The Sun is not moving and it is easy to prove !
- Thread starter Thermoman
- Start date
No tail !
Quite obviously a ''firey ball'' hurdling around space would leave a trail . The gravitational-B frame drag of space would deform the circular form .
The ''rear'' of the Sun would be stretched backwards as the Sun moved forward relative to velocity .
If the Sun was moving we'd observe the same as a comet or a shooting star ! There would most certainly be an observational shift , a blur or haze trailing what we see .
So, isn't everything in our solar system in movement, as well as our galaxy? The sun certainly isn't static nor anything else.
Last edited:
Not everything in the solar system is moving . How do you prove the Sun is moving ? Even Einstein said we can't know that answer !
How did we get from not knowing to all of a sudden it is definetly moving ?
My observations over the years conclude there is no necessity for the Sun to be moving , the Earths relative spin , axis and movement been relative to the Suns fixed ''Southern'' position . From my understanding everyone on Earth see's the Sun , spatial South .
Additionally of course there is the physics involved , The Thermal Dynamics of moving bodies . The Sun because of its huge ammount of energy , will have a high level of inertia . Edit : That last sentence was a bit word saladery .
The lack of a tail applies only to the sun? Just trying to understand your logic.
There is certainly some relative movement between objects in the solar system.
Sun: Facts - NASA Science
From our vantage point on Earth, the Sun may appear like an unchanging source of light and heat in the sky. But the Sun is a dynamic star, constantly changing and sending energy out into space. The science of studying the Sun and its influence throughout the solar system is called heliophysics...
science.nasa.gov
All spatial bodies in motion potentially have a tail but the tails of most bodies are not visible tails . In years to come we may develop the tech to see the unseen . However , the Sun has the potential to create a visible tail or visible distortion if it was in motion because of frame dragging .
Additionally I have a new model for Stars that fits in with the observation !
I am just trying to think of the simple way of explaining a complex subject !
I suppose the simple way is to explain Frame Dragging relative to this discussion as an external force acting on a moving body !
Added - Run with the Olympic Torch , notice the direction of the flame. This is due to Frame Dragging . (yes the wind created too )
I know what the definition is. I'm looking for your explanation of its relevance to the tail comment.
Simple way of explaining/ visualizing, but completely different processes.
Yes it was just for visual purposes and you got it !
As a Comet travels ''forward'' , the Space behind the Comet pulls backwards relative to any available unbounded energy/light of the Comet . This is why comets have a tail .
The reason this happens is because of the eigen value of the Space compared to the Comet .
I call this type of frame dragging , the transition force .
So, this is your argument for the sun not moving? Right?
So NASA (linked earlier) is wrong?
You do know that a lot of the information in that link is speculative such as core temperature etc?
Nobody has used a thermometer on the Sun I assure you !
What I have wrote so far is a fraction of my argument !
The Sun is not formed how NASA or anybody else explains . edited second thoughts
Not opposed to , an advancement on the information by using other information .
For example the Sun has no magnetic field , I know this because of the magnetic currie point !
Added but according to NASA https://www.nasa.gov/science-resear...n additional effect on how the particles move.
Curie temperature - Wikipedia
Additionally compass needles don't point to the Sun so again I know science has made stuff up !
I think you are off here and just trying to be controversial or stimulate a conversation.Curie temperature - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Additionally compass needles don't point to the Sun so again I know science has made stuff up !
Let's see who else may have something to add.
I look forward to hearing healthy debate but I do not believe my physics and knowledge of present knowldege is off !
If you have 2 magnetic sources, especially separated by millions of miles, which would you expect a compass on Earth to react to?
Obviously the Earth but that is very provable . On the other hand who has proved the Sun has a magnetic field ?
The high density , high temperature state of the Sun implies a magnetic field would be impossible because of the currie point . Which is most likely ?
The tails of comets, planetary atmospheres and mafnitospheres are not eroded simply due to motion in space. The reason is the powerful emission of light and particles (solar wind) from the Sun, which blows them away and changes the otherwise initially spherical shape.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 178
-
-
-
UFO whistleblowers tell Congress 'we are not alone in the cosmos' (video)
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 38
-
-
-
Question Educating Space to Toddlers to Pre-Adolescence?
- Started by NeoViking
- Replies: 11
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram