More than 90 percent of objects found in the vast outer-solar system reservoir may have been born around other stars
in [Physics]
|
Prev: More than 90 percent of objects found in the vast outer–solar system reservoir may have been born around other stars
Next: WHEN BLACK HOLES SLOW DOWN --
From: Greg Neill on 13 Jun 2010 09:11 Brad Guth wrote: > On Jun 12, 6:05 pm, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote: >> You are mistaken in your interpretation. With a speed of >> about 18.2 km/sec (combining the Sirius system's radial and >> proper motions), and given the mass of the system as about >> 3 solar masses, the total mechanical energy of the Sun-Sirius >> system is about 1.67 x 10^8 J/kg, a positive value. Thus >> the Sirius system and our solar system are not gravitationally >> bound; their mutual trajectory will be open and hyperbolic. > I don't agree with that subjective interpretation of yours. Subjective? The current mass of the Sirius system is known from simple Newtonian mechanics. The proper motion and radial velocity are measured. The conclusion is drawn from the given facts via standard Newtonian orbital mechanics. For any two-body gravitationally interacting bodies, the total specific mechanical energy is given by: E = v^2/2 - u/r where: v is the velocity u is the gravitational parameter for the system: G*(M + m) M and m are the masses of the bodies G is Newton's gravitational constant All of the above are known values for the system under consideration. There are two cases of interest for E: E < 0 : The system is gravitationally bound and will exhibit a circular or elliptical orbit, or if the proper motion is zero, a straight-line collision. E >= 0: The system is unbound and will exhibit parabolic (E = 0) or hyperbolic trajectories, or if the proper motion is zero, a straight-line collision if the red-shift if negative, or if the red-shift is positive, proceeding away in a straight line indefinitely. So where are *your* objective facts and what are their accredited sources?
From: Sam Wormley on 13 Jun 2010 10:20 On 6/13/10 12:19 AM, Brad Guth wrote: > Supposedly the red supergiant Betelgeuse that�s currently worth 16~18 > solar mass and losing>6e24 kg/year, might easily have been an > original stellar mass of 32, could end up being an unstable white > dwarf of 1.6 solar mass, suggesting a 20:1 ratio. > > ~ BG Ms = Solar Mass Review of the Final States of Stars Star are born and stars die... just like us. The big massive stars have but short lives, a few millions of years. Stars like our sun last for a good 10 billions of years, and the little red stars like Barnard's Star might last for 100 billion years. How long stars live, is determined by their mass (which must be at least 80 Jupiter masses to sustain thermonuclear fusion of hydrogen). There are four (4) fates for the end of stars depending on their masses and the masses of their cores: Red/Brown Dwarfs - less than 0.6 Ms <== Main Sequence 0.076-0.8 Ms Stars less than about 0.6 solar masses, when nuclear fuel is used up, gravitational collapse shrinks the star, but no more than the gas temperature-pressure-volume laws of classical physics allow. We have not found any white dwarf less massive than 0.6 solar masses. Part of the answer is that the universe may not be old enough for lower mass stars to have evolved off the main sequence. White Dwarfs - 0.6 and 1.44 Ms <== Main Sequence 0.8-8 Ms Stars with core masses between 0.6 and 1.44 solar masses are destined to become white dwarfs. White dwarfs are degenerate matter. Further collapse is halted by electron degeneracy pressure. See pages 456-459 in your textbook. The vast majority of stars are in this mass range and are destined to become white dwarfs. Neutron Stars - 1.44 and 2.9 Ms <== Main Sequence 8-30 Ms Core masses between 1.44 and 2.9 solar masses overcome electron degeneracy pressure and collapse to form neutron stars, a star that is essentially one gigantic nucleus. Further collapse is halted by neutron degeneracy pressure. Black Holes - 3 or more Ms <== Main Sequence > 30 Ms But for cores with mass of 3 or more solar masses, neutron degeneracy pressure does not stop the collapse and the star becomes a black hole with zero physical size, but with all the mass. Gravity really wins! In each case, gravity eventually wins. But, to what extent is determined by the mass and the relative pressures of the quantum mechanical forces, electron and neutron degeneracy pressure.
From: Brad Guth on 13 Jun 2010 11:23 On Jun 13, 7:20 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/13/10 12:19 AM, Brad Guth wrote: > > > Supposedly the red supergiant Betelgeuse that s currently worth 16~18 > > solar mass and losing>6e24 kg/year, might easily have been an > > original stellar mass of 32, could end up being an unstable white > > dwarf of 1.6 solar mass, suggesting a 20:1 ratio. > > > ~ BG > > Ms = Solar Mass > > Review of the Final States of Stars > > Star are born and stars die... just like us. The big massive stars have > but short lives, a few millions of years. Stars like our sun last for a > good 10 billions of years, and the little red stars like Barnard's Star > might last for 100 billion years. How long stars live, is determined by > their mass (which must be at least 80 Jupiter masses to sustain > thermonuclear fusion of hydrogen). > > There are four (4) fates for the end of stars depending on their masses > and the masses of their cores: > > Red/Brown Dwarfs - less than 0.6 Ms <== Main Sequence 0.076-0.8 Ms > Stars less than about 0.6 solar masses, when nuclear fuel is used up, > gravitational collapse shrinks the star, but no more than the gas > temperature-pressure-volume laws of classical physics allow. We have > not found any white dwarf less massive than 0.6 solar masses. Part of > the answer is that the universe may not be old enough for lower mass > stars to have evolved off the main sequence. > > White Dwarfs - 0.6 and 1.44 Ms <== Main Sequence 0.8-8 Ms > > Stars with core masses between 0.6 and 1.44 solar masses are > destined to become white dwarfs. White dwarfs are degenerate matter. > Further collapse is halted by electron degeneracy pressure. See pages > 456-459 in your textbook. The vast majority of stars are in this mass > range and are destined to become white dwarfs. > > Neutron Stars - 1.44 and 2.9 Ms <== Main Sequence 8-30 Ms > Core masses between 1.44 and 2.9 solar masses overcome electron > degeneracy pressure and collapse to form neutron stars, a star that is > essentially one gigantic nucleus. Further collapse is halted by neutron > degeneracy pressure. > > Black Holes - 3 or more Ms <== Main Sequence > 30 Ms > But for cores with mass of 3 or more solar masses, neutron > degeneracy pressure does not stop the collapse and the star becomes a > black hole with zero physical size, but with all the mass. Gravity > really wins! > > In each case, gravity eventually wins. But, to what extent is > determined by the mass and the relative pressures of the quantum > mechanical forces, electron and neutron degeneracy pressure. In other words, your obfuscation is noted, as well as you have no idea where this nasty impact stuff that's capable of terminating Earth is coming from, and you'll be damned if you'll let anyone else figure it out. Are all Semites as deathly afraid of whatever Sirius represents? btw, a star doesn't get to being a red supergiant without first having lost at least a third of its original mass. ~ BG
From: Brad Guth on 13 Jun 2010 11:34 On Jun 13, 6:11 am, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote: > Brad Guth wrote: > > On Jun 12, 6:05 pm, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote: > >> You are mistaken in your interpretation. With a speed of > >> about 18.2 km/sec (combining the Sirius system's radial and > >> proper motions), and given the mass of the system as about > >> 3 solar masses, the total mechanical energy of the Sun-Sirius > >> system is about 1.67 x 10^8 J/kg, a positive value. Thus > >> the Sirius system and our solar system are not gravitationally > >> bound; their mutual trajectory will be open and hyperbolic. > > I don't agree with that subjective interpretation of yours. > > Subjective? The current mass of the Sirius system is > known from simple Newtonian mechanics. The proper motion > and radial velocity are measured. The conclusion is > drawn from the given facts via standard Newtonian orbital > mechanics. > > For any two-body gravitationally interacting bodies, > the total specific mechanical energy is given by: > > E = v^2/2 - u/r > > where: > v is the velocity > u is the gravitational parameter for the system: G*(M + m) > M and m are the masses of the bodies > G is Newton's gravitational constant > > All of the above are known values for the system under > consideration. > > There are two cases of interest for E: > > E < 0 : The system is gravitationally bound and will > exhibit a circular or elliptical orbit, or if the > proper motion is zero, a straight-line collision. > > E >= 0: The system is unbound and will exhibit parabolic > (E = 0) or hyperbolic trajectories, or if the proper > motion is zero, a straight-line collision if the > red-shift if negative, or if the red-shift is > positive, proceeding away in a straight line > indefinitely. > > So where are *your* objective facts and what are their > accredited sources? I've been sharing those for years. Where have you been for the past decade? Everything I have to interpret with, you have (unless you've intentionally blocked it). You do realize those gravitational strings that keep us associated with Sirius are way stronger than what keeps the likes of Sedna hanging around. Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius) http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html Sirius and us(our solar system) are very much indeed inseparable, at least according to those regular pesky laws of physics pertaining to the mainstream accepted notions of Newtonian gravity and orbital mechanics, that seems way more than sufficient for everything else were told to accept, and especially if little Sedna can be turned around at a tidal radii of 1.459e14 m thats worth merely 2.975e13 N, whereas Sirius at 8.6 light years and worth 1.417e17 N (roughly a 20 thousand fold stronger tidal radii grip), and to think that weve been gaining on this 3.5 solar mass of Sirius by 7.6 km/sec, plus most likely and unavoidably accelerating towards our next close cosmological encounter within a orbital period of 105,000 ~ 110,000 years, and previously more often as we go back in time. Its as though 65+ million years ago we were orbiting much closer to Sirius, and our environment especially influenced by the substantially large and vibrant spectrum of Sirius(B) wasnt exactly none too dim. The cosmic molecular cloud of what created Sirius, as being worth at least 1.25e6 solar masses, while at a center to center distance of 100 ly and using our solar system mass of 2.05e30 kg for that same era, we get the following results for 100 ly (9.46053e17 m), 50 ly (4.7303e17 m) and 10 ly (9.46053e16 m). 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 100 ly = 3.819e20 Newtons 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 50 ly = 1.528e21 N 2.05e30 kg and 2.5e36 kg at 10 ly = 3.819e22 N current (sun ~ earth) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 5.974e24 kg at 1.496e11 m = 3.541e22 N current (sun ~ mars) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 6.418e23 kg at 2.2794e11 m = 1.639e21 N current (sun ~ pluto) gravitational force of attraction: 1.989e30 and 1.305e22 kg at 5.906e12 m = 4.964e16 N current (solar system) ~ Sedna/average gravitational attraction: 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 7.867e13 m = 1.023e14 N current (solar system) ~ Sedna/aphelion gravitational attraction: 2.02e30 and 4.7e21 kg at 1.459e14 m = 2.975e13 N current (solar system) ~ Sirius gravitational force of attraction: 2.02e30 and 6.9615e30 kg at 8.1365e16 m = 1.417e17 N Not to continually nitpick, however theres also 2005-VX3 / damocloid(asteroid) of 112 km diameter as perhaps worth at most 1.47e18 kg, thats hanging with us all the way out to 2275.5 AU (3.4e14 m) thats worth merely 1.71e9 N, and apparently even its not going away from our solar system's tidal radii grip. It seems thats representing a Sirius/XV3 ratio of nearly 83e6:1 greater tidal radii hold on us, not to mention that we seem to be headed back towards Sirius at 7.6 km/s and unavoidably accelerating, exactly as any elliptical Newtonian orbital trek should. ~ BG
From: Greg Neill on 13 Jun 2010 12:02
Brad Guth wrote: > On Jun 13, 6:11 am, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote: >> Brad Guth wrote: >>> On Jun 12, 6:05 pm, "Greg Neill" <gneil...(a)MOVEsympatico.ca> wrote: >>>> You are mistaken in your interpretation. With a speed of >>>> about 18.2 km/sec (combining the Sirius system's radial and >>>> proper motions), and given the mass of the system as about >>>> 3 solar masses, the total mechanical energy of the Sun-Sirius >>>> system is about 1.67 x 10^8 J/kg, a positive value. Thus >>>> the Sirius system and our solar system are not gravitationally >>>> bound; their mutual trajectory will be open and hyperbolic. >>> I don't agree with that subjective interpretation of yours. >> >> Subjective? The current mass of the Sirius system is >> known from simple Newtonian mechanics. The proper motion >> and radial velocity are measured. The conclusion is >> drawn from the given facts via standard Newtonian orbital >> mechanics. >> >> For any two-body gravitationally interacting bodies, >> the total specific mechanical energy is given by: >> >> E = v^2/2 - u/r >> >> where: >> v is the velocity >> u is the gravitational parameter for the system: G*(M + m) >> M and m are the masses of the bodies >> G is Newton's gravitational constant >> >> All of the above are known values for the system under >> consideration. >> >> There are two cases of interest for E: >> >> E < 0 : The system is gravitationally bound and will >> exhibit a circular or elliptical orbit, or if the >> proper motion is zero, a straight-line collision. >> >> E >= 0: The system is unbound and will exhibit parabolic >> (E = 0) or hyperbolic trajectories, or if the proper >> motion is zero, a straight-line collision if the >> red-shift if negative, or if the red-shift is >> positive, proceeding away in a straight line >> indefinitely. >> >> So where are *your* objective facts and what are their >> accredited sources? > > I've been sharing those for years. Where have you been for the past > decade? I've been looking at empirically obtained facts, not your imagination generated mental farts. > > Everything I have to interpret with, you have (unless you've > intentionally blocked it). You make things up as you go along, so no, I don't have (and don't really want) what you're "sharing". > > You do realize those gravitational strings that keep us associated > with Sirius are way stronger than what keeps the likes of Sedna > hanging around. > > Gravity Force of Attraction (orbital tidal radius) > http://www.1728.com/gravity.htm > http://www.wsanford.com/~wsanford/calculators/gravity-calculator.html > > Sirius and us(our solar system) are very much indeed inseparable, at > least according to those regular pesky laws of physics pertaining to > the mainstream accepted notions of Newtonian gravity and orbital > mechanics, No, I just used those "pesky" laws to show that Sirius is certainy *Not* bound. Where are *your* calculations? > that seems way more than sufficient for everything else > we�re told to accept, and especially if little Sedna can be turned > around at a tidal radii of 1.459e14 m that�s worth merely 2.975e13 N, > whereas Sirius at 8.6 light years and worth 1.417e17 N (roughly a 20 > thousand fold stronger tidal radii grip), You are babbling. You don't even know what the terms you use mean. Tidal radius? Seriously. You also don't seem to understand that binding involves more than the magnitude of the forces to determine whether something is gravitationally bound. Momentum matters, both angular and linear. Ever hear of the concept of escape velocity? At the distance of Sirius the escape velocity from our solar system is (using u = G*(M_Sun + M_Sirius) ): u = 5.31 x 10^20 m^3/s^2 r = 8.136 x 10^16 m v_esc = sqrt(2*u/r) = 0.11 km/sec Since the Sirius system is travelling in excess of 18 km/sec relative to us, it is certainly unbound. Now let's take a look at Sedna with a semimajor axis of 7.866 x 10^13 m and an average orbital speed of 1.04 km/sec. The escape velocity from the Sun at the distance of Sedna is 1.84 km/sec, which is of course greater than Sedna's orbital speed, thus Sedna is gravitationally bound. The same result will be found by using the Mechanical Energy method that I showed you previously. [snip remainder of flotsam] |