Project Serpo: Postings by "Anonymous" -- Breaking news?, page 49

privacy

Pages: << 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 29 times

reply posted on 30-12-2005 @ 09:23 PM by lost_shaman

Hal9000,

The distance is given in the introduction.

Here.

The distance is given as 310" Arc Minutes.

You can go to this Site and calculate that into Light years or Kilometers.

Other sites will tell you that the two stars are 350 Billion miles apart.

When calculated the distances are actually 336,777,165,225.69 - 345,524,624,062.72 billion Miles apart at 38.5 - 39.5 LY's from Earth respectively.

[edit on 30-12-2005 by lost_shaman]

reply posted on 30-12-2005 @ 10:02 PM by torbjon

IF there is another star in the Z.R. system making for a close binary (a Very Close binary) and IF Serpo orbits it's primary at the same rate that that star orbits its primary, THEN this could be the type of orbital system they are trying to describe... note, image is not drawn to any type of scale, I just doodled some circles and dots *shrugs*

www.torbtown.com...

on the other hand, they may just trash alla the numbers they've given us and come up with some better ones *shrugs* who can tell

rock on
twj

reply posted on 30-12-2005 @ 10:30 PM by lost_shaman

Also the paper states that the Stars have abnormal gravities because they are both significantly Helium-rich.

The Stars also have a normal Metal content.

"Anonymous" mentioned nothing about the He content of Sepro's Atmosphere, and he also said Serpo was a mineral poor planet , which would not make much sense if the Z1, and Z2 are considered normal Metal Heavy Stars.

Also in Astronomy keep in mind any element above Hydrogen is considered to be a metal.

[edit on 30-12-2005 by lost_shaman]

reply posted on 30-12-2005 @ 11:41 PM by Bill Ryan

I didn't exactly shout Eureka and go running down the street naked, but I did have an "Aha" moment an hour ago and see a way in which Serpo's orbit could be stable. It was in response to reading some of these ATS posts, so many thanks.

Click here to see the diagram (this page not connected by link to the rest of the site):

www.serpo.org/orbit.html

I've run this past a physicist and an astronomer and am awaiting their response. But it looks stable to me. I don't know whether it accounts for the 865 days orbital period – calculations needed. It's a weird configuration, but would explain why the physicists had so much trouble with what Anon was saying if (a) they were thinking of only two stars, not three, and (b) they were trying to make the orbit fit plane with the two close binary suns.

Best, Bill

reply posted on 30-12-2005 @ 11:59 PM by lost_shaman

Bill Ryan,

See this site, burtleburtle.net...

Then scroll down and see , Strobe version of the 2::1 retrograde resonance.

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 12:34 AM by Centrist

Originally posted by Bill Ryan
I didn't exactly shout Eureka and go running down the street naked, but I did have an "Aha" moment an hour ago

I'm sure the neighbors were pleased that it was not a more dramatic epiphany

I looked at that orbit and think we need a good astrophysicist to look at this. It certainly looks plausible.

thanks!

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 12:46 AM by lost_shaman

As far as I can tell Close Binary Stars don't offer very many stable orbits.

Judging just on what "Anonymous" has said Serpo would be in a 1:1 ratio orbit. As far as I can tell this would not be possible.

And "Anonymous" has stated that Serpo orbits one of the two Suns.

"Anonymous" mentions several other Planets that need to have stable orbits also.

And on top of all that we have to make sure that Serpo has a tilt of 43 degrees so that the Southern Hemisphere receives most of the Sunlight in this Binary System.

And this is just my personal observation or thoughts , but I would think that a planet tilted at 43 degrees would receive so much light on one Hemisphere and so little on the other that it would not take much time geologically speaking before all of the planets water would end up locked up in the form of Ice in the Cold Hemisphere.

[edit on 31-12-2005 by lost_shaman]

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 02:10 AM by Hal9000

Originally posted by Bill Ryan
I didn't exactly shout Eureka and go running down the street naked,

Now there is an image that will stick with me.

I don't know Bill, I think your reaching with that model. I kind of like the scenerio that torbjon describes with one primary star with a companion star, and the planet is orbiting the companion. The only problem is the distance. Usually when a distance to a star is given, it is the mean or average distance. In this case the distance to the primary star would vary so much, I think it would have to be mentioned. Like I said before, we need more info from Anon.

I came across a site with a free download of software called "Starlight Pro" for modeling binary stars that might be helpful.
members.cox.net...

I have no idea how to use it, but maybe someone else can.

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 02:24 AM by mbkennel

Re the picture of the solar system.

I agree that with two stars, zeta 1 and 1a, you can have more complex configurations.

But in that system you show, what is the orbit of z1 and z1a around each other? There's nothing 'nailing' them fixed. They have to be moving too, and their combined gravity is what matters for any planet (insignificant in mass versus a Sun).

A complex tidal resonance may be feasible.

My most likely scenario is that the description on www.serpo.org is not entirely accurate scientifically and we would have to see the actual text of the report in full detail to understand it.

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 02:39 AM by mbkennel

Other things to consider:

some people have questioned the two suns saying that it would be "too hot".

Firstly, we aren't completely sure that the solar luminosity (energy output) of each star is exactly the same of our own. This can make a big difference of course.

Second, if you consider radiative temperature only (and reality is more complex) the flux coming out (which must equal that coming in) goes as T^4 (and that's T in kelvin). Hence doubling the heat increases absolute temperature by the fourth root of two, i.e. square root of about 1.41.

Third, because of the inverse square law simply by moving the radius of the planets out a little bit you can get a lower equilibrium temperature.

Fourth, the greenhouse effect has a very significant effect on the real life temperature which happens on the surface, otherwise Venus would be more like the Sahara on average instead of like the inside of a blasting convection oven. And that depends on the specific chemistry and climatology that we know nothing about.

the reports of the orbital distances, I bet would be *averages*. Our planet does not maintain a constant distance to the Sun during its orbit. It happens to change only a relatively small amount but other circumstances could be more complex.

Again, I think it is impossible to make a judgement without the full text of the purported report in question, the one with supposedl yofficial data and analysis.

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 04:35 AM by Boogie

I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but you have 2 other planets mentioned in ANON's comments: Otto and Silus

We need to remember that Silus definetly has living creatures on it. And Otto has an EBEN research base. Plus 6 planets total were mentioned in the EBEN solar system. So focusing just on Serpo and trying to make it "fit" into a habitable zone better work for at least Silus too.

Great work on some of the theories

I am learning quite a bit too.

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 04:48 AM by AmoebaSized

Zeta 2:
Designation: HD20807
ICRS 2000.0 coordinates:
RA and Dec: 03Hr 18Min 12.8189Sec -62Deg 30Min 22.907Sec
B magn, V magn, Peculiarities: 5.84, 5.24
Spectral type: G1V
Radial velocity (v:Km/s) or Redshift (z): v +11.5 [ .9] A
Parallaxes (mas): 82.79 [.53] A
Proper motion (mas/yr) [error ellipse]: 1331.01 646.97 [ .51 .51 45] A

Zeta 1:
Designation: HD20766
ICRS 2000.0 coordinates:
RA and Dec: 03Hr 17Min 46.1635Sec -62Deg 34Min 31.159Sec
B magn, V magn, Peculiarities: 6.18, 5.54
Spectral type: G2.5V
Radial velocity (v:Km/s) or Redshift (z): v +12.2 [ .9] A
Parallaxes (mas): 82.51 [.54] A
Proper motion (mas/yr) [error ellipse]: 1337.73 648.84 [ .51 .51 168] A

aladin.u-strasbg.fr...

I think according to the image that can be made Zeta 2 is above and to the left of Zeta 1, but then the image may be inverted maybe as a star field would be through a telescope.

According to the picture there, they both looked the same!

I don't think that they binary star orbit program are using PA (Position Angle) and the way the stars orbit around one another, which would be handy, if one is found.

PA - or Postion Angle according to Robert Burham, Jr. Celestrial Hanbook I think was 222 degrees, so the image seen is backwards (mirrored left to right)(maybe inverted also perhaps) when viewed there by Aladin Sky Atlas.

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 05:00 AM by lost_shaman

Originally posted by AmoebaSized

According to the picture there, they both looked the same!

No surprise as they are both G Class Stars.

The high He content of the stars does explain the low intensities , High Gravity ,and high UV spectrum. Otherwise known as radiation.

One more thing , according to the Paper , Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 move along together on the same plain they do not rotate around each other. Rather they do seem to share a center of gravity, or " Physical Relationship".

I guess that some of the stuff about Radiation from "Anonymous" would be correct.

Now , If Serpo has a Gravity of 9.60 m/s2 , I do not understand why that would have impressed Carl Sagan to think that was something he could not comprehend as stated by " Anonymous". This again is a statement that makes no sense to me.

Earth's gravity is something like 9.800723 m/s2 , so serpo's gravity would be or should be easily comparable to that of Serpo's. What would Carl Sagan have had a problem with? The two Planet's are also comparable in size according to "Anonymous", right?

[edit on 31-12-2005 by lost_shaman]

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 10:07 AM by torbjon

More circles and dots…

okay, what about this, the primary is ZR1 (or ZR2) the secondary is a Jupiter type planet that ignited into a star. Otto, Silus, and three other planets orbit the primary, Serpo orbits the secondary….

Basically Serpo is just a big moon orbiting a Jupiter sized sun in a system much like our own…

www.torbtown.com...

(not to scale, three outer planets not included, but you can see what I’m getting at, and if you're Not seeing the new image, trying hitting Reload or Refresh on your browser...)

(and I Still think the whole thing is fishy even though I’m drawing little doodles, so there *laughs*)

rock on
twj

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 10:51 AM by Gazrok

the thing that gets me Gaz is that you and me both know the term Flying saucer is completely wrong to begin with.

in regards to the actual physical description of what "it" was.

Very fluid like, almost crescent shaped, with an organic biological feel to it. similar to a manta ray.

Oh well.

True, but remember the term came more from Arnold's description of HOW they flew..."like a saucer if skipped on a lake"... THAT's where we get "flying saucers"....Arnold's sighting, and several others in the time period, were more chevron-shaped craft....more akin to a flying wing than an actual saucer.

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 03:02 PM by AmoebaSized

This data is the best data we have at this time about Zeta 1 & 2 Reticuli.
It is long, but bear along, and the links are given to where the data was obtained from.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Zeta(2) Reticuli: 39.3952 light-years, class G1 V
Zeta(1) Reticuli: 39.5288 light-years, class G2 V

Zeta 2:
Spectral class: G1
Luminosity Class: V
Apparent visual magnitude: +5.24
Absolute visual magnitude: +4.83
Visual luminosity: 1.020 x Sol
Color indices: B-V= +0.60
Mass: 1 x Sol
Diameter: 0.987 x Sol
Source for diameter: Apparent Diameters and Absolute Radii of Stars (Fracassini+ 1988)
Comfort Zone (visual): 1.010 A.U.s
Orbital period in CZ: 1.01469 years
Tidal index in CZ: 0.971251
Angular size of star in sky in CZ: 0.520878 degrees

Proper names: Zeta(2) Reticuli, Zeta Reticuli
Catalog numbers:
Gliese (Gl) 138, Henry Draper (HD) 20807, Cape Photographic Durchmusterung (CPD) -62°265 , Luyten Half-Second (LHS) 172 , Hipparcos Input Catalog (HIC) 15371, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) 248774, Hoffleit Bright Star (HR) 1010, Luyten Two-Tenth (LTT) 1576
Age: 8700 million years
Source for age: B. Edvardsson et al., "Chemical Evolution of the Galactic Disc", A&AP 275
Heavy element abundance: 73% of Sol
Standard error in heavy element abundance: 21%
Source for heavy element abundance: Strobel [Fe/H] Determinations
Arity: singular
Points of interest:
This star and Zeta(1) Reticuli may actually form a binary system. If so, the two stars are at least 5500 A.U. apart in space, which would give them a very very long orbital period.
B. Edvardsson et al. arrived at a metallicity of 55% of Sol for this star, based on their measured iron-to-hydrogen ratio of 59% of the Solar value.

Right Ascension and Declination: 3h18m12.81s, -62°30'23" (epoch 2000.0)
Distance from Sol: 39.40 light-years (12.08 parsecs)
Standard error in distance: 0.6361%
Source for distance: Hipparcos
Celestial (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: 11.80, 13.84, -34.95
Galactic (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: 4.025, -26.44, -28.93
Proper motion: 1.483 arcsec/yr (63.7° from north)
Radial Velocity: 11.5 km/sec
Source for proper motion and radial velocity: Gliese
Galactic (U,V,W) velocity components in km/s: -70.05, -46.35, 16.94

www.stellar-database.com...

Zeta 1:
Spectral class: G2
Luminosity Class: V
Apparent visual magnitude: +5.53
Absolute visual magnitude: +5.11
Visual luminosity: 0.786 x Sol
Color indices: B-V= +0.64
Mass: 0.9 x Sol
Diameter: 0.912 x Sol
Source for diameter: Apparent Diameters and Absolute Radii of Stars (Fracassini+ 1988)
Comfort Zone (visual): 0.887 A.U.s
Orbital period in CZ: 321.369 days
Tidal index in CZ: 1.29173
Angular size of star in sky in CZ: 0.548307 degrees

Proper names: Zeta(1) Reticuli, Zeta Reticuli
Catalog numbers:
Gliese (Gl) 136, Henry Draper (HD) 20766, Cape Photographic Durchmusterung (CPD) -63°217 , Luyten Half-Second (LHS) 171 , Hipparcos Input Catalog (HIC) 15330, Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) 248770, Hoffleit Bright Star (HR) 1006
Heavy element abundance: 71% of Sol
Standard error in heavy element abundance: 21%
Source for heavy element abundance: Strobel [Fe/H] Determinations
Arity: singular
Points of interest:
This star and Zeta(2) Reticuli may actually form a binary system. If so, the two stars are at least 5500 A.U. apart in space, which would give them a very very long orbital period.

Right Ascension and Declination: 3h17m46.12s, -62°34'30.1" (epoch 2000.0)
Distance from Sol: 39.53 light-years (12.12 parsecs)
Standard error in distance: 0.6502%
Source for distance: Hipparcos
Celestial (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: 11.84, 13.83, -35.09
Galactic (X,Y,Z) coordinates in ly: 4.097, -26.52, -29.02
Proper motion: 1.495 arcsec/yr (63.2° from north)
Radial Velocity: 12.2 km/sec
Source for proper motion and radial velocity: Gliese
Galactic (U,V,W) velocity components in km/s: -71.24, -46.81, 16.08

www.stellar-database.com...

What do these fields mean?
www.stellar-database.com...

Comfort Zone: This is the distance, in Astronomical Units, at which we're pretty sure a planet may orbit this star and support life on its surface. (One Astronomical Unit is the mean distance from the Earth to the sun.) Much closer and the life forms would fry, or the air and water would evaporate; much further and life forms would freeze. Note that, since humankind has only ever stumbled across one planet where we know for sure that life exists, it's hard to generalize about the range of conditions under which life as we know it could arise; thus, the comfort "zone" is listed as a single distance, being the distance a planet would have to be from the star to receive precisely as much light as the Earth does from the sun. Note also that even if an Earth-like planet were present at the comfort zone distance, other factors could make such a planet uninhabitable (like if the star occasionally emits large, lethal flares).
The comfort zone distance in A.U.s is computed by simply taking the square root of the star's luminosity in solar units, since the light received by a planet falls off with the square of its distance from the star. In the Internet Stellar Database, I've cheated a little bit by using the visual luminosity (the luminosity passing through a filter that approximates our own eyes' bias) as the basis for the comfort zone. This is reasonable for yellowish stars like our sun, but doesn't work as well for very cool or very hot stars. Cool red stars tend to emit more of their energy in the infrared portion of the spectrum, while hot blue stars tend to emit more energy at frequencies higher than the visual "peak" frequency. I should really be using the bolometric luminosity (the energy emitted at all frequencies), but bolometric data are pretty hard to find for most stars.
Orbital period in CZ: If a planet, whose mass was small compared with the star, were in a circular orbit about this star in its comfort zone, this entry shows how long the "year" on that planet would be. (This figure is related both to the distrance the planet is from the star and the mass of the star itself. More massive stars demand faster orbits, but greater distances both take longer to traverse and require that the orbiting object be moving more slowly.) The exact relationship for a planet orbiting at any distance is P2 = A3/M, where M is the mass of the star in solar masses, P is the orbital period in Earth years, and A is the semimajor axis (radius) of the orbit in Astronomical Units. Conveniently, for the Earth's orbit around the sun, all three of these values — P, A, and M — are equal to 1.
Tidal Index in CZ: If a planet were in a circular orbit about this star in its comfort zone, this entry shows how strong the star's tidal forces would be on said planet, relative to the strength of the Sun's tidal forces on Earth. A very high Tidal Index means that any such planet would quickly become locked in synchronous rotation around the star, so that the same side of the planet faces the star at all times (in the same way that the moon is locked in synchrorous rotation around the Earth).
Angular size in sky in CZ: If a planet were in a circular orbit about this star in its comfort zone, this entry shows how big the star would appear to an observer on the surface of said planet. The Earth's sun subtends an angle of about 0.5 degrees.
Detected companions: If any actual planets or brown dwarfs have been detected around this star, directly or indirectly, the number so discovered will be mentioned here. The "Points of Interest" field (above) will likely have a more in-depth description as to what is known about these unseen objects.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Now:
Zeta 2:
Mass: 1 x Sol
Diameter: 0.987 x Sol
Source for diameter: Apparent Diameters and Absolute Radii of Stars (Fracassini+ 1988)
Comfort Zone (visual): 1.010 A.U.s
Orbital period in CZ: 1.01469 years
Tidal index in CZ: 0.971251
Angular size of star in sky in CZ: 0.520878 degrees

Comfort Zone would be compared to Earth around our Sun (Sol) 1.010 A.U. s units or 1 A.U. is 93,000,000 miles between the Earth and Sun, so a planet they think to be in a CZ around Zeta 2 would be slightly further away than Earth is from our Sun -- or 1.010 times 93,000,000 miles.

Zeta 1:
Mass: 0.9 x Sol
Diameter: 0.912 x Sol
Source for diameter: Apparent Diameters and Absolute Radii of Stars (Fracassini+ 1988)
Comfort Zone (visual): 0.887 A.U.s
Orbital period in CZ: 321.369 days
Tidal index in CZ: 1.29173
Angular size of star in sky in CZ: 0.548307 degrees

For Zeta 1, an Earth like planet should be only the CZ of 0.887 AU. or closer to that Sun than our Earth is to our Sun away, so 0.887 times 93,000,000 miles away for a habitable planet.

This is the best known data about that star system!
The stars do orbit around one another in a very long orbital period. However that is hard to determine as it may take many years of our time to really figure that out.

Orbital period is for an Earth-like planet and the length of the year --- or 321.369 days and 1.01469 years compared to our 365.2522 days around our Sun for the Earth!

A planet has to be in a Critical Zone Distance away from a Sun, or so according to Dr. Carl Sagan to obtain -- life!
That is what they go by now, as distance away from a Sun to obtain an Earth-like Planet.

So, unlike the postings -- the best estimate of having life would be that data above about the distance for a Earth-like planet around either of those 2 Suns (stars) there in that System. Yes, I suppose it could be different, but then that is what the astronomers go by for comparing anything in the Heavens for any Earth-like Planet around any other star up there.

Zeta 2 planet would be looked for at around 82, 491,000 miles from that Sun.
Zeta 1 planet would be looked for at around 93, 930,000 miles from that Sun.
That gives slightly different data than what Anonymous is posting for the distance away for Planet Serpo.
(96 million miles and 91 million miles away).

The Suns are relavtively the same size as our Sun -- (Mass: 1 x Sol)
(Diameter: 0.987 x Sol) for Zeta 2 and (Mass: 0.9 x Sol)
(Diameter: 0.912 x Sol) for Zeta 1.
Sol is our Sun's name!
We compare anything like Planets and Suns to our Solar System.
Source for distance: Hipparcos
Hipparcos is/was a satellite launched back in 1988 or so, and a website is still up for the data that satellite observed.
Any stars up in the sky are in different catalogs and combined as data anyone can look up, and usually kept by NASA with many websites and many catalogs of data.

[edit on 31-12-2005 by AmoebaSized]

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 03:31 PM by torbjon

outstanding research!

however, keep in mind that we're talking about a Magic solar system where:

"It was determined that Kepler's Laws did not apply to that solar system."

and

"One of the things our Earth-based scientists learned was not to apply Earth's laws of physics in a universal way."

so basically anything goes and nothing we do here really matters.

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 03:55 PM by waffleprime

so basically...he's saying that their still an eben still in a base somewhere..from what I got out of the whole things....who up for going to capture him! we can sneak him into denny's for the grand slam!

reply posted on 31-12-2005 @ 07:49 PM by Serpentime

Originally posted by torbjon

outstanding research!

however, keep in mind that we're talking about a Magic solar system...

The analysis here is fascinating.

And that is some outstanding research on Reticulum... (My admiration to all of the posters. I will definitely check into it.)

...but I still think that we need to know more about what's going on behind the scenes.

In other words:

"Before getting into a boat, it is always wise to know exactly what the boat is floating in..." --Anonymous (A different one.)

Just my thoughts,

Please carry on...

Serpentime

reply posted on 1-1-2006 @ 03:02 PM by AmoebaSized

We shall fly there with our Digitized Data and 3-D programs first:

Hipparcos Website:
sci.esa.int...

The Digital Universe: (something that I may need):
sci.esa.int...

Explains the Digital Universe:
www.naturalhistorymag.com...://www.naturalhistorymag.com/0404/0404_feature.html

Download the Digital Universe:
www.haydenplanetarium.org...

Addition data about the Earth:
Sol (our Sun):
www.stellar-database.com...

Spectral class: G2
Luminosity Class: V
Apparent visual magnitude: -26.72
Absolute visual magnitude: +4.85
Visual luminosity: 1 x Sol
Color indices: B-V= +0.65, U-B= +0.10
Mass: 1 x Sol
Diameter: 1 x Sol
Comfort Zone (visual): 1 A.U.s
Orbital period in CZ: 1 years
Tidal index in CZ: 1
Angular size of star in sky in CZ: 0.533111 degrees
Detected companions: 8 (actually Pluto and Charon are not really considered to be a planet anymore since 17 new objects were found in the Kuiper Belt, some of which are bigger in size than Pluto, but we like Pluto and still refer to it as a Planet anyway! Neptune is the real last Planet!)

www.stellar-database.com...

Perhaps:
785,586,000,000 miles between Zeta 1 & 2 (correct to 785 billion miles)
0.1336 light-years apart. (5,880,000,000,000 or 5.88 trillion miles for a light-year -- or the distance traveled by light in a year -- 300,000 km/sec).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And we shall use the Throne that God gave us and had to be invented --- The Crapper ---- as the name of the person who invented it -- was named --- Thomas Crapper!
And in Australia due to gravity, you would be upside down and sideways, but which way is -- out!
And where are you perfectly sideways on this Planet Earth:
Earthlings? !

Freedom!
Just some humor!

[edit on 1-1-2006 by AmoebaSized]

[edit on 1-1-2006 by AmoebaSized]