--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00004 Date: 03/15/98 From: MIKE ROSS Time: 12:20pm \/To: BARTON PAUL LEVENSON (Read 1 times) Subj: Re: Infinite mass Barton Paul Levenson said the following to Bob King on the subject of Infinite mass (14 Mar 98 20:15:48) > BK> have infinite mass (plus). > Not infinite, not unless their speed relative to us is > exactly c. If over, their mass would be imaginary. BK> Now just a minute! BK> If an object relative to us is going to exceed the BK> s.of l. and its mass become imaginary/whatever, then BK> how does it manage to get to the point of exceeding the BK> s. of l. without actually equalling it at some point, BK> hence at that point it would have infinite mass? BPL> Darned if I know. As the object approaches the speed of light spacetime dilation effects become more pronounced. For example, time slows down to a crawl and the object's mass tends towards infinity which causes space to curve in on itself. At the speed of light the object would become a singularity and would be hidden from our universe. Beyond this point, you need to ask the philosophy department. --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 * Origin: Juxtaposition BBS. Lasalle, Quebec, Canada (1:167/133) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00005 Date: 03/13/98 From: MIKE PELL Time: 07:46pm \/To: BARTON PAUL LEVENSON (Read 1 times) Subj: BB theory [...] > Van Flandern is a wonderfully good celestial mechanics expert but as a > cosmologist he doesn't do as well as some introductory astronomy > students. Thanks for your thoughts Barton. mp | AmiQWK 2.9 - FREEWARE | ... --- PCBoard (R) v15.4/M 5 Beta * Origin: The GameBoard BBS-9056893982/9409-BurlingtonONCANADA (1:244/506) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00006 Date: 03/13/98 From: MIKE PELL Time: 07:46pm \/To: ARNOLD G. GILL (Read 1 times) Subj: BB theory Hello Arnold, thank you for taking the time to critque TVF's big bang post. Much appreciated. mp | AmiQWK 2.9 - FREEWARE | ... --- PCBoard (R) v15.4/M 5 Beta * Origin: The GameBoard BBS-9056893982/9409-BurlingtonONCANADA (1:244/506) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00007 Date: 03/15/98 From: LANCE REYNOLDS Time: 11:04am \/To: MARK BLOSS (Read 1 times) Subj: A 5th force? [2/2] All, Please forgive my excessive quoting. Hyya Mark! MB> He's right about that, at least. But the finding is only MB> startling to some of us, others of us are amused. MB> Duh. How about gravity _pulling_ it out, rather than _pulling_ MB> Oh? And how is it working "against" gravity again? By pulling MB> Yep. A fifth force ... call it "Wishful Thinking". MB> through space'. This is a tiresome and sophomoric article, MB> What's very weird? I sense a quote taken out of context here. MB> Sure, there could be. There could be a sixth and a seventh and MB> Duh. But scientists don't bother speculating very much. People MB> have speculated that the universe was sneezed out a rather large MB> goat's nostrils. MB> And this is the hallmark of a pseudo-scientist. "There is no MB> Duh. Call it "vacuum". And it's pulling whatever's in it MB> Maybe he _would_ be surprised to find out - it still _hasn't_. MB> So, maybe that's what ants have been doing all these billions of MB> years (they were around when the dinosaurs were still here) - MB> driving our universe apart at ever faster speeds... they are the MB> 5th force! Yeah, that's it. So, how do you really feel? I seem to be feeling a certain... testy-ness here, Mark. And I completely agree with you assessment... Well said. lance * Silver Xpress V4.4 [Reg] --- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0 * Origin: Modem Magick (619)447-5010 (1:202/311) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00008 Date: 03/11/98 From: JOHN PAZMINO Time: 09:25pm \/To: JOHN PAZMINO (Read 1 times) Subj: Star Constellations JP> JH> I'm looking for some picture files of the classic constellations, both showing JP> JH> the shapes of the constellation on top of a drawing of the figure, eg Orion and JP> JH> also photographs showing them as if you were seeing them with the naked eye - JP> JH> ie not through a telescope. JP> JH> JP> JH> I need these because I am a Cub Scout Leader, and these would help for when I JP> JH> do the Astronomy badge with the children. JP> JH> JP> JH> Unfortunately, I'm not on the Internet, so FTP sites are out of the question. JP> JH> However I can accept file attached email to my email addresses below. JP> JH> JP> JH> I've tried searching the Starbase One BBS in London (where I live) to no avail. JP> JH> Unless you could recommend another BBS in the UK, I'm a bit stuffed! JP> JP> Well, fancy up to someone with Web access. Use flowers, wine, JP> beer, sports tickets, whatever. There's a new planetarium program JP> issued in mid 1997 called Planetarium Pro. It's a nice simulation of JP> the sky and all AND right in the sky around the stars are the JP> allegorical creatures of the constellations! You see the stars of, JP> say, Leo, with the lion around them in subdued cameo form. DL veersion JP> runs for 7 days, but after then you simply reinstall it again. AN addition: the program is at www.game-club.com. And you don't have to reinstall it after the 7 days are up. You may simply change your PC's system clock back to the date youu downloaded the program. This is the filedate of the ZIPfile. Of course, be SURE to reset the clock after you are finished with Planetarium Pro. (Same thing goes for other time-limited programs, like CosmoSaver.) If you got a file attribute editor you can alter the program's filedate to some far off future date, like 1999 Dec 31 to fool it into thinking the time will not expire for a couple years. --- RoseReader 2.52 P005004 * Origin: MoonDog BBS Brooklyn,NY 718 692-2498 (1:278/230) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00009 Date: 03/13/98 From: JOHN PAZMINO Time: 01:31pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Hayden Plm 18 Feb 9 1/ 2 PHOTOESSAY OF HAYDEN PLANETARIUM - SESSION 25 - 18 FEBRUARY 1998 John Pazmino - Amateur Astronomers Association - New York ---------------------------------------------------------------- Generally busyness all thru February thwarted plans to visit the site until this very week, the eve of my journey to the upcoming solar eclipse. I'm off to the Caribbean Sea via cruise ship and will see the eclipse from sea near Aruba. So I shoved off other chores and arranged to see the works on Wednesday the 18th of February. It rained in the previous night with thunder and lightning. By morning crushhour the rain ebbed to a drizzle. When I set off for the Planetarium the rain already stopped. The sky remained thoroly overcast and the streets were still wet. A cool breeze blew and my heavy winter coat was welcome on by back. I arrived at the Museum at 12:20 EST by a one-train ride and entered the Museum thru its subway access. Altho the hall was crowded, I saw an guard answering some visitor's questions. When he was free I announced my appointment. The chap was the stereotypical Bulgarian postal clerk. He even smelled like one. He nodded and said something like, "OK". I started to walk into the hall toward the elevator. He hailed me and asked that I sit down. There are benches along the walls and I pointed to one. He then brought out a large plastic toolbox or fishing tackle box and set it on the bench next to me. Is this a new sign in process with fingerprinting and photographing? He fumbled at the box and finally yanked it open. Out sprang stuffed up papers. He pulled one out, smoothed it with his fingers and handed it to me. "Put your name on this paper". In the dim light I made out lines on a form, some of which were filled in. I wrote my name on the first empty line. The guy studied the form, fingered it, and slowly handed it back. "Where are you going? Put it here". I did, "Planetarium office". He studied the paper again. After many seconds he asked, "What time did you get here?" I asked him being that I needed the official time from his watch. He pulled his watch from a pocket, studied it, and noted it was around 12:30. So I put that time in the little space on the form. He studied the form for a while, then asked "Who are you seeing?" I told him I had an appointment with Ms Oliver. "Put that here". So I squeezed in her name in the line. Apparently all this now was copasetic and folded the form and stuffed it into his toolbox. He rummaged around in it and pulled out a nametag. "Put your name here." I wrote out my name on the tag. He studied it. "What is your name?" I pronounced it slowly and pointed out the characters on the tag. "OK, you can go now." I rammed the tag into my coat pocket and skipped off to the Planetarium office. When I stepped off of the elevator I was struck by how dark the hall was. There was little light coming thru the exterior windows. These are corrugated and frosted, like privacy windows, so one can not see anything clearly thru them. But they were dark. By interpreting the shadows outside I guessed that the Planetarium structure was rising up to the level of the office. Ms Oliver greeted me and, yes, the edifice is climbing higher. I didn't bother telling Ms Oliver what went on with the guard; it was too silly. We went to the special viewing station and, lo!, the works outside were a full floor higher and definitely was covering up the exposed walls of the Museum. Right under the window we looked out of workmen were busy tinkering on the floor forms of the next higher level. We could hear their chatter and the clanking of tools thru the glass. The Planetarium is up to its fourth floor! Work is proceding on the backoffice section, that abutting and keying into the Museum. The belly of the Planetarium was filled with laid out materials and some workhuts. The tower crane was swooshing back and forth moving small piles of material to the site. In this instance the load was lumber to building concreting forms on the top of the fourth floor. It was settled down before several workers, who untied the lumber and let the crane's empty hook haul up and away. It will be soon be impractical to continue inspection of the works from this spot. The concrete shell of the backoffices will cover the windows. Unless we can find an other site for the overviews, I'll be limited to the photoessay from the street. We were finished after some fifteen minutes and I left by the subway access. It has a ramp up to the street. I gave my nametag to the Bulgarian bloke. He studied it, fingered it, put it in his pocket. "OK, you can go now." From the street, near 79th Street and Central Park West next to the main ceremonial entrance I walked around to 81st Street. The ground was rapidly drying out after the previous night's rain. The breeze was cool and refreshing and probably helped in the quick evaporation of the water from the ground. Both gates were open and I took several pictures from each. The work in progress was fairly routine and the only significant din was the motors of the tower crane. It alternately moved parts from a laydown area in the former carpark to the Planetarium and removed items from there to the laydown area. All operations went quickly and smoothly. The park was overall empty, likely the people were dissuaded by the rain earlier in the day. The dogrun had only a couple dogs and their runners. The surrounding street had light foot traffic. The new feature on the site was a plank road leading from the circular drive in the midblock of 81st Street to the contractor's wall. It rested on grass. I asked the fate keeper about this. He explained that it was freshly put down a day or two earlier. It was the road fro moving onto the site a second tower crane. Later in the project a third will be set up. He wasn't sure when the second crane will arrive but it is soon. Continued in next message. --- RoseReader 2.52 P005004 * Origin: MoonDog BBS Brooklyn,NY 718 692-2498 (1:278/230) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00010 Date: 03/13/98 From: JOHN PAZMINO Time: 01:31pm \/To: ALL (Read 1 times) Subj: Hayden Plm 18 Feb 9 2/ 2 Continued from previous message. The Planetarium edifice is still completely in the open with no enclosure of the completed sections. All is exposed to the elements with not even a tarp or canvas sheet to fend off any wind or rain. So far the main accomplishment is the placing of concrete for the skeleton and the embedding of utility mains. A curious feature of the works is the preservation of the lamppoles. The trees on the site are worthy to be protected but the lamppoles will be torn out and replaced with nostalgic ones of starsafe design. No one on the site could understand why the old poles are so carefully avoided and were not pulled out long ago. At night, when I come to the AAA's lectures at the Museum, these lamps are burning with their glary glow. There being nothing more to inspect or essay I left at quite 13:30 for an errand at the nearby postoffice. This is on 83rd Street between COlumbus and Amsterdam Avenues. When that business was done I walked back to the Museum for a final look-around. Then I took the Eighth Avenue bus back to my office. --- RoseReader 2.52 P005004 * Origin: MoonDog BBS Brooklyn,NY 718 692-2498 (1:278/230) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00011 Date: 03/16/98 From: CRAIG MACDOUGAL Time: 12:02am \/To: MARK KAYE (Read 1 times) Subj: Planetary Alignments On 03-12-98 MARK KAYE wrote to PAUL M. DAVIS... MK> PMD> Someone in the PHYSICS echo has stated that all the MK> PMD> planets in our solar system will be aligned on 5th MK> PMD> March 2000. Can anyone verify this for me as I've not MK> PMD> heard of this myself? [snip] MK> There is the possiblity of unscrupulous people taking MK> advantage of this chance optical grouping of the planets, but MK> as far as being anything other than a beautiful sight in our MK> skies, this event does not have any significance. It won't even be that. All of the planets will be "clustered" around the sun. Speaking as a planet astronomer, March of 2000 will be kind of boring. Clear Skies, Craig in Tampa --- * OFFLINE 1.57 * Is Jupiter out tonight? * Origin: Get All Your Fido Here! telnet://docsplace.dynip.com (1:3603/140) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 180 ASTRONOMY Ref: F3K00012 Date: 03/15/98 From: BARTON PAUL LEVENSON Time: 08:32pm \/To: MARK BLOSS (Read 1 times) Subj: A 5th force? [1/2] MB> A mysterious force is NOT needed to explain the acceleration, or MB> deceleration, of the expansion of the universe. Einstein thought MB> the universe was static - neither expanding nor contracting - and MB> thought there must be a fifth cosmological constant for the universe MB> to remain static. When Hubble discovered the red-shift in 1917, and MB> Einstein confirmed it - he had to admit there was no need for a 5th MB> force. That remains true - and whether or not the universe is slowing MB> down or speeding up in its expansion - still does not need a 5th force MB> to explain its expansion - whether or not it is slowing down or MB> speeding up. This is dead wrong. If lambda is non-zero there is a fifth force driving it. DM> If true, says one astronomer, in billions of years many of the stars DM> will be gone from the night sky. MB> MB> This will not be true at all. Totally fabricated and completely MB> ridiculous. Here's why: As the Universe expands, light from distant MB> stars which have not yet arrived here, will then be arriving - offsetting MB> any loss of light from stars moving away with fewer and fewer photons MB> reaching Earth. This offset process will keep the sky looking pretty MB> much the same, effectively, forever. No it won't. You're assuming the Universe is infinite and that Hubble expansion -- which can exceed c over large enough distances -- can be offset by light getting here from older and older distances, which it can't. DM> blunder. MB> MB> It does no such thing at all. It sure does. If the expansion is accelerating Einstein was wrong to take out the cosmological constant, lambda. MB> That sneaky little effect, I say to Mr. Riess, is called seudo-science. MB> Because all that's needed is "momentum" and it is a process of echanics MB> already known and explainable. There is no need to create a force to MB> explain something that can already be explained by a force we already MB> know about. When something explodes, matter is thrust forth at a MB> tremendous velocity, _increasing_ its velocity for a period of time, MB> before _decreasing_ its velocity; and when it has reached the point MB> where it will expand no further, it begins to come back down again. Except that the Big Bang was NOT an explosion in space, but an explosion OF space. Momentum has nothing to do with it. MB> MB> And then, since we are looking at an observable universe which is MB> most likely only a thimble compared to the actual universe, it might MB> indeed be gravity itself which is _pulling_ our observable slice of MB> it toward something altogether different than what could be imagined. MB> There is no reason to think that the matter of our observable MB> universe has more power than the matter in the part of the universe MB> we cannot see. If the universe we observe was a BB (a little tiny brass Excuse me, a hyper-large attractor can't be powering a uniform expansion in all directions, which is what we see with the Hubble shift. MB> Right - it tells us how fast the universe is/was MB> expanding - NOT whether or MB> not it is expanding _faster_ in the future than it is now. It can tell us if the expansion was faster or slower in the past, and the change can be projected, so yes, it does tell us that. DM> They expected to find that the expansion of the universe was slowing DM> from the effect of gravity. MB> MB> And it could very well be speeding up, because of the effect of gravity MB> also. Regardless, what they are seeing, is what _was_ MB> happening billions MB> of years ago in these billions of light-year-away MB> galaxies - they are not MB> looking at what is happening "now". This is why their basic conclusions MB> are not acceptable in their current form - and it is why the writer of MB> this article is speculating. The writer of the article knows what he's talking about. I'm sorry to say that, from what you've written here, you don't. MB> And if it is speeding up - it is going to coast, and slow down, from he MB> loss of momentum. There is no hidden force involved - none is needed o MB> explain a non-static universe, which is what we are seeing. Not if a force is increasing the rate of expansion. DM> at a slower and slower rate. MB> MB> This is a misrepresentation of the Big Bang theory. The Big Bang heory MB> does accord a universe exploding from a singularity about 12 to 400 MB> billion years ago, and is still expanding - but it never assumed a 400? Where did that come from? All Hubble measurements make in the last 40 years or so give Hubble ages from 12 to 20 billion years. --- Maximus 3.01 * Origin: SoundingBoard, Pittsburgh PA (1:129/26)