- Thank you received: 0
Is the Sun a binary?
- MarkVitrone
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
18 years 2 months ago #16092
by MarkVitrone
Reply from Mark Vitrone was created by MarkVitrone
Nemesis,
What a fantastic and thought provoking post. I will do some reading and talking around and think on it a little. Where should this other star be? Surely we have seen it.
Mark Vitrone
What a fantastic and thought provoking post. I will do some reading and talking around and think on it a little. Where should this other star be? Surely we have seen it.
Mark Vitrone
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 2 months ago #4204
by nemesis
Replied by nemesis on topic Reply from
Thanks, Mark. One thing is pretty certain, the object can't be an ordinary star, or as you note, it would have seen and recognized for what it is long ago. This leaves an object that is massive but emits very little electromagnetic radiation. Possible candidates could be a brown dwarf, or a collapsed object like a neutron star, a supernova remnant. I favor the latter possibility myself. As for location, Cruttenden thinks the object lies in the direction of the galactic center, near the plane of the ecliptic. What data is needed to compute an orbit? Let me know what you come up with.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- MarkVitrone
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
18 years 2 months ago #4205
by MarkVitrone
Replied by MarkVitrone on topic Reply from Mark Vitrone
I would be interested in seeing some support for an object that is known to exist. Widgets will not do in a topic of this magnitude.
Mark Vitrone
Mark Vitrone
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 2 months ago #4206
by Gregg
Replied by Gregg on topic Reply from Gregg Wilson
Suppose a body is pure nucleus. Presumably it would reflect all gravitons. If the gravitons reflected have the same velocity as the gravitons coming in, does such a body have a gravitational gradient? Would you know that it is there?
However, such a body would block the gravitational flux with another body. For the moment, assume that our solar system is a single body, which we know, blocks or reflects gravitons. The line between your possible neutron star and our solar system would have a deficit of gravitons going back and forth between the two bodies. So, there would be a gravitational "hole" between them and they would be gravitationally "attached". A neutron star would have very little electromagnetic radiation. It would be "invisible".
Gregg Wilson
However, such a body would block the gravitational flux with another body. For the moment, assume that our solar system is a single body, which we know, blocks or reflects gravitons. The line between your possible neutron star and our solar system would have a deficit of gravitons going back and forth between the two bodies. So, there would be a gravitational "hole" between them and they would be gravitationally "attached". A neutron star would have very little electromagnetic radiation. It would be "invisible".
Gregg Wilson
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
18 years 2 months ago #4207
by nemesis
Replied by nemesis on topic Reply from
Mark, I'm not sure what you mean by a "widget". All candidates are potentially detectable. There are problems with an ordinary main-sequence star though. If the object were similar to the Sun, it would be the brightest star in the sky. Even a dim red dwarf would probably be naked-eye visible, if maybe not conspicuous. But it would stand out because of its very large parallax and proper motion, much greater than any other star. It's hard to see how it could have been missed. A white dwarf could be a candidate. It should be telescopically visible and could be identified by its motion like a main-sequence star. A brown dwarf would be extremely faint in the visible, radiating mainly in the infrared. The best way to detect it may be through occultation of background stars. This latter method may be the only way to pick up a collapsed object, or maybe gravitational lensing of background objects.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Larry Burford
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
18 years 2 months ago #9254
by Larry Burford
Replied by Larry Burford on topic Reply from Larry Burford
[Gregg] "If the gravitons reflected have the same velocity as the gravitons coming in, does such a body have a gravitational gradient? "
No.
[Gregg] "Would you know that it is there?"
Not from it's gravitaional properties.
[Gregg] "However, such a body would block the gravitational flux with another body."
One of the reasons that LeSagian gravity didn't catch on until recently is that 100% reflection of gravitons results in no force of attraction with other bodies. Any graviton that is reflected on one side of the body (and would therefore contribute to a deficit of gravitons leaving the other side) is replaced by a graviton reflected from that other side. IOW, no graviton shadow is produced by such a mass.
!00% absorbtion of gravitons would produce a force of attraction, but it would also heat up the masses and cause them to explode in a very short time.
A recent breakthrough was made by V J Slabinsky (see his article in <i>Pushing Gravity</i>) by using a mixture of reflected and absorbed gravitons. There is a range of mixtures that produces strong gravitational acceleration fields with small heating effects.
LB
No.
[Gregg] "Would you know that it is there?"
Not from it's gravitaional properties.
[Gregg] "However, such a body would block the gravitational flux with another body."
One of the reasons that LeSagian gravity didn't catch on until recently is that 100% reflection of gravitons results in no force of attraction with other bodies. Any graviton that is reflected on one side of the body (and would therefore contribute to a deficit of gravitons leaving the other side) is replaced by a graviton reflected from that other side. IOW, no graviton shadow is produced by such a mass.
!00% absorbtion of gravitons would produce a force of attraction, but it would also heat up the masses and cause them to explode in a very short time.
A recent breakthrough was made by V J Slabinsky (see his article in <i>Pushing Gravity</i>) by using a mixture of reflected and absorbed gravitons. There is a range of mixtures that produces strong gravitational acceleration fields with small heating effects.
LB
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.728 seconds