From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul> Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 22:00:47 +0100 Archived: Fri, 27 May 2011 06:31:20 -0400 Subject: Re: Is The Sun Emitting A Mystery Particle? >From: Michael Tarbell <mtarbell.nul> >To: post.nul >Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 09:09:47 -0600 >Subject: Re: Is The Sun Emitting A Mystery Particle? <snip> >I have snipped the bulk of your reply, as I frankly am unable to >grasp its connection to the phenomenon under discussion. You >have suggested some kind of connection between the sun's mass >and the rate of radioactive decay, which is only economical in >the sense that it is entirely free of theoretical or empirical >foundation. >I was willing to concede that the neutrino hypothesis is, at >least for now, equally unfounded (i.e., they are 'Occam >equivalent'), although there are at least hints of a plausible >correlation with the rotation of the sun's neutrino-producing >core. Speaking of plausibility, I would still be interested in a >response to the previous straightforward question: if this (33- >day periodic) effect is due to some variation in the sun's mass, >why is this perturbation not apparent in the orbital motion of >the planets? Hi Mike Must confess to preferring short and sweet responses myself, but my last post was unavoidable. So I'll refer you to a single-sentence posted in December 2010, at www.perceptions.couk.com/uef/ansci8.html#sol when I saw that same half-life variation article being quoted as a doomsday/armageddon argument by folk who misunderstood the gist of it. And, talking of misunderstandings, your last question shows that I seem to have somehow given the wrong impression: The Sun has virtually no angular momentum and therefore can't much affect the planets' motions (unless it blew up or something), whereas the planets, with most of the system's momentum, strongly affect the Sun's mass-rotation and its more violent surface activities, as that NASA pdf implies. So the 33-day ripple (in half-life results) is probably caused by a 33-day rotation / deformation of the Sun's average mass - and that is caused by the planets. There's a clue in the Solar Cycle variations (in the sunspot cycle) as evidenced in that NASA report - quoted at www.perceptions.couk.com/uef/checkalign.html#nasa22 in October 2009. Cheers Ray D BTW if you Google for "work of J H Nelson" there's references to his original `sunspots / planetary alignments' stuff c. 1940 - which was totally ignored by everyone (inc. NASA till recently) because Nelson was an engineer and not a sanctified scientist. Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp