|
Post by Andrew on Jun 3, 2015 0:05:57 GMT
And on it goes with the same stupidity. It appears to be your gift to suck me into even more and more of your endless mind gaming toxic stupidity. Obviously Nautonnier is saying something in his mind that is world shattering news unknown to Astronomy and yet after days of effort on my part I have no idea what he is talking about. Even to guess what he might be thinking has brought the troll of trolls down upon me for another repeat of the endless childish baiting i had to put up with the last time i encountered you. Unbelievable I think what Nautonnier is saying in his own mind should be only world shattering to a bunch of fuddy duddies who are completely convinced of only one source of climate variability. Of course we know that what should seldom does when it comes to opinions. Of course that irks the loving bj out of folks with their feet firmly ensconced in concrete on other platforms. So really one of the good aspects of this forum is we self moderate and we don't have a fuddy duddy in charge. As I see it Nautonnier is doing nothing that Dr. Judith Curry is not doing. Dr Curry and Nautonnier probably have different opinions on what is important but both offer up science pieces that shatters the notion that the science is settled. Over the years in this forum both you and Nautonnier's statements have helped refine my own opinions. The main difference has been that I have come closer to Nautonnier's opinions and further from yours. . . .proving life is all about learning and you can learn from anybody if you listen carefully enough. So whatever Nautonnier is thinking is some kind of secret while what Curry is thinking is plastered all over the internet for all to know and read about and you think their methods are the same Whatever
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jun 3, 2015 8:16:27 GMT
I go away to get my hearing aid fixed and look what happens .....
Will someone please PM me when this thread is exhausted?
|
|
|
Post by nonentropic on Jun 3, 2015 9:33:56 GMT
agree Ratty we need a new subject that is interesting.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 3, 2015 11:21:38 GMT
It is instructive to read from the beginning of this thread. It should be called fugue.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 3, 2015 13:26:02 GMT
It is instructive to read from the beginning of this thread. It should be called fugue. Interesting that it turned out you either have brain damage or you a liar. Since you are able to contemplate the meaning of fugue it seems you are just a liar. For the record: In 2008 you were told it is well known the sun wobbles. solarcycle24com.proboards.com/thread/258/epitrochoid-orbits-barycentersThere is no real debate whether the Sun orbits the solar system barycenter, it does so according to basic laws of gravity. The value you mention is slightly incorrect, the Sun can wander up tp ~2.2 solar radii from the solar system barycenter, not 2 solar diameters. The barycenter is there and so is the varing orbital velocity. This velocity is, however, always quite small (~walking pace) . The Sun is in free fall, so it does not feel inertia forces. You are confusing this with tidal effects, which is something else. The tidal effects are also vanishingly small. The wobble of other stars as well as ours is well known, nothing new. As mentioned there is no controversy over whether the sun orbits the barycenter. The debate has been focused on whether the Sun's orbital movements are related to solar activity. It is difficult to find a physical model explaining such a relation. In 2013 you repeated your stupid claim that astronomers are clueless It always amazes me that astronomers will identify stars with planetary systems by detecting a doppler shift due to the star's 'wobble' caused by the star actually orbiting a barycenter not just spinning on its own axis -- yet those same astronomers will deny that the Sun has any wobble In 2015 you repeated your stupid claim that astronomers are clueless Astronomers identify stars that have planets by their 'wobble' induced by the planets orbiting them. Then when it comes to our own local star insist that it does not wobble. They do not appear to grasp the dissonance.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 3, 2015 14:48:40 GMT
No surprises here: Just another repeat thought for you. The Sun orbits the barycenter (center of mass) of the Solar system as do the planets. The position of the barycenter in relation to the Sun alters dependent on the orbit of the major planets in the system. ..... The Earth also orbits the moving Barycenter (or falls toward it if you want to be pedantic) so the Earth's orbit is affected as is its velocity and due to all the various energy laws its Length of Day may alter relatively significantly. So to add to the tides due to the Moon acting like a continual 'pump on ocean currents and the thermohaline currents due to convective and salinity effects, we now 'slop' the system by increasing or decreasing the rate of rotation of the Earth. This may happen over a long period as the barycenter transits through then around the sun in a particular direction. So for several years the rotation of the earth may be continually accelerating (as with centripetal force) while relative to the Sun which is orbiting the same barycenter there seems to be little or no change. The momentum and inertia of the oceans will lead to changes in the deep ocean currents and in kelvin waves. I don't know if anyone has linked these kelvin waves to the changes in the velocity of the Earth due to the motion of the barycenter it would be interesting to confirm there is a correlation. However, after all that - the above is a hypothesized mechanism for an 'astrometeorologist' to identify planetary configurations which are likely to result in major oceanic effects such as an El Nino or La Nina. there are cycles mainly driven by the Earth's .... orbiting about a barycenter which is also orbited by other planets and the Sun which blasts the parts of the Earth facing it with all sorts of energy at varying rates as the Sun follows its epitrochoid orbit around the barycenter.
|
|
|
Post by tobyglyn on Jun 3, 2015 23:51:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 4, 2015 5:06:52 GMT
Tobyglyn, that was interesting thanks but not very relevant to the current thread. The current thread is pointing out that large changes to the Solar system center of mass via a small object will have next to no impact on the orbit of Earth which continues to orbit the Sun rather than orbit the SSBC, and therefore the position of the SSBC cannot be a significantly relevant factor in Earths Orbit - particularly obvious I think when it can be seen that Earth orbits far more rapidly than the SSBC significantly changes. Even the nearer Jupiter is orbiting 12 times slower than Earth and the next biggest influence is Saturn at 29.4 years. It just makes no sense at all to think that Earth is orbiting the SSBC.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jun 4, 2015 11:28:16 GMT
Where the sun goes the earth will follow.
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jun 4, 2015 11:48:41 GMT
Where the sun goes the earth will follow. Andrew is convinced that the Sun is unaffected by the planets after all the tidal pull of Jupiter only raises the surface of the Sun 10cm (I think have his or Leif's quote correct). But at the same time Andrew accepts the 'wobble' caused by Jupiter which puts the 'logic' into a strange place. Think of the force required to 'wobble' the Sun's mass. It's probably around the same as the force required to accelerate the planets in their orbits. Sometimes the wobble is so much when the planets are in alignment that the Sun is actually circling in a small orbit around a center of mass (I will try not to use the 'B' word as with the L..... word for a type of heat, it gets Andrew excited. )
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 4, 2015 11:57:09 GMT
Where the sun goes the earth will follow. Andrew is convinced that the Sun is unaffected by the planets after all the tidal pull of Jupiter only raises the surface of the Sun 10cm (I think have his or Leif's quote correct). But at the same time Andrew accepts the 'wobble' caused by Jupiter which puts the 'logic' into a strange place. Think of the force required to 'wobble' the Sun's mass. It's probably around the same as the force required to accelerate the planets in their orbits. Sometimes the wobble is so much when the planets are in alignment that the Sun is actually circling in a small orbit around a center of mass (I will try not to use the 'B' word as with the L..... word for a type of heat, it gets Andrew excited. ) Your deliberate efforts to twist what i say describe you only
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 4, 2015 12:09:14 GMT
Where the sun goes the earth will follow. What actually is your point with this comment? Do you have some kind of amazing insight to add or was it just a device to get Nautonnier to come forth with more nothingness?? This entire conversation is based on Nautonniers dishonesty. Back in 2008 it was explained to him why he is wrong and now almost 7 years later he is too cowardly to get to the point where his stupidity is once more revealed. Given the history of this board to date we are going to be dancing around on this for the rest of time while meanwhile a whole tribe of retards celebrate their stupidity by imagining they know better than the best minds on the planet both living and dead.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 4, 2015 13:13:29 GMT
As it happens, one if my 10 year olds favorite things to point out is 'Pluto isn't a planet, it's just a damned rock!' Obviously I point out 10 year olds shouldn't be using the word 'damned' too often
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Jun 4, 2015 16:46:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jun 4, 2015 17:20:11 GMT
Everything wobbles. Don't need arithmetic to know that.
|
|