Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated - Requiem for Relativity
Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated
Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Astrophysics
 Gravity & Relativity
 Requiem for Relativity
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author  Topic Next Topic
Page: of 72

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 24 Mar 2007 :  17:48:32  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I think we should be thinking about going there An ion rocket engine will give us some good data on aether density, maybe a few more relativity experiments as well as that. What's the next launch window for this brute? As it would have to be sent round the houses to get up to speed. I would hate to watch the launch, then pop my clogs before it gets there
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 24 Mar 2007 :  18:13:11  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Telescope aiming directions: large distant planet Barbarossa in our solar system

Here are aiming directions for March 30, but they're good for the
next 10 days, because this predicted magnitude +17.3 reddish
planet, "Barbarossa", is so far away (190 AU), that it doesn't move
very fast at opposition:

1. Find the 5th magnitude star 14epsilon Crater (the constellation
Crater is S of Leo).

2. Using a finder scope, move slightly more than 1.0 degree NE by N,
to find two unnamed stars, one 7th & one 8th mag, which make
the "crossbar" of the "T" (a very short crossbar) with the star 14epsilon
Crater.

3. Move 0.7 degree straight N of the middle of the "crossbar" in #2.
The 10th mag star there is only 3' NW from my "best" calculated
position for "Barbarossa". My "next best" calculated position
(different method with alternative data) is 11' N of this 10th mag
star.

4. If your field of view is well over 14', aim 4' N of the 10th mag
star in #3. If your field of view is *much* bigger than 14', simply
aim at the 10th mag star, if you wish.

Sincerely,
Joseph C. Keller, M. D.
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 25 Mar 2007 :  07:26:16  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Here's the general lay of the land, 14 epsilon crater is marked and a little left of centre. If you like I can put up a bigger map from flickr but that will make the page wider and make it awkward to read posts. Maybe Joe, download it and mark up the image.

Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 26 Mar 2007 :  22:04:29  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Thanks for the map! It's excellent. The 7th & 8th mag stars I mention are visible on it. Simply go 0.7 deg N from their midpoint.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 26 Mar 2007 :  22:06:54  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
To: Joan Genebriera, Tacande Observatory, Canary Islands
From: Joseph C. Keller, M. D.
Re: search for planet Barbarossa, your second photo made 49 hr ago.

Congratulations, you found it!

Two or three bodies forming a line roughly parallel to the ecliptic (i.e., also to Barbarossa's presumed orbit) spread over about 6", of summed magnitude (by comparison with nearby USNO-B catalog stars) +18 to 18.5, are found in the lower right corner near

RA 11h 26m 22.2s Decl -09deg 04' 59"

This object is not in the USNO-B catalog. Nearby cataloged objects include

USNO-B 0809-0228748
USNO-B 0809-0228758
USNO-B 0809-0228763
USNO-B 0809-0228757.

It does not appear on the Aladin Optical Red, Optical Blue, nor Optical Infrared images. I note that the exposure was short. The presence of two or three points of light aligned with the ecliptic, argues against an asteroid or detection artifact.

The object is 30s W of its estimated RA (correcting for Earth parallax) which corresponds to a 2800 yr period for circular orbit. It is 2.4' ecliptic latitude S of its predicted track (by the second prediction method, i.e., that by which this photo was directed).

Sincerely,
Joseph C. Keller, M. D.
March 26, 2007

>From: Joan Genebriera <PLEIADES@telefonica.net>
>To: josephkeller100@hotmail.com
>Subject: New planet ?
>Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 15:33:47 +0100
...
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 26 Mar 2007 :  23:32:13  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Joan Genebriera is an amateur astronomer from Barcelona, Spain, now working in the Canary Is. The photo was taken with a 16" Cassegrain telescope from 2500ft elevation at 29deg N latitude. The low elevation and equatorial latitude argue against a cosmic ray artifact, though presumably electronic sensors, not photographic film, were used.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 27 Mar 2007 :  15:20:22  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I've emailed Joan Genebriera's photo of Barbarossa, to "Stoat", but I'm unable to cut & paste it into this window. If you would like to have the photo, please email me or Stoat. He's been successful posting astronomical photos here; he might be able to post this photo of Barbarossa.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 27 Mar 2007 :  15:35:44  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
In the 0.7" resolution photo by Joan Genebriera (electronic, not a scan of film) Barbarossa is north of the date "25" printed in the lower right corner. Barbarossa & its apparent moon are nearer the edge than the bottom. Together with the moon, and three stars to the NW, they make a line of five points of light.
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 28 Mar 2007 :  04:28:43  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Here's that image, I reduced its size, so that it wouldn't create problems with the text window. Has Joan put up the fits file on the web?



Go to Top of Page

nemesis

84 Posts

Posted - 28 Mar 2007 :  09:24:38  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Stoat, in the blowup I assume Barbarossa and its moon are directly over the "25" about 1/3 of the way from top to bottom?
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 28 Mar 2007 :  19:42:08  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Letter re: identification, of Barbarossa candidate, as asteroid

Dear Ms. Genebriera & Mr. Riley [Steve Riley, amateur astronomer, USA],

I compared all of Mr. Riley's photo to its counterpart, Ms. Genebriera's photo "Barbarossa_3" (i.e., the photo with the more northerly coordinates, on which I saw the candidate object). Also I compared them to the SERC DSS2 (Red filter) image in the Aladin archive. Both photos showed excellent correspondence to the archive image.

Other than the candidate object on Ms. Genebriera's photo, I saw nothing on either photo that did not match the DSS2 image (except for obvious very slight defects). In particular, I saw nothing retrograde thereof on Mr. Riley's photo.

I spoke lengthily yesterday with *********, to whom I had emailed Ms. Genebriera's photo. His opinion was that the candidate object was *not* a cosmic ray artifact.

So, it might have been an asteroid on Ms. Genebriera's photo. An asteroid would be out of the field of view of Mr. Riley's photo. A trans-Neptunian object, even as close as 30 AU from the sun (which would give 5 arcminutes motion in 3.2 days now, near opposition) would have been inside the field of view (centered on the candidate object).

Thank you both for your assistance. This initial negative result neither proves nor disproves the existence of a distant planet shepherding a point of the 5:2 Jupiter:Saturn resonance. The 1987 SERC image I discovered, is consistent with such a planet.

I'll forward to both of you, any important information I acquire in the future about this. Meanwhile, if either of you take more photos along the ecliptic in this area, I will give my full attention to their analysis.

Sincerely,

Joseph C. Keller, M. D.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 28 Mar 2007 :  19:50:03  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by nemesis

Stoat, in the blowup I assume Barbarossa and its moon are directly over the "25" about 1/3 of the way from top to bottom?



[I'll answer since I'm online. - JK] Nemesis, you're correct. Also, in the top picture, it's 1/4 of the way up from the bottom.

It didn't show up in Steve Riley's verification photo. Almost all the stars, even much dimmer ones, did, so now I think it's an asteroid, maybe one with irregular shape or albedo, hence the double appearance.

- Joe Keller
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 29 Mar 2007 :  00:23:12  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
The theoretical mass of Barbarossa, 0.0068 solar mass, and distance from the sun, 191 AU, cause gravitational tidal force which comprises part of the anomalous acceleration of Pioneer 10 & 11. O. Oelsen, Astronomy & Astrophysics 463:393+, 2007, Table 1, p. 395, gives, for each of three time intervals for Pioneer 10 & one time interval for Pioneer 11, three different estimates of the anomalous acceleration by different investigators. The standard deviation of these three investigations (considered as a meta-analysis) roughly given by half the range, varies from 1% to 4%, depending on which of the four time intervals is considered. Oelsen remarks that measurement error is believed to be small compared to the differences (~ 10%) observed between time intervals generally.

Using probe distances and heliocentric ecliptic coordinates from "lewes.gsfc.nasa.gov" via "nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov", and a slide rule, I exactly calculated the sunward tidal acceleration due to Barbarossa, for the midpoint of each interval (by tidal, I mean the difference between that at the probe and that at the sun). Subtracting this from the mean of the three values given by Oelsen for each interval, makes these four measurements of the Pioneer anomaly accurately conform to a simple rule:

Rule: [see post of April 24 below for more accurate rule. - Joe Keller]

...


JD Anderson et al, 1998, also quantified a sunward anomalous acceleration for the Galileo and Ulysses probes. For these probes, sunward was grossly different from Earthward or along the velocity vector or along the spin axis. Anderson's estimates, though rough, confirm that the acceleration is sunward, not along those other directions. Anderson's 1998 figures for these nearby probes, fit 7.0 considerably better than 3.5. However, recent authors suggest that Anderson's corrections, more important in the nearby solar system, were inaccurate, and that the true figures might be smaller or zero.
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 29 Mar 2007 :  01:50:06  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi Joe, does this mean that we've lost a newly found asteroid? Now I believe that there are astronomers who do nothing else but look for asteroids. Don't they have to be reported? This might be a useful argument to get people to point telescopes at the region of sky where the planet may be.

These look like the people to see about reporting asteroids. There's also links to some telescope arrchives. I tried to use one but it just didn't recognise that I had put in the coordinates. That might be down to my using an apple mac.

I can't put the link up for some reason. Do a google for the, minor planet center.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 29 Mar 2007 :  14:09:56  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Stoat

Hi Joe, does this mean that we've lost a newly found asteroid? Now I believe that there are astronomers who do nothing else but look for asteroids. Don't they have to be reported? This might be a useful argument to get people to point telescopes at the region of sky where the planet may be.

These look like the people to see about reporting asteroids. There's also links to some telescope arrchives. I tried to use one but it just didn't recognise that I had put in the coordinates. That might be down to my using an apple mac.

I can't put the link up ror some reason. Do a google for the, minor planet center.



This asteroid was photographed on a ten-minute exposure, so, the length of the track is consistent with the distance to the orbit of, say, Ceres. (This is inaccurate because not only is the length of the track vague, but increased Earth parallax for nearer asteroids is somewhat compensated by their faster revolution.)

This asteroid might have bright spots on its surface. Assuming it has the relatively high albedo of Ceres (9%), it would be 3km across based on its magnitude, +18.3 by comparison with nearby cataloged stars.
Go to Top of Page

Joe Keller

USA
957 Posts

Posted - 30 Mar 2007 :  00:55:53  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
I found another disappearing dot, again on a scanned archival Red plate (absent from two other archival Red scanned plates, also one archival Blue and one archival Optical Infrared). Its Red magnitude is +17.8 by comparison with a nearby star with stable catalog magnitudes. Its coordinates are

RA 11 03 12.4 Decl -5 58 09

This is a POSS I Palomar plate from 1954.154. The position is quite consistent with the track, the period and the 1987 archival object (est. Red mag +17.3) discussed above.

Tonight's coordinates, based on great-circle extrapolation & corrected for Earth parallax are

RA 11 25 49.4 Decl -9 03 02.

Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 30 Mar 2007 :  04:28:08  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Can you say what its ascending node is, and its inclination to the ecliptic, Joe? I thought I'd add it to my planets in the program "Starry Night Back Yard" You might want to donload a demo copy of that and see if it lets you add a planet in demo mode. Setting up a planet is pretty easy as it's all done by sliders, and it does some of the maths for you, like working out the planet's year. About 2600 for this one at 191 AU.
Go to Top of Page

cosmicsurfer

USA
507 Posts

Posted - 30 Mar 2007 :  15:13:02  Show Profile  Visit cosmicsurfer's Homepage  Send cosmicsurfer a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
Hi Joe,

Sure enjoying your posts! Wondering about pioneer anomaly, mass accelerations, and the phenomenon of time delayed echo’s of images. Your astute calculations indicated the pioneer anomaly was caused by a zone of differential acceleration towards gravitational center of Sun. Boundary zones of resonance around our solar system may exist where FTL accelerations are more concentrated as they enter this scale. If all mass acceleration is the result of a collapsing higher scale FTL fields (we cannot see because these fields exist outside of our spectrum view plane), then could shells of concentrated resonant electromagnetic fields surrounding solar systems and galaxies result in lensed time delayed echoes of images revealing light wave splitting of image from these boundary zones?

Just how images bounce back and forth on there way through the Elysium or Aether may reveal where these boundary zones exist. A slightly skewed field may bounce the light waves in such a way that reveal a time delayed portion of the spectrum resulting in double images. Space is certainly not empty and from my perspective if you were to look at space from a higher scale viewpoint and were able to take a picture (beyond the frequencies of light) of Universe, all mass in this scale would appear as empty holes/space and then the negative space would reveal bands of extreme frequency energies as they collapsed into this scale. The viewer suddenly would realize that everything we presently see as Universe was the result of this FTL interactions with lower frequency light waves and matter. So, that 90% of the Universe rather then being Dark Matter is now higher scale higher frequency wave forms collapsing into this lower frequency electromagnetic spectrum of light creating mass and accelerations. Just some thoughts….

John
Go to Top of Page

Stoat

United Kingdom
964 Posts

Posted - 31 Mar 2007 :  07:45:44  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hi John, it's something I've been thinking about too. if we say that half of the energy of matter at rest is this "atmospere" of aether and that this falls off as an inverse fourth power. Then, I think that this extremely rigid substance has a slight curve to it. Of course we don't know the ratio of light speed to gravity speed but I like the idea that of it being in the region of pi times 10 billion. A few constants actually start to get into the right ball park with that ratio.

Put matter in motion and it tries to to get to equilibrium, it rebalances its aether energy, so that it's no longer half and half. It rotates faster. A planet going near light speed will not flatten but speed up its rotation.

On this brown dwalf. I don't think that it was formed from the sun in a fission process. Much more likely that it was an early break up of the cosmic cloud. So, lets say that two aether "bubbles" form. Where they meet, do we get an almost flat disk of aether energy density, which would have a massive surface area but little volume. Also thiis surface area would more than likely have fractal properties. Boundaries have different surface areas for different frequencies. Such a disk, at the 54 Au mark"?" would have interesting properties.

Bode's Law; well it's not a law but we should expect that there is something to do with resonances going on here. Suppose we say that, in order for a solar system like ours to happen, we need a brown dwarf to direct the Sun's fission of planetary mass objects. No brown dwalf and the sun will still fission off planets but they will be closer in to the parent.
Go to Top of Page

cosmicsurfer

USA
507 Posts

Posted - 31 Mar 2007 :  15:04:15  Show Profile  Visit cosmicsurfer's Homepage  Send cosmicsurfer a Yahoo! Message  Reply with Quote
Hi Stoat, excellent post yes I agree most likely "break up of the cosmic cloud" is a typical process mimicking overall motions of Universe. The original plasma begins to rotate as a dipole and two electromagnetic fields produce spin at top and bottom in reverse directions. This spin causes the plasma to divide in half or variations there of and that is how you gain two opposing rotational stars and the splitting of “cosmic cloud” mass causes a trailing of plasmas following the greater gravitational center or larger sun. So that the binary star system is the normal causation for planetary structure not a fission process, which may also be a later function of the gravity differences between centers.

Accretion is constant from higher scales feeding like a spring that is attached to every atom. I see all matter as a condensate of the slowing down of this higher frequency constant connection from the higher scales. To include as you correctly understood both boundary resonant conditions and fractals. Galaxies are like gemstones in their brilliance and repetitive fractals that appear to fall into an infinite center (galaxies really move in two directions from collapsing fields inwards to outwards motion of mass formed in creational zones, and resonance boundary zones).

As you said, the inverse square rule certainly does apply but maybe what we are not seeing is this “fall off” zones near boundaries are literally not of this scale high frequencies concentration regions that are the result of a shock wave resonating off of the centers of gravity. So that the collapsing field “hits a wall” of resonating boundary zones and falls off from that point out into space around mass subject to the inverse square rule (of combined gravitational centers of mass).

I have really enjoyed the great science involved in your guys search for our brown dwarf sister sun. I would think that there will be one large trailing component found of comets and other trailing destruction of asteroids. Most star systems are binary because that is the common shape of Universe. Two opposing fields in reverse rotation and that is why I will say that until we understand that nothing can exist period with out time going in two directions (as it is attempting to collapse back to zero time) we will still be flailing around in the water without a paddle: Trying to fabricate all kinds of work arounds to describe the unusual conditions of motion that we observe from false big bangs, to dark matter that does not exist. Thanks to TVF first bringing forward the idea of (multiple scales, FTL CG impacts) high frequency higher scale attributes of Universe, we can now see that all mass is generated as a component of this constant streaming of FTL collapsing fields around all mass.

john


Go to Top of Page
Page: of 72  Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Paradoxes Resolved, Origins Illuminated © © 2002-? Meta Research Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.95 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.03