Science and Technology news... :: View topic

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that) Thinking with
the PARALLAX movement theirs is very small. Reality is the closer their
movement is more rapid. That figures Cygni is a star that fits well
for I think its one of the fast racing stars. Can all this be
used for making accurate measurements as to the angular separation of
are closest stars? yes it can and does do just that. It was well over
175 years ago that Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away. Get the picture? Vega was measured
13LY away I remember the name Henderson for he came up with Alpha
Centaurie was our closest star and only 4 LY away. My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe Go figure TreBert

BradGuth · Guest

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
[quote]We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that) Thinking with
the PARALLAX movement theirs is very small. Reality is the closer their
movement is more rapid. That figures Cygni is a star that fits well
for I think its one of the fast racing stars. Can all this be
used for making accurate measurements as to the angular separation of
are closest stars? yes it can and does do just that. It was well over
175 years ago that Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away. Get the picture? Vega was measured
13LY away I remember the name Henderson for he came up with Alpha
Centaurie was our closest star and only 4 LY away. My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe Go figure TreBert
[/quote]
Perhaps only if there>s no dark matter or gravity distortions getting
in the way.

What micro % of the Milky Way can we quantify or otherwise map with
any objective certainty?

~ BG

BradGuth · Guest

On Oct 19, 5:55 pm, "Hagar" <hs...@surewest.net> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:f6de17d6-ef88-4414-aa4c-dcf2a0f7526b@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that) Thinking with
the PARALLAX movement theirs is very small. Reality is the closer their
movement is more rapid. That figures Cygni is a star that fits well
for I think its one of the fast racing stars. Can all this be
used for making accurate measurements as to the angular separation of
are closest stars? yes it can and does do just that. It was well over
175 years ago that Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away. Get the picture? Vega was measured
13LY away I remember the name Henderson for he came up with Alpha
Centaurie was our closest star and only 4 LY away. My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe Go figure TreBert

Perhaps only if there>s no dark matter or gravity distortions getting
in the way.

What micro % of the Milky Way can we quantify or otherwise map with
any objective certainty?

~ BG

Why don>t you leave that to the "smart" people, I mean the real scientists
who have degrees in the field of astronomy and hold paying jobs to perform
their diligent research. Hacks like you need not apply, since you only
muddy the waters, as it were.
[/quote]
If we limit our knowledge to those in charge of living large off of
our hard earned public loot, Hitler or something worse (like our
republican Mafia) would still be in charge.

btw, it>s not possible to make a cesspool of mainstream status quo
lies upon lies muddy.

If "smart" people are so capably in charge; what about using our
Selene/moon L1 or Venus L2, and what about the planet Venus?

~ BG

BradGuth · Guest

On Oct 19, 6:43 pm, "Mark Earnest" <gmearn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[quote]"Hagar" <hs...@surewest.net> wrote in message

news:4-idncHuzNJzS2bVnZ2dnUVZ_tLinZ2d@giganews.com...

"BradGuth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f6de17d6-ef88-4414-aa4c-dcf2a0f7526b@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that) Thinking with
the PARALLAX movement theirs is very small. Reality is the closer their
movement is more rapid. That figures Cygni is a star that fits well
for I think its one of the fast racing stars. Can all this be
used for making accurate measurements as to the angular separation of
are closest stars? yes it can and does do just that. It was well over
175 years ago that Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away. Get the picture? Vega was measured
13LY away I remember the name Henderson for he came up with Alpha
Centaurie was our closest star and only 4 LY away. My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe Go figure TreBert

Perhaps only if there>s no dark matter or gravity distortions getting
in the way.

What micro % of the Milky Way can we quantify or otherwise map with
any objective certainty?

~ BG

Why don>t you leave that to the "smart" people, I mean the real scientists
who have degrees in the field of astronomy and hold paying jobs to perform
their diligent research. Hacks like you need not apply, since you only
muddy the waters, as it were.

Amateurs are much smarter than "smart" people, since they don>t build from
the same shaky foundation of what is merely thought to be known.
[/quote]
I like that interpretation. Mainstream subjective science as the one
and only holy grail isn>t working at 10% of what>s badly needed and
past due.

~ BG

Hagar · Guest

"BradGuth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f6de17d6-ef88-4414-aa4c-dcf2a0f7526b@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
[quote]G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that) Thinking with
the PARALLAX movement theirs is very small. Reality is the closer their
movement is more rapid. That figures Cygni is a star that fits well
for I think its one of the fast racing stars. Can all this be
used for making accurate measurements as to the angular separation of
are closest stars? yes it can and does do just that. It was well over
175 years ago that Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away. Get the picture? Vega was measured
13LY away I remember the name Henderson for he came up with Alpha
Centaurie was our closest star and only 4 LY away. My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe Go figure TreBert

Perhaps only if there>s no dark matter or gravity distortions getting
in the way.

What micro % of the Milky Way can we quantify or otherwise map with
any objective certainty?

~ BG
[/quote]
Why don>t you leave that to the "smart" people, I mean the real scientists
who have degrees in the field of astronomy and hold paying jobs to perform
their diligent research. Hacks like you need not apply, since you only
muddy the waters, as it were.

Mark Earnest · Guest

"Hagar" <hsahm@surewest.net> wrote in message
news:4-idncHuzNJzS2bVnZ2dnUVZ_tLinZ2d@giganews.com...
[quote]
"BradGuth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f6de17d6-ef88-4414-aa4c-dcf2a0f7526b@i18g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that) Thinking with
the PARALLAX movement theirs is very small. Reality is the closer their
movement is more rapid. That figures Cygni is a star that fits well
for I think its one of the fast racing stars. Can all this be
used for making accurate measurements as to the angular separation of
are closest stars? yes it can and does do just that. It was well over
175 years ago that Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away. Get the picture? Vega was measured
13LY away I remember the name Henderson for he came up with Alpha
Centaurie was our closest star and only 4 LY away. My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe Go figure TreBert

Perhaps only if there>s no dark matter or gravity distortions getting
in the way.

What micro % of the Milky Way can we quantify or otherwise map with
any objective certainty?

~ BG

Why don>t you leave that to the "smart" people, I mean the real scientists
who have degrees in the field of astronomy and hold paying jobs to perform
their diligent research. Hacks like you need not apply, since you only
muddy the waters, as it were.
[/quote]
Amateurs are much smarter than "smart" people, since they don>t build from
the same shaky foundation of what is merely thought to be known.

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Hagar(the Hacker) Who are you hacking me or BG? I just read my
post,and thought I see it clearer in my mind than I typed it out(a
little choppy at best) I do think I got my parallax view out(I hope)
TreBert

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Mark Very true what you said of amateurs. I can take chances,and have
very far out ideas,but not the imperial thinkers. Cactus Saul calls me
an old fart(he is half right) Wheeler would not like to be called an
old fart. See the difference. TreBert

BradGuth · Guest

On Oct 20, 6:15 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
[quote]Hagar(the Hacker) Who are you hacking me or BG? I just read my
post,and thought I see it clearer in my mind than I typed it out(a
little choppy at best) I do think I got my parallax view out(I hope)
TreBert
[/quote]
They is simply out to get anyone having free thoughts, much less
deductively connecting those dots, and then they tend to proceed to
deny everything and otherwise lie their mainstream butts off, claiming
that they are the good guys.

Unfortunately, most every time you keep falling for their bluff.

~ BG

Hagar · Guest

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" <herbertglazier@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:4864-48FC8470-466@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net...
[quote]Hagar(the Hacker) Who are you hacking me or BG? I just read my
post,and thought I see it clearer in my mind than I typed it out(a
little choppy at best) I do think I got my parallax view out(I hope)
TreBert

[/quote]
It was in reply to GuthBalls usual drivel, but if you also feel offended,
well, I>ll call that a 2-fer ....

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Hagar Two for one shot is the way mother nature creates. Let it be
particles or universes It saves Spacetime and energy TreBert

Saul Levy · Guest

Do you mean 61 Cygni, BEERTbrain? lmao!

Just Cygni says NOTHING!

Saul Levy

On Sun, 19 Oct 2008 11:50:06 -0400, herbertglazier@webtv.net (G=EMC^2
Glazier) wrote:

[quote]We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that) Thinking with
the PARALLAX movement theirs is very small. Reality is the closer their
movement is more rapid. That figures Cygni is a star that fits well
for I think its one of the fast racing stars. Can all this be
used for making accurate measurements as to the angular separation of
are closest stars? yes it can and does do just that. It was well over
175 years ago that Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away. Get the picture? Vega was measured
13LY away I remember the name Henderson for he came up with Alpha
Centaurie was our closest star and only 4 LY away. My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe Go figure TreBert[/quote]

Saul Levy · Guest

That>s why you>ll never get a Nobel, BEERTbrain! lmao!

You>re a JOKE!

Saul Levy

On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:21:06 -0400, herbertglazier@webtv.net (G=EMC^2
Glazier) wrote:

[quote]Mark Very true what you said of amateurs. I can take chances,and have
very far out ideas,but not the imperial thinkers. Cactus Saul calls me
an old fart(he is half right) Wheeler would not like to be called an
old fart. See the difference. TreBert[/quote]

BradGuth · Guest

On Oct 28, 4:06 pm, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com>
wrote:
[quote]In article
b70966a4-3626-4c34-8b17-22bca79b3...@a3g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,

BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 6:15 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
Hagar(the Hacker) Who are you hacking me or BG? I just read my
post,and thought I see it clearer in my mind than I typed it out(a
little choppy at best) I do think I got my parallax view out(I hope)
TreBert

They is simply out to get anyone having free thoughts, much less
deductively connecting those dots, and then they tend to proceed to
deny everything and otherwise lie their mainstream butts off, claiming
that they are the good guys.

Unfortunately, most every time you keep falling for their bluff.

No, unfortunately, the original post that you appear to be defending is
silly in its first sentence:

In article <4864-48FB572E-...@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net>,
herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that)

No, we don>t know that at all. It doesn>t pass a sanity check. G seems
to be claiming that the brightest stars are in a sort of halo around the
sun at 20 million AU, or 310 light years. The galaxy is 100,000 light
years across, so the claim makes no sense.

Now G didn>t explicitly say "he brightest stars in the galaxy" or "the
brightest stars in the sky", just the brightest stars. These could be
anywhere in the universe, which makes the 310 LY claim even more silly.

Maybe G meant the brightest stars we can see. But that>s silly, too, for
the apparent brightness of a star depends on its distance as well as its
size. It may actually be that the N brightest stars we can see are on
average 310 LY away, but that>s a fairly useless statement, for it says
nothing about the structure of the galaxy or their movement.

In article <4864-48FB572E-...@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net>,
herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away

1 Parsec = 3.26 LY, so that would put it 1 LY away, which fails a
sanitgy check, for Alpha Centauri is four LY away. Which "Cygni" are you
talking about? Do you mean 61 Cygni? That has a parallax of .28 minutes
of arc.

G. you should really be more careful in what you write. People might
otherwise mistake you for a hack.

Brad, you defend "free thoughts" all the time, but any time such get
analyzed, you squeal like a stuck pig.

So what is G claiming, anyway?

In article <4864-48FB572E-...@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net>,
herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe

Hm. This is not actually anything new. That>s something like saying that
with paint, you can make your house any color.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
People who can>t spell get kicked out of Hogwarts.
[/quote]
A star can be most any color, and it>s color can change from time to
time, depending on stellar age and of whatever>s either running into
it or getting gravity sucked into a given star, as well as from
whatever might be sufficiently big that>s orbiting and of course its
blueshift or redshift shouldn>t be ignored. More than once (at least
a dozen or more times) I>ve seen a star giving off vibrant red, blue,
green and yellow (short strobe like) indications for hours on end, and
yet never a word from those astronomy wizards that supposedly know all
there is to know.

~ BG

BradGuth · Guest

On Oct 28, 7:38 pm, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com>
wrote:
[quote]In article
cd510ab5-5e3e-4f5d-9468-fb33681dc...@w1g2000prk.googlegroups.com>,

BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 28, 4:06 pm, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com
wrote:
In article
b70966a4-3626-4c34-8b17-22bca79b3...@a3g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,

BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 20, 6:15 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
Hagar(the Hacker) Who are you hacking me or BG? I just read my
post,and thought I see it clearer in my mind than I typed it out(a
little choppy at best) I do think I got my parallax view out(I hope)
TreBert

They is simply out to get anyone having free thoughts, much less
deductively connecting those dots, and then they tend to proceed to
deny everything and otherwise lie their mainstream butts off, claiming
that they are the good guys.

Unfortunately, most every time you keep falling for their bluff.

No, unfortunately, the original post that you appear to be defending is
silly in its first sentence:

In article <4864-48FB572E-...@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net>,
herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

We know that the average distance to the brightest stars is about 20
million times the distance from Earth to Sun(read that)

No, we don>t know that at all. It doesn>t pass a sanity check. G seems
to be claiming that the brightest stars are in a sort of halo around the
sun at 20 million AU, or 310 light years. The galaxy is 100,000 light
years across, so the claim makes no sense.

Now G didn>t explicitly say "he brightest stars in the galaxy" or "the
brightest stars in the sky", just the brightest stars. These could be
anywhere in the universe, which makes the 310 LY claim even more silly.

Maybe G meant the brightest stars we can see. But that>s silly, too, for
the apparent brightness of a star depends on its distance as well as its
size. It may actually be that the N brightest stars we can see are on
average 310 LY away, but that>s a fairly useless statement, for it says
nothing about the structure of the galaxy or their movement.

In article <4864-48FB572E-...@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net>,
herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Cygni had a parallax of one third of a second of arc
and that put it about 10 LY away

1 Parsec = 3.26 LY, so that would put it 1 LY away, which fails a
sanitgy check, for Alpha Centauri is four LY away. Which "Cygni" are you
talking about? Do you mean 61 Cygni? That has a parallax of .28 minutes
of arc.

G. you should really be more careful in what you write. People might
otherwise mistake you for a hack.

Brad, you defend "free thoughts" all the time, but any time such get
analyzed, you squeal like a stuck pig.

So what is G claiming, anyway?

In article <4864-48FB572E-...@storefull-3331.bay.webtv.net>,
herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

My thoughts on this
are Using Practical astronomy you can establish the scale of the
universe

Hm. This is not actually anything new. That>s something like saying that
with paint, you can make your house any color.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
People who can>t spell get kicked out of Hogwarts.

A star can be most any color,

Well, no, not really. A star can be any color in the range allowed by
blackbody radiation. There are no green stars.
[/quote]
I agree, there are no green stars that we know of.

[quote]
and it>s color can change from time to
time, depending on stellar age and of whatever>s either running into
it or getting gravity sucked into a given star, as well as from
whatever might be sufficiently big that>s orbiting and of course its
blueshift or redshift shouldn>t be ignored.

You didn>t mention spectral changes because of a star>s natural
variability. But none of these changes would significantly change the
star>s basic blackbody radiation profile.

More than once (at least
a dozen or more times) I>ve seen a star giving off vibrant red, blue,
green and yellow (short strobe like) indications for hours on end,

What you>re seeing is atmospheric turbulence or "twinkling". It>s the
reason that modern observatories are built on mountaintops.
[/quote]
1) you are fudging. I know atmospheric turbulence when I see it, and
it never affects and track along with just one star.

2) just one specific star, none others in the sky doing anything the
least bit similar. Remember that I said for hours on end, and
referring to just one specific star.

[quote]
and
yet never a word from those astronomy wizards that supposedly know all
there is to know.

Only because you haven>t read any field guides on astronomic
observation.
[/quote]
Now you>re just lying.

~ BG


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Astrology - Amateur Forum	Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Page 1 of 6