Stellar Oscillations across Spiral Arms

Loss of energy, mostly to impact, permits cometary capture, whenever velocity thus falls below the escape velocity. Escape velocity will be maintained by any falling body so long as it loses no energy to such things as impact, electric currents (dynamo effect), and so on.

In the case of nuclear reactions, impact often leads to nuclear fission, or fusion of nucleii with other nuclear particles, mostly neutrons or other nucleii.

In the case of comets, the most conspicuous effects of impacts would be fission, fusion analogs. Hence my impact explanations of S1, S2 at metaresearch.org/msgboard/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=692

So one could say that the Law of Conservation of Energy forbids two body capture, so long as bodies fall freely, which they nearly always do . . .

Such use of "forbids" does not Google, presumably because Newtonian Physics is generally considered commonsensical. Fundamentalist terms such as "forbid" are seen as appropriate only in non-commonsensical Quantum Mechanics (QM). Even Relativity and String Theory seem sensible after QM.

I was wrong about something I wrote earlier: While "the particles fired at atoms in Rutherford's historic experiment were . . . strongly scattered in all directions", proving that atoms are mostly empty space, they were not: "similarly Slingshot Effect-ed". Both projectile and target nucleii were repulsively positively charged.

Peter Nielsen

Email: uusi@hotkey.net.au
Post: 12 View St, Sandy Bay 7005, Australia

Since I am trying to understand gravity the introduction of other forces only muddles me more than normal. If we can stay with gravity for a long enough time to clear up one point it would be great. The point is how a capture can be made by two bodies and it seems the capture by one body is not clearly described. You say a comet will excape a gravity field if the velocity of the comet is above excape velocity. It seems to me this is not correct because a body aimed correctly will crash into the center of the gravity field where a mass of some kind will be located. That crash will stop the comet assuming it is a small mass comet. So, how do you explain if the comet is above the excape velocity to begin with? Going beyond that exact aim a slightly off the mark aim can be altered by a third body and capture will result. It seems to me there are a lot of ways for capture to occur even if TVF says it defys dynamic laws.

Jim,
Capture does not happen easily because it requires loss of energy, most often to impact, while space is almost entirely empty. Nearly all bodies fall freely without ever being captured, around stars, across spiral arms, around galaxy centres and so on.

Note consistency of my "Loss of energy, mostly to impact, permits cometary capture, whenever velocity thus falls below the escape velocity . . ." with your impacting "body . . . crash[ing] into the center of the gravity field where a mass of some kind . . . will stop the comet, assuming it is a small mass comet."

Most Sosah proto-comets would approach the Sun fast, with more than escape velocity. They would be deflected hyperbolically, usually only slightly, and continue past the Sun, often unseen by astonomers.

"Slow" Sosah proto-comets' speeds relative to the Sun would be close to escape velocity. Their trajectories would be almost parabolic, with the Sun at the focus of the parabola. Many of these slow proto-comets would be seen as new comets. Many of their orbits would intersect the Solar System, possibly a planet or asteroid, possibly even the Sun, depending on chance, your "aim", and so on.

Such cometary orbit intersections with asteroids or planets would manifest as explosive impacts. Hence my S1, S2 at metaresearch.org/msgboard/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=692 .

Some explosion fragments would escape the Sun. Others would become new comets or asteroids in elliptical orbits, with the Sun at one of the foci. The evidence that this and/or other forms of planetary explosion have been happening is explained in TVF's eph . . .

An easy way to imagine escape and orbital velocities: A super cannon atop Mount Everest shoots horizontally. Assuming no atmosphere, the projectile has to exceed 5 miles per sec to orbit the Earth, 7 miles per sec to escape the Earth, anything less and it orbits or falls to Earth.

In reality, such projectiles would impact with the atmosphere and explode. A projectile fired at greater than the escape velocity would thus in fact remain captured, because of its loss of energy upon impacting the atmosphere.

Peter Nielsen

Email: uusi@hotkey.net.au
Post: 12 View St, Sandy Bay 7005, Australia

If you do the math you will find the fast or slow speed of approch will result in a comet being very near excape the same speed as it nears a star because of acceleration. In the real universe all the mass is found in bits we call atoms,dust,stars and in clumps we call galaxies and all are moving at about the same speed in patterns we call spirals or whatever. So, a comet if it comes from some place outside the solar system it is coming into the gravity system of the sun at a speed above the excape velocity of the sun's gravity and will slow down relative to the excape velocity as it nears the sun. It seems to me capture is a likely outcome as the comet nears the sun and that can and does happen in thr real universe. I know models say it cannot happen but that onlt means the model is in need of repair.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Peter Nielsen</i>
<br />Peter Nielsen wrote: As a physicist, I must say that it is not quite true that "the laws of dynamics forbid 2-body capture".<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The exact statement is: “2-body capture is impossible when gravitation is the only force acting.” This property of Newtonian dynamics is well known and easy to prove. Your later messages suggest that you have begun to understand why it holds.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">when we are talking about putative "Sosah" (Stellar Oscillations across Spiral Arms Hypothesis) cometary capture, the idea of comets being swept up from across the local spiral arm in the path of the Sun, the Solar System is far from being a 2-body system.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">On the contrary, for cometary capture, only the Sun has significant mass, and the 2-body rules apply. There are no significant non-gravitational forces acting in the case of comets that can assist interstellar capture. The average hypothetical interstellar comet, much like all the stars in the solar neighborhood, would have a typical rms velocity of +/- 25 km/s relative to the Sun. To capture such a high-speed body would require more energy than to vaporize it.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The trajectories of slow eph-candidate comets are bent towards the Sun across a huge cross-section, to be so seen while faster comets, their trajectories much less attracted towards the Sun, generally pass more quickly, much further away unseen . . .<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Indeed, no such interstellar comet has ever been seen, even though the law of averages says we should have seen several by now if they existed.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">This speed dependence of cometary capture probabilities would give rise to an important observational bias; slow comets would be more observable than fast comets. Has this bias been fully accounted for by astronomers?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Yes, of course. There is only a small difference in the average visibility time because zero-initial-velocity comets are traveling at 42 km/s by the time they reach the vicinity of Earth’s orbit, whereas a typical interstellar comet would have a speed of 49 km/s near Earth's orbit. -|Tom|-

Tom,
In your last posting: ". . . There are no significant non-gravitational forces acting in the case of comets that can assist interstellar capture . . . To capture such a high-speed body [as an interstellar proto-comet] would require more energy than to vaporize it."

Yes, proto-comets would generally be explosively vaporised in their impacts with planets and asteroids, but No, such explosions "can assist interstellar capture": As explained in my last posting, fragments would often be produced which ". . . would become new [eph-consistent] comets or asteroids . . . The evidence . . . is explained in TVF's eph . . ."

"[Multiscale] Sosah proto-. . . cometary orbit intersections with asteroids or planets would manifest as explosive impacts. Hence my S1, S2 at metaresearch.org/msgboard/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=692 ."

Note that S1, S2 events can be plausibly rare, of the order of ~1 S1 event per 100s of million years (myrs) , ~1 S2 event per 1,000 myr in the Solar System. Note the consistency of such rarity of these most energetic events with Sosah explanation of a much more frequent, 26 myr cycle of much lower energy terrestrial mass extinction impact events in terms of a projected Solar System 52 myr period of Sosah oscillation. Sosah impact energies are maximal at spiral arm centres because relative speeds of objects moving in opposite transverse directions are maximal there.

Multiscale Sosah impact is thus indicated, via eph, S1, S2 explanation, as a fundamental ultimate cause of cometary capture.

Peter Nielsen

Email: uusi@hotkey.net.au
Post: 12 View St, Sandy Bay 7005, Australia