Question Astrometry - TheAncient branch of Astronomy re- Our Sun

[rod]

Rod, I just have one question which you are ignoring, is there any way of getting the age of the Sun using Astrometry? Astrometry is just a division of Astronomy, it's no cousin of Astronomy like Astrophysics. Astrometry is just the science of the position of heavenly bodies in the sky. It can be used to find the orbit of different heavenly bodies, eclipses and constellations. It is not possible to use astrometry to find out the age of the Sun, just not possible. There is no way to find it out using astrometry.

I agree, astrometry does not show the age of the Sun. I also point out that the Canyon Diablo meteorite starting point does not show the age of the Sun either. The meteorite shows the radiometric age obtained for the meteorite. This measurement does not record how long the Sun has been moving in the galaxy or spinning on its axis for example. Do you agree with me here?

 

[IG2007]

I agree, astrometry does not show the age of the Sun. I also point out that the Canyon Diablo meteorite starting point does not show the age of the Sun either. The meteorite shows the radiometric age obtained for the meteorite. This measurement does not record how long the Sun has been moving in the galaxy or spinning on its axis for example. Do you agree with me here?

Hmm... I agree with you in the galaxy orbit thing but not the rotation thing of the Sun. If you look at the Sun with a telescope (it's really dangerous but I heard there are special glasses for that), spot any of the sunspots of the Sun, and then wait for it to come again at the same spot. As speed =distance/time. We know the diameter and radius of the sun and then we are finding out the time when we do this experiment. And then, it is easy enough to find out the speed.

 

[rod]

IG2007, you may enjoy this. Since the beginning of 2020, I logged 10 observations of the Sun and 6 sunspots reported at spaceweather.com that I observed. I use a 90-mm refractor telescope with a glass, white light solar filter, the more expensive are the H-alpha filters and telescopes made for solar observing like the SolarMax types. Quite correct about solar rotation and sunspot tracking, much fun too Concerning the Sun's early spin rate *in the beginning*, this is modeled using the *meteorite ages* obtained like the Canyon Diablo standard for dating the Sun and efforts to fit in with H-R stellar evolution diagrams, see The Sun in time: age, rotation, and magnetic activity of the Sun and solar-type stars and effects on hosted planets

 

[IG2007]

Rod, the article is quite informative and interesting. Lol, I had just made a guess about Astrometry from its name. I didn't think that it was right.

 

[sunstance]

As there is no clear evidence or way to use existing charts as none existed.
I would suggest the first thing is our universe is much older. 73 billion roughly it is massive beyond comprehension big. any reaction would take ? and even light to travel across it is ?. all I know is logic.
It stands to reason that our planet must be considered to begin after any purging on the sun.
It must be considered that the sun had no magnetic poles, because clearly it did not come with the magnetic poles.
The size of our sun and the time it would take is in its billions.
Lets say Blue for 3 billion years which still is not agreed to, then green for one billion years ? then yellow after cracking throughout with the beginning of purging so that one billion years then the colour changing to orange and poles have been defined so 11.8 billion years of purging and created well defined magnetic poles. Considered clean at 6.92 billion years ago.
It takes another three billion years to cool down and fix an orbit , and still does not spin until the giant land mass forms on it. the giant land mass is created based in magnetic fields and attraction and grows out of the planet then the giant one land mass breaks apart and the planet starts to spin. creating the new world which them take time to cool down again and life comes form the sea to land. so first the sun is around 23 billion years old and our planet is considered a planet after bombardment around 6.92 billion years old.
ok and the age of the universe is based on that if you traveled at the speed of light is would take 46 billion years. so if that is half the amount then the universe is around twice that roughly so 46 plus 92 billion years .
But the time into takes even to travel it be the time you got to the edge the universe would of expanded so if the figures are to be worked out then the time frame must fall in with a point in time which would be the big bang. However if the time frame is taken form earth or the sun as to when it was created in a relationship with earth I would say 36 billion light years, so doubled is 72 billion years.
So we can now form a simple chart of time with size of our universe and gauge the formation of relationships.
So finally back to earth which is 6.92 billion years old ,at between 3.92 or 4.1 billion years ago life or at least formation of life had already just started. happy good reading. Observation Rules

 

[COLGeek]

As there is no clear evidence or way to use existing charts as none existed.
I would suggest the first thing is our universe is much older. 73 billion roughly it is massive beyond comprehension big. any reaction would take ? and even light to travel across it is ?. all I know is logic.
It stands to reason that our planet must be considered to begin after any purging on the sun.
It must be considered that the sun had no magnetic poles, because clearly it did not come with the magnetic poles.
The size of our sun and the time it would take is in its billions.
Lets say Blue for 3 billion years which still is not agreed to, then green for one billion years ? then yellow after cracking throughout with the beginning of purging so that one billion years then the colour changing to orange and poles have been defined so 11.8 billion years of purging and created well defined magnetic poles. Considered clean at 6.92 billion years ago.
It takes another three billion years to cool down and fix an orbit , and still does not spin until the giant land mass forms on it. the giant land mass is created based in magnetic fields and attraction and grows out of the planet then the giant one land mass breaks apart and the planet starts to spin. creating the new world which them take time to cool down again and life comes form the sea to land. so first the sun is around 23 billion years old and our planet is considered a planet after bombardment around 6.92 billion years old.
ok and the age of the universe is based on that if you traveled at the speed of light is would take 46 billion years. so if that is half the amount then the universe is around twice that roughly so 46 plus 92 billion years .
But the time into takes even to travel it be the time you got to the edge the universe would of expanded so if the figures are to be worked out then the time frame must fall in with a point in time which would be the big bang. However if the time frame is taken form earth or the sun as to when it was created in a relationship with earth I would say 36 billion light years, so doubled is 72 billion years.
So we can now form a simple chart of time with size of our universe and gauge the formation of relationships.
So finally back to earth which is 6.92 billion years old ,at between 3.92 or 4.1 billion years ago life or at least formation of life had already just started. happy good reading. Observation Rules

There is nothing logical, nor scientific here. I think we have wandered off topic sufficiently and it is time to close this discussion.