Space is big. Really... really... BIG
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 12:09 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, I guess that program makes sense of this discovery. Now, we might > need to worry about the multitude of other objects that are out there > heading in random directions. I have a suspicion that the Earth and other > planets and moons have been impacted by this type of debris in the distant > past. Let's hope it does not occur too frequently. > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Bowery <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Fri, Jan 10, 2014 12:53 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT]Star Object Ejection Process > > As luck would have it: > > Surprising new class of “hypervelocity stars” discovered escaping the > galaxy > > http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2014/01/hypervelocity-stars/ > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:16 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Steven, >> >> A few years back I also wrote a program that handled a central large >> star like object with another orbiting it. I had a plan to eventually >> include a small number of other objects that were to interact >> gravitationally, but never found the time to complete the project. I was >> curious about how different attraction laws effected the orbits of planets, >> and the answer was loud and clear; forget about anything except for the >> second order case! I observed the elliptical orbits and that was about the >> end of that project. >> >> I am happy to hear that you did something similar but much more >> extensive. If you get a chance, take a look at that program that I was >> mentioning (Planets). One item that I find particularly interesting is >> that you can call up a flood of small planets to interact simultaneously. >> The behavior that you witness is quite impressive and it makes the fact >> that our solar system is relatively stable seem fortunate. >> >> I did notice that very few moons appear orbiting my planets. My >> suspicion is that most of the moons seen today are a result of collisions >> between the main planet and smaller objects. Apparently the blast kicks >> out a mass of material that then condenses into the many moons. Each of >> these mirrors the original formation of the sun and its system. I am >> confident that some of the early moons found themselves ejected by their >> brothers on occasion. >> >> If you are curious, you can load Linux in parallel with your standard >> system that preserves your original operating system and data. That is >> what I did to be able to use whichever one I desire. Unfortunately, I went >> overboard and now have three Windows Vista systems and two Linux systems >> present on this one computer. Hey, I had the 3 hard drives available! :-) >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson <[email protected]> >> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> >> Sent: Fri, Jan 3, 2014 8:39 pm >> Subject: RE: [Vo]:[OT]Star Object Ejection Process >> >> Hi Dave, >> >> I tend to concur with your suspicions that the effect is most likely >> real, this based on my own computations of simple planetary orbits. I have >> used both single precision and double precision in my simulations. Rounding >> off errors appeared to be negligible. As far as my own personal >> observations went I saw little if no difference between SP vs DP. >> >> A science program like NOVA recently did a program on how NASA began to >> use sophisticated gravity assist trajectories in order to shoot satellites >> out in to further regions of the solar system. The point being, if you have >> a lot of extra patience the trip can be performed with far less rocket fuel >> than traditional means. >> >> On a related matter, a couple of months ago you may recall I posted on >> Vort a personal discovery I made concerning what I later learned is >> actually a derivative of Kepler’s 3rd law, that the square of the orbital >> period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major >> axis of its orbit. I stumbled across a much more simplified observation of >> the 3rd law: All orbits that share the same orbital period also share the >> same distance in their major radius. I didn’t know at the time whether this >> observation had been made by others, so I posted my findings out on Vortex. >> See: >> >> http://personalpen.orionworks.com/kepler4thlaw.htm >> >> Someone eventually was kind enough to point me to a link that correlated >> my personal observation with Kepler’s 3rd law. Yes, the observation had >> already been made. Alas, my hope for fame (and bragging rights) had been >> dashed. Nevertheless, it was fun to discover the fact that some personal >> observations I had made about planetary motion based on computer >> simulations I had personal designed turned out to be confirmed as true. I >> still think the observation should officially be described as Kepler’s >> honorary 4th law of planetary motion. ;-) >> >> PS: The Kiplinger letter for this Friday made the comment that China’s >> recent successful rover landing on the moon will fuel some fears in >> congress that NASA should get a little extra funding boost for planetary >> research. It will be nothing near the glories of the space race of the >> sixties. But a modest financial boost never the less. (I love watching the >> movie: “The Right Stuff.”) >> >> Regards, >> Steven Vincent Johnson >> svjart.OrionWorks.com >> www.zazzle.com/orionworks >> tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/ >> >> > >
