Helium Planets

I'm interested in all of it. Sandy Wood, on "Stardate" had a little bit on this today.

[Jim] "I'm interested in all of it"

And yet, you ask no more questions ...

***

Kind of strange. (That's not bad, just different. When most people are interested in something, they ask a lot of questions.)

Oh well. I'll be standing over here at the bar, sipping on adult beverages and nibbling on adult brownies, and learning more about physics and chatting up the ladies. (They have no chance of stealing me from my life-partner, but they don't know that and I *love* to flirt. It's an 'Al Bundy' thing.)

Let me know if you think of anything to ask. I actually enjoy sharing my knowledge. You do not have to agree. But I hope you will understand.

If you really want to think outside the box, it helps a *lot* to be familiar (very familiar) with what is inside the box. And you will be surprised to find out how much good stuff is inside the box. Think about it, hard, before you reject it.

Of course, some of it NEEDS to be rejected. But not without reason.

Regards,
LB

What about the news from SETI about the meteors from the birth of The Moon in the papers today? They say it has been determined these bits of stuff from space left a trail which SETI has calculated back to the date when The Moon came to be. Doesn't this fly in the face of EPH?

DRP postulates that the Moon came to be at about the same time as postulated by the main stream's GI (giant impactor) theory. But the mechanism (over spin and separation) is different. There are a lot of details that are similar in either scenario, however, including a lot of debris that left the vicinity of Earth and Luna but did not leave the solar system or impact another body. IOW, some of the debris could still be orbiting Sol.

If the article suggests that there can only be one source for the meteors we encounter these days, I'd take it with a grain of salt. EPH (which predates DRP - and you and me and Tom - but is now a defacto part of it) postulates that some/many of the comets and meteors we see today are leftovers from one or more planetary break up events. It does not say this is the only possible source for meteors. If you were familiar with another part of DRP - the fission theory of solar system development - you probably would not have had to ask this question.

We (mankind) simply have not been collecting data long enough for our models to be that sophisticated. Have you not noticed that the experts always disagree? They do way too much conclusion-leaping. The mathematics side of our models is much closer to "done" than the physics side.

LB

The SETI paper in confined to the six meteors landing in California a year or so ago-not all meteors.

Why do you say this would fly in the face of EPH?