 -0700
Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-24 15:07 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-03-24 15:59 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-24 16:30 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-25 17:23 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-03-24 18:14 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-25 17:26 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-25 12:11 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-25 19:32 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-26 00:35 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-25 12:13 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-26 00:46 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-26 08:03 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-26 17:21 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-26 10:51 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-26 18:35 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-26 13:10 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-26 20:39 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-26 14:44 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-26 21:58 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-26 15:12 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-26 22:20 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-26 16:02 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-27 04:38 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-26 16:10 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-27 04:48 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-27 04:26 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-27 12:02 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-27 05:35 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-27 19:08 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-27 18:41 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-28 02:56 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 15:16 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-27 18:04 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-28 03:01 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 05:19 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 12:30 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 07:00 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 07:08 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 16:09 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 09:37 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 09:54 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-28 17:31 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 17:52 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 11:43 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 21:42 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 06:55 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 07:30 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 14:51 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 09:35 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 17:21 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 21:46 -0500
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-29 17:40 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 14:43 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-29 17:34 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 09:58 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-28 17:33 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 17:52 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-28 17:29 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 17:52 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 10:22 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-29 17:24 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-03-31 19:46 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-28 14:46 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 16:09 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-28 12:33 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 06:24 -0700
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-03-28 14:41 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-03-28 16:07 +0000
Re: Black Hole Event Horizon "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-03-24 18:25 -0700
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 09:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c67c42bd-186e-4263-ad85-d1169f7af46f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #678721 |
Odd "john <johnse...@gmail.com> wrote: > This one billion thing means that you can only spin a structure like a > galaxy at one frequency > No. " Uh- yes, actually. Two things, idiot MM and dumber Odd- you claim stars don't go a set rate around galaxies- you claim one side goes faster than the other, but then claim our sun does, and you can calculate its period? Which is it, forgetful dollies? Also, there's a magnetic structure associated with each of the two primary arms- it's not just about what stars do or don't do. The reason you can't keep these pertinent points in your 'minds' is because you don't have a physical model. I do. It's called the Atomic Model for the Galaxy. You should consider it. By the way, the stars WOULD speed up and slow down in a 1:2 orbital http://users.accesscomm.ca/sefton/2electronorbital.GIF
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 09:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <42073ded-cf94-47ad-bdbb-15d9c0012cf9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #678731 |
MM Cute, dumb MM says stars go faster on one side of a galaxy than the other, but then has a hard and fast value for OUR star. And. Can't. See. The. Problem. 'Scientist'
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 17:31 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9gjhk$6r4$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #678735 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >MM >Cute, dumb MM says stars go faster on one side of a galaxy than >the other, but then has a hard and fast value for OUR star. Two words. Elliptical. Orbit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 17:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9gkoq$1i5u$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #678735 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > MM > Cute, dumb MM says stars go faster on one side of a galaxy than the > other, but then has a hard and fast value for OUR star. > And. > Can't. > See. > The. > Problem. Right. There’s no problem. The period of Halley’s Comet is fixed. It’s speed is completely different on either side of its orbit. Where. Is. The. Problem?? > > 'Scientist' > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 11:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <406e1ba0-6e76-4d6e-bf03-a692eccab23a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #678762 |
Odd " Right. There’s no problem. The period of Halley’s Comet is fixed. It’s speed is completely different on either side of its orbit. Where. Is. The. Problem?? Pretty sure stars don't follow ellipses. Plus- measurements on opposite sides of the galaxy were made at the same radii. But don't let facts get in the way, Odd, please. Well, forget stars. There are these magnetic structures associated with the ARMS, themselves. Do they rotate as a unit? Every billion years?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 21:42 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9h289$9t8$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #678778 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > " > Right. There’s no problem. The period of Halley’s Comet is fixed. It’s > speed is completely different on either side of its orbit. Where. Is. The. > Problem?? > > Pretty sure stars don't follow ellipses. And you’re wrong. Again, this has been explained to you at least a half a dozen times and you cannot seem to absorb it. The most common path for a star in a galaxy is an elliptical path. This is part of how spiral arms form in the first place. A YouTube clip was given to you that shows exactly that — stars in elliptical orbits generating the spiral arms. It is also how stars migrate from one arm to another, which is also OBSERVED, though you have it fixed in your calcified brain that stars are permanent residents of the arm you see them in now; they are NOT. > Plus- measurements on opposite sides of the galaxy were made at the same radii. John, think about this for a second — WHY does a comet travel faster on one side of its orbit compared to the other? What is the PHYSICAL REASON for the change in speed? > But don't let facts get in the way, Odd, please. > > Well, forget stars. > There are these magnetic structures associated with the ARMS, themselves. There are magnetic fields associated with the arms, yes. They are not static structures. Your word choice is biased and misleading. I’m going to suggest an experiment for you that might help you figure this out. Put a line of buoys from the shore out into the ocean, every few feet for about a mile. Each one of them will have a battery and a current loop, so that each one generates a magnetic field above the buoy. You’re going to sit in a hot air balloon, hovering about 60 feet above the ocean. You notice that if a buoy rises, the magnetometer in the balloon basket shows an increase in the magnetic field. This doesn’t surprise you because the buoy is closer. You also notice that as a wave washes past a buoy, the buoy gets pushed first closer to shore and then further from shore. This again doesn’t surprise you because you know that water waves push buoys in a circular motion, like this: https://goo.gl/images/pXPtos and so you notice that buoys first bunch together as a wave passes and then space out in between, just like air molecules do in a sound wave, and this bunching together also makes the magnetometer reading increase when the wave passes by. So what you can confirm in a direct measurement is that the magnetic field gets stronger as a wave washes by, under your balloon, and you know why. Now notice that NONE of the buoys are permanent residents of any wave. The wave is not made up of any fixed collection of buoys. The buoys move around, but they pass from one water wave to the next. This is all something you can OBSERVE. Now then, John, is it so hard to understand how stars are like the buoys, and the galactic arms are like the waves, and the magnetic field is stronger where the waves are though the stars move from one wave to the next? Is it so hard to understand that the magnetic field that is stronger around the passing waves in no way binds the buoy to travel a mile from ocean to shore, even though the wave does? THINK, John, THINK!!! > Do they rotate as a unit? Every billion years? > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 06:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0d1fc439-04a2-435a-9c53-c1662a74e9ad@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #678810 |
Odd "The most common path for a star in a galaxy is an elliptical path. " We have known about galaxies for less than 100 years. It takes a billion years for a galaxy to go around. And you KNOW that stars travel in ellipses around that Center. How could you possibly claim that, Odd?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 07:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b74ffa13-c04d-4853-9a2f-c0de9de9416d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #678891 |
Odd "Odd "The most common path for a star in a galaxy is an elliptical path. " We have known about galaxies for less than 100 years. It takes a billion years for a galaxy to go around. And you KNOW that stars travel in ellipses around that Center. How could you possibly claim that, Odd? " It has been proven time and again, even in our lifetime, that Science was wrong about things, yet some people still have this 100% belief- like Odd shows- that everything they say is right. Odd- just saying- they didn't even know about jets until recently- they still don't know how they work. Its clear you're on the what-they-tell-me train. You should try thinking for yourself.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 14:51 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9iugq$19pj$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #678896 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > "Odd > "The most common path for a > star in a galaxy is an elliptical path. " > We have known about galaxies for less than 100 years. > It takes a billion years for a galaxy to go around. > And you KNOW that stars travel in ellipses around that Center. > How could you possibly claim that, Odd? " > > It has been proven time and again, even in our lifetime, that Science was > wrong about things, yet some people still have this 100% belief- like Odd > shows- that everything they say is right. Usually wrong in little ways. Or in deep ways with subtle effects. > > Odd- just saying- they didn't even know about jets until recently- they > still don't know how they work. > Its clear you're on the what-they-tell-me train. > You should try thinking for yourself. John, it’s the excuse of the lazy amateur to say, science has a history of being wrong, and so everything we think we know now is still wrong, and so anybody’s guess is as good as any other about what’s really happening. That is just NOT TRUE. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 09:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <178665c2-a184-41e0-a5c5-06c97e961389@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #678900 |
Odd "- show quoted text - Because you don’t have to watch an entire circuit to know it! THINK John. The laws of physics that run the orbits of stars in a galaxy are the SAME laws that run satellites around the earth and that run the planets and comets around the sun. So if we discovered a new planet today, we wouldn’t have to watch its orbit for the duration of an entire cycle. We could watch it for a couple of days to measure its position and velocity and we would know already where it would be 55.3 years from now. This is " This is known to not be right. THINK, Odd!! Why do they need DM? Because the same laws obviously DONT APPLY. Where were you when they found GRCs? The start of FUDGE PHYSICS. So, wherever your laws get the wrong answers, there must be DM. You guys are hilarious. Plus, all a galaxy's mass is not necessarily at the Center. But, you're right about the opposite sides of the disc slowing, actually. It's because of the double precession that is also happening, and BOTH sides slow and speed up equally, the slowest being at the axis of precession. And the slowing runs along as the disc rotates through that axis at both ends. However, this slowing doesn't have anything to do with asymmetrical GRCs except that it is also because of galactic precession. If the Galaxy takes 500 million years to precess, and we've been watching closely for, say, 50 years, will the .00000025% change be noticed?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 17:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9j7a2$1rhf$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #678917 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > "- show quoted text - > Because you don’t have to watch an entire circuit to know it! > > THINK John. The laws of physics that run the orbits of stars in a galaxy > are the SAME laws that run satellites around the earth and that run the > planets and comets around the sun. So if we discovered a new planet today, > we wouldn’t have to watch its orbit for the duration of an entire cycle. We > could watch it for a couple of days to measure its position and velocity > and we would know already where it would be 55.3 years from now. This is > " > This is known to not be right. > THINK, Odd!! Why do they need DM? > Because the same laws obviously DONT APPLY. No, John, that is not a change in the laws. That is a change in the INPUTS to the same laws. The laws of gravity never changed with the dark matter hypothesis. The law says, given X amount of matter and energy, then you will see motions Y. As we have discussed MANY times, John — many times! — the discrepancy between predicted and measured GRCs points to two distinct possibilities: 1. The law that relates X and Y is still right, but we have the wrong value of X. 2. We have the right value of X, but the law relating X and Y is different than what we thought. Dark matter is option 1, not option 2. Get it right. > Where were you when they found GRCs? > The start of FUDGE PHYSICS. > So, wherever your laws get the wrong answers, there must be DM. You guys are hilarious. > > Plus, all a galaxy's mass is not necessarily at the Center. Exactly!! And now you have your answer about why speeds at different sides of the galaxy are different, even at the same radius!! Good for you for figuring it out! > > But, you're right about the opposite sides of the disc slowing, actually. > It's because of the double precession that is also happening, and BOTH > sides slow and speed up equally, the slowest being at the axis of precession. > And the slowing runs along as the disc rotates through that axis at both ends. > However, this slowing doesn't have anything to do with asymmetrical GRCs > except that it is also because of galactic precession. > If the Galaxy takes 500 million years to precess, and we've been watching > closely for, say, 50 years, will the .00000025% change be noticed? > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 21:46 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <279rbdd8o58ei4vmgtq729b8u1jb62103b@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #678941 |
On Thu, 29 Mar 2018 17:21:06 +0000 (UTC), Odd Bodkin wrote: >Dark matter is option 1 Posted above, but worth repeating: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25767 -- Goat
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 17:40 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9j8f8$aun$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #678917 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >However, this slowing doesn't have anything to do with asymmetrical GRCs >except that it is also because of galactic precession. >If the Galaxy takes 500 million years to precess, and we've been watching >closely for, say, 50 years, will the .00000025% change be noticed? Yes. Doppler shift. So we already know that galaxies don't precess, not that there has been ever been any scientist dumb enough to think so.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 14:43 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9iu1t$18q4$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #678891 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > "The most common path for a > star in a galaxy is an elliptical path. " > We have known about galaxies for less than 100 years. > It takes a billion years for a galaxy to go around. > And you KNOW that stars travel in ellipses around that Center. > How could you possibly claim that, Odd? > Because you don’t have to watch an entire circuit to know it! THINK John. The laws of physics that run the orbits of stars in a galaxy are the SAME laws that run satellites around the earth and that run the planets and comets around the sun. So if we discovered a new planet today, we wouldn’t have to watch its orbit for the duration of an entire cycle. We could watch it for a couple of days to measure its position and velocity and we would know already where it would be 55.3 years from now. This is how we can launch interplanetary probes and give it 12 minutes of burn with a really solid grip on where it’s going to be in 3.5 years. So all you have to know is where stars are and how fast they’re going and in what direction and you KNOW their trajectory is going to be. That’s the whole point of physics, is to be able to say, we have enough clarity about how this works to tell you what state it’s going to be in at any point in the future. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-29 17:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9j82i$aun$3@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #678891 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >"The most common path for a >star in a galaxy is an elliptical path. " >We have known about galaxies for less than 100 years. We have known about Kepler's Laws for about 400 years. >It takes a billion years for a galaxy to go around. Maybe for some stars. Technically star S2 takes 15 1/2 years to go around once (it's very close to the central black hole) and we *already have* observed it in a complete orbit already. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S2_(star) Besides, we don't have to watch a redwood tree grow from a seedling to an old giant tree for 3000 years to know how redwood trees grow. >And you KNOW that stars travel in ellipses around that Center. >How could you possibly claim that, Odd? We already know the laws of gravity, which predict conic sections for orbits. S2's orbit is an ellipse, with eccentricity 0.876. We know it because we observed it!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 09:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <11e348a4-ffe4-4363-94c6-5114f1ce8d06@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #678731 |
One of the original pioneers of the Bohr era actually found that the electron slows at each end of its orbital. I guess I'll have to read all their bios, again.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 17:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9gjm5$6r4$4@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #678737 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >One of the original pioneers of the Bohr era actually found >that the electron slows at each end of its orbital. >I guess I'll have to read all their bios, again. Reference? Doesn't matter. The Bohr model has been known to be wrong for about 100 years now.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 17:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9gkor$1i5u$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #678737 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > One of the original pioneers of the Bohr era actually found that the > electron slows at each end of its orbital. > I guess I'll have to read all their bios, again. > Yeah especially if you don’t remember it accurately because you can’t even remember who it was or where you read it. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 17:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9gjdr$6r4$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #678731 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >Odd >"john <johnse...@gmail.com> wrote: >> This one billion thing means that you can only spin a structure like a >> galaxy at one frequency >> >No. >" >Uh- yes, actually. Why would you say something dumb like that? >Two things, idiot MM and dumber Odd- >you claim stars don't go a set rate around galaxies- I never said that. Each star has its own set rate. The Sun is about 200-250 million years. A star on the edge is perhaps a billion years. Star S2, very close to the central BH, is about 15 1/2 years. > you claim one side goes faster than the other, Actually, you were the one who claimed that. But I don't see a problem with that, there are such things as elliptical orbits. > but then claim our sun does, and you can calculate its period? Why not? I took the number you gave me plus the galactic distance and did the math. That's the standard model of orbital motion! It assumes an approximately circular orbit but we already know that it is almost circular. > Which is it, forgetful dollies? Which is what? >Also, there's a magnetic structure associated with each of the >two primary arms- Asked and answered long ago. The magnetic fields are far too weak to influence the orbits. (and the Milky Way apparently has multiple arms, not just 2) > it's not just about what stars do or don't do. >The reason you can't keep these pertinent points in your 'minds' >is because you don't have a physical model. I am going by the model that astronomers use. You keep claiming you have a model but all I see are animations of spinny things. No predictions, no observations, no calculations, nothing! >By the way, the stars WOULD speed up and slow down in a 1:2 orbital Nobody cares about your retarded precessing spinny things, other than the OCD that apparently controls your life.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-03-28 17:52 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <p9gkop$1i5u$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #678731 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > "john <johnse...@gmail.com> wrote: >> This one billion thing means that you can only spin a structure like a >> galaxy at one frequency >> > > No. > " > > Uh- yes, actually. > Two things, idiot MM and dumber Odd- > you claim stars don't go a set rate around galaxies- you claim one side > goes faster than the other, but then claim our sun does, and you can > calculate its period? Which is it, forgetful dollies? It’s what we said. I suggest you look at some animations of our solar system. You will notice a few things. 1. Halley’s Comet has a fixed period, about 72 years, but its speed changes dramatically, so that it’s going much faster on one side of the orbit than on the other. 2. Different comets have different periods, and they ALL move faster on one side of their orbit. 3. The interior planets have smaller periods than the outer planets. That is, the solar system does not rotate like a solid disk Now substitute “galaxy” for “solar system”, and “star” for “planet” and “comet” and the same picture applies there, because the laws of physics are the same for both. It shouldn’t be a struggle to give up this misconception about galaxies behaving like solid disks, because you just have to LOOK at the solar system to see how it behaves. The different periods and the asymmetric rotation of the heavenly bodies have been observed for literally THOUSANDS of years, and you want to say it doesn’t make sense to you because you can’t imagine it being anything other than solid disk rotation?? > Also, there's a magnetic structure associated with each of the two > primary arms- it's not just about what stars do or don't do. > The reason you can't keep these pertinent points in your 'minds' is > because you don't have a physical model. > I do. It's called the Atomic Model for the Galaxy. > You should consider it. > By the way, the stars WOULD speed up and slow down in a 1:2 orbital > http://users.accesscomm.ca/sefton/2electronorbital.GIF > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web