From: Greg Neill on
Brad Guth wrote:

> You purely subjective interpretation that's obfuscation saturated and
> Semitic approved is noted.
>
> Too bad you can't simulate a damn thing, perhaps because that would
> make you look even more stupid.
>
> Even if there's nothing elliptical and the closing velocity of 7.6 km/
> sec were a constant, as for going back 300e6 BP is only an added
> distance of 7.6e3 ly when that molecular cloud of at least 12.5e6 Ms
> existed.

As expected you've bollocked up the calculation;
you've forgotten the contribution of the proper
motion velocity components to the total velocity.

The speed of sirius with respect to the solar
system is about 18.2 km/sec, of which less
than half is currently directed radially.


From: Brad Guth on
On Jun 17, 10:43 am, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote:
> Brad Guth wrote:
> > You purely subjective interpretation that's obfuscation saturated and
> > Semitic approved is noted.
>
> > Too bad you can't simulate a damn thing, perhaps because that would
> > make you look even more stupid.
>
> > Even if there's nothing elliptical and the closing velocity of 7.6 km/
> > sec were a constant, as for going back 300e6 BP is only an added
> > distance of 7.6e3 ly when that molecular cloud of at least 12.5e6 Ms
> > existed.
>
> As expected you've bollocked up the calculation;
> you've forgotten the contribution of the proper
> motion velocity components to the total velocity.
>
> The speed of sirius with respect to the solar
> system is about 18.2 km/sec, of which less
> than half is currently directed radially.

You forgot or rather ignored that everything is in orbit around
something, so we're even.

We are still headed towards Sirius at 7.6 km/sec and seemingly
speeding up (not slowing down).

~ BG
From: Brad Guth on
On Jun 17, 10:38 am, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote:
> Brad Guth wrote:
> > On Jun 17, 4:25 am, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >> *Still* waiting for your calculation results.
>
> > So your internet/Usenet access is blocked.  That's not my fault, now
> > is it.
>
> *Still* waiting...

Double the same, right back at you.
From: Greg Neill on
Brad Guth wrote:
> On Jun 17, 10:43 am, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote:
>> Brad Guth wrote:
>>> You purely subjective interpretation that's obfuscation saturated and
>>> Semitic approved is noted.
>>
>>> Too bad you can't simulate a damn thing, perhaps because that would
>>> make you look even more stupid.
>>
>>> Even if there's nothing elliptical and the closing velocity of 7.6 km/
>>> sec were a constant, as for going back 300e6 BP is only an added
>>> distance of 7.6e3 ly when that molecular cloud of at least 12.5e6 Ms
>>> existed.
>>
>> As expected you've bollocked up the calculation;
>> you've forgotten the contribution of the proper
>> motion velocity components to the total velocity.
>>
>> The speed of sirius with respect to the solar
>> system is about 18.2 km/sec, of which less
>> than half is currently directed radially.
>
> You forgot or rather ignored that everything is in orbit around
> something, so we're even.

Hardly. Why don't you work out the curvature of the
trajectory of an object orbiting (essentially) the
center of the galaxy at the dystance of sol and
sirius? See if it makes a distance over a few
thousand years. Hint: The Sun's trip around the
galaxy takes about 230 to 250 million years.

>
> We are still headed towards Sirius at 7.6 km/sec and seemingly
> speeding up (not slowing down).

"Seemingly"? Where are your figures? Here are
mine:

It's obvious that the radial speed must increase
until Sirius passes the point of closest approach
in about 60,000 years, a minimum distance of about
7.8 light years, after which the radial component
of the speed will decrease again. The total speed
will remain at about 18.3 km/sec (vector addition
of the radial and proper motion components).


From: Greg Neill on
Brad Guth wrote:
> On Jun 17, 10:38 am, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote:
>> Brad Guth wrote:
>>> On Jun 17, 4:25 am, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>> *Still* waiting for your calculation results.
>>
>>> So your internet/Usenet access is blocked. That's not my fault, now
>>> is it.
>>
>> *Still* waiting...
>
> Double the same, right back at you.

How clever of you. Still waiting to see your attempt
at the calculation. C'mon junior, grow a pair and
show us that you can do math.