Ok if that's a proof, can you please explain it to usThe proper motion of Sirius relative to the Solar System exceeds the escape velocity.
along with the difference in Sirius' motion (slower, more stable) relative to the "fixed" rotation of the Zodiac stars ie: why this is the case
As prof. Jed Buchwald has pointed "Sirius remains about the same distance from the equinoxes — and so from the solstices — throughout these many centuries, despite precession." [7] For the same reason, the helical rising (or zenith) of Sirius does not slip through the calendar (at the precession rate of about one day per 71.6 years), as other stars do. This remarkable stability within the solar year may be one reason that the Egyptians used it as a basis for their calendar whereas no other star would have sufficed.
The lunisolar theory of precession requires that the earth wobble enough to lose one complete rotation on its axis and one revolution around the sun (relative to the fixed stars) per precession cycle. Modern astronomers now measure the rate of precession via radio telescopes fixed on distant quasars and a process known as Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI) confirms the earth changes orientation to the stars at about 50.3 arc seconds p/y, equating to one complete precession of the equinox in about 25,700 years. Nonetheless, Sirius, due to its proper motion, remains practically stationary making it the ideal marker for ancient Egyptian planning purposes.
en.wikipedia.org...
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NewAgeMan
As I've pointed out twice before. Read the last sentence.
Originally posted by NewAgeMan
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NewAgeMan
The Sun is like a comet, dragging the planets in its wake
The Sun is not like a comet.
The planets are not dragged it its wake.
Comets do not have a wake. They have tails which are pushed off of them by the solar wind.
Comets do not have objects orbiting them.
this thread is enjoyable as a learning experience for those of us who don't already know everything there is to know about the motions and relationships involved.Perhaps listening to what is being said and looking at the evidence instead of contradicting it would make the experience even more enjoyable.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by galactix
because we rotate about the dog star.You mean revolve?
You claim Sirius is stationary. If we are revolving around it, shouldn't its position change? The position of the Sun changes as we revolve around it.
you are being just like the clergy who refused to believe that the earth orbited the sun.Oh, they believed Galileo. They had to because his evidence was irrefutable. They just couldn't publicly acknowledge what he told them. Wouldn't have been politically prudent.
if we look at sirius every year at this time and compare it to a stationary referance on earth. it stays stillAlmost. Because it's apparent motion almost matches the apparent motion caused by precession.
The calcs have been doneYes. The proper motion of Sirius relative to the Solar System is much greater than the escape velocity.
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by NewAgeMan
The Sun is like a comet, dragging the planets in its wake
The Sun is not like a comet.
The planets are not dragged it its wake.
Comets do not have a wake. They have tails which are pushed off of them by the solar wind.
Comets do not have objects orbiting them.
this thread is enjoyable as a learning experience for those of us who don't already know everything there is to know about the motions and relationships involved.Perhaps listening to what is being said and looking at the evidence instead of contradicting it would make the experience even more enjoyable.
thats like saying that the earth does not drag the moon along in its wake.
Originally posted by eriktheawful
Our sun does not orbit Sirius.
As pointed out in another thread, Sirius has a proper motion of 1.2 arcseconds/year in declination and .546 arcseconds per year in right ascension, this gives it 15 km/sec and 6.8 km/sec velocity relative to our solar system.
The distance to Sirius is about 8.6 light years. Both Sirius A and B have a combined mass of 3 times that of our sun. Given that mass and the distance from Sirius, the escape velocity is at 0.1 km/s, meaning that with our sun moving at 220 km/s it can not be in orbit about the Sirius system.
The Sirius system is also much younger than our sun at somewhere between 200 million to 300 million years old (verses the 4.5 billion year age of our sun), which means that our sun could not have been orbiting a star that didn't exist when it formed.
Sirius is moving towards our solar system and over the next 60,000 years will continue to become brighter. After that it will recede from us, but will be one of the brightest stars in our sky for the next 200,000 years.
sources:
Sirius
And
SIMBAD query result
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by galactix
if we look at sirius every year at this time and compare it to a stationary referance on earth. it stays stillAlmost. Because it's apparent motion almost matches the apparent motion caused by precession.
The calcs have been doneYes. The proper motion of Sirius relative to the Solar System is much greater than the escape velocity.
The combined mass of Sirius A and B is about 3 solar masses.
stars.astro.illinois.edu...
The distance from the Solar System to Sirius is about 8.6 light years.
stars.astro.illinois.edu...
This makes the escape velocity 0.1 km/s.
www.calctool.org...
The radial velocity of Sirius relative to the Solar System is about 7.6 km/s.
We are moving far to fast relative to Sirius to be in orbit around it.
In order to hold the Solar System in orbit the mass of Sirius would have to be about 15,000 times that of the Sun.
If you disagree, please provide your calculations.
edit on 12/16/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
your leaving out dark mass bro: we already know that systems orbit black holes faster than they should.
here read this bitchin science xplanation
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by galactix
your leaving out dark mass bro: we already know that systems orbit black holes faster than they should.
You mean dark matter? No, we don't know systems orbit black holes faster than they should but black holes don't have anything to do with dark matter anyway.
Dark matter accounts for differences in orbital velocities on a galactic (and intergalactic) scale, not on an interstellar scale and certainly not enough to keep the Solar System in orbit around Sirius.
here read this bitchin science xplanation
Nibiru. Bitchin science.
edit on 12/16/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by eriktheawful
reply to post by galactix
It's called Parallax and literally hundreds of years of observations, with much more detailed observations over the last 70 years or so.
I can counter with the same type of question to you: Why do you HAVE to believe that our sun MUST be orbiting another star?
There is no physical rule or law that says that it must be that way.
Take a look at Benard's Star which is moving at 10.3 arcseconds per year, hence why it's called the "Runaway" star, and it's not orbiting another star.
However we DO have physical laws, such as Orbital Mechanics which is based on Newton's Laws of Motion, Escape Velocity and Gravitation.
And those laws pretty much say: the sun is not orbiting Sirius.
New theories are fine, and should be encouraged, but they also need to show evidence and stand up to peer review. Posting something on YouTube does not "make it so".
If you want the sun to orbit another star, then you're going to have to rewrite a lot of different laws of physics and prove that your new laws hold up under testing and peer review (something that the current laws of physics do).
