Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Weitter Duckss

Why Atmospheres of Stars Lack Metals?

345 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

bmk1245
2 minutes ago, danydandan said:

I only glanced at the article, didn't bother looking through it as well it's in a language I can't read. I'll scroll down and look for equations.

Don't waste your time. First equation tells all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Weitter Duckss
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, danydandan said:

Not as closely as I should, what have the results if CERN stated regarding your theory.

It is important from Collider, a proton decays. The breakthrough (ultimately simplified) flows over .. mionees, the mions disintegrate at evv (100%). If the proton in disintegration in the end residues has evv, how can we exclude evv in the proton formation?

 

New theories arise when existing theories are not good (they do not respond to the truth, but they push them persistently).

Theory observes visible (physical) matter without the need to define the space. Galaxies are moving away from each other (we know that this is not the whole truth) and there is no need for space interference.

Alexander claims to be an amateur. I can add, amateur who has invested much effort in the theory. New face and new ideas should be welcomed.

Edited by Weitter Duckss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
5 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

Don't waste your time. First equation tells all.

Yeap seen it now, waste of time if your basing a premise of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bmk1245
23 minutes ago, danydandan said:

Yeap seen it now, waste of time if your basing a premise of that.

Once "theory" starts with such blunder, you can skip the rest, for sure.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beard_new
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, bmk1245 said:

Funny thing, Duckss brought link to pure BS. First equation proves that: left side - energy, right side - energy divided by velocity squared.

Dimensional analysis should be the first lesson in physics class. 

There is no mistake in the formula! Speed is relative to the speed of light and is dimensionless (u/c).
It is better to read from the beginning. There is an explanation of terms and principles.
By going to the main page the main page, you can turn on the English translation (on the left), then in the menu on top of TIPS.

Edited by beard_new
Refinement
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beard_new

On http://www.newtheory.ru so do not consider. And they try to observe the rules of communication there. Calm down and do not be nervous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
1 hour ago, beard_new said:

 

On http://www.newtheory.ru so do not consider. And they try to observe the rules of communication there. Calm down and do not be nervous.

Maybe something is lost in translation, but you need to reconsider a number if assumptions made in theory, specifically your mathematical proofs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beard_new
19 minutes ago, danydandan said:

Maybe something is lost in translation, but you need to reconsider a number if assumptions made in theory, specifically your mathematical proofs.

Thank you! I will try to make a normal translation. The main thing is that the article is available to many. At the Russian forum is quite an adequate discussion. I will translate in parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
3 minutes ago, beard_new said:

Thank you! I will try to make a normal translation. The main thing is that the article is available to many. At the Russian forum is quite an adequate discussion. I will translate in parts.

I used Google translate by copying and pasting I don't know if it's a Google issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beard_new
1 minute ago, danydandan said:

I used Google translate by copying and pasting I don't know if it's a Google issue.

Google translate does not always translate correctly what is not standard for the language. Even for Russian speakers, I had to explain the terms. Now there is something to work on :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bmk1245
4 hours ago, danydandan said:

Maybe something is lost in translation, but you need to reconsider a number if assumptions made in theory, specifically your mathematical proofs.

BS can't be lost in translation. The guy is just another Petrik. Period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weitter Duckss
4 hours ago, beard_new said:

Google translate does not always translate correctly what is not standard for the language. Even for Russian speakers, I had to explain the terms. Now there is something to work on :)

„2. Moment of inertia. The moment of inertia is determined by the nature of its own rotation of object movement and their gyroscopic properties.“

Explain this to concrete examples from the Universe. For example: why only 0.00003% of the stars (main sequence) have very large rotation (and high temperature), compared to 96.15% of the classes M, K and G with low temperatures and slow rotation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beard_new
1 hour ago, Weitter Duckss said:

Explain this to concrete examples from the Universe. For example: why only 0.00003% of the stars (main sequence) have very large rotation (and high temperature), compared to 96.15% of the classes M, K and G with low temperatures and slow rotation.

The main sequence is the region on the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram containing stars whose energy source is the thermonuclear reaction of helium synthesis from hydrogen. What does the moment of inertia have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
beard_new

Discussion at the forum gave me an idea of the further development path.

There is one important (from my point of view) observation. I'm not sure that one day my work will become widely known (there is little professionalism, and there is not much time), but I am sure that my ideas have a rational grain. Therefore, if someone decides to use this grain in their work, I will not have any claims, I will not require the mention of my name. Of course, I will continue to work on the theory. But it's just my pleasure.
Ideas can be born in a single head, but should belong to everyone if they are useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weitter Duckss
9 hours ago, beard_new said:

The main sequence is the region on the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram containing stars whose energy source is the thermonuclear reaction of helium synthesis from hydrogen. What does the moment of inertia have?

I agree that work should always be developed.

In the diagram, the star rotation grows from right to left. I generally use in discussing all the stars and other bodies. How Stars Create "Moment of Inertia," as you explain the difference in Moment of Inertia.

 

"The speed of light measured in SN is always equal to constant C = 1 according to the principle of its measurement."

How to measure the measurement of light beyond the visible matter. If there is no light beyond the visible objects (the universe is black) your postulate then reads

"Energy equal to zero corresponds to the absence of energy, mass equal to zero corresponds to the absence of mass. The speed corresponding to zero corresponds to the lack of movement. "

The experiment with the enclosed room of the mirror shows:. Regardless of the show (strength, intensity, quantity) in the room, light and waves disappear with the termination of emissions "photons" and radiation.

From my point of view, your postulate is correct. As you explain, the rest with photons and light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bmk1245
3 hours ago, beard_new said:

Discussion at the forum gave me an idea of the further development path.

There is one important (from my point of view) observation. I'm not sure that one day my work will become widely known (there is little professionalism, and there is not much time), but I am sure that my ideas have a rational grain. Therefore, if someone decides to use this grain in their work, I will not have any claims, I will not require the mention of my name. Of course, I will continue to work on the theory. But it's just my pleasure.
Ideas can be born in a single head, but should belong to everyone if they are useful.

Let me guess, your new idea is measuring length in kilograms?

Brothers Lifshitz and Landau turn in their graves over your bs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bmk1245

Bit OT,

Landau was brilliant scientist, but his humor takes the best:

P: "Please draw me a circle"

L draws a cross

P: "Hm, now draw me a cross"

L draws a circle

P: "Landau, why don't you do what I ask?"

L: "If I did, you might come to think I've become mentally retarded".

(link)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weitter Duckss

The constant growth of the body becomes very popular.

The conclusion would be that it is a very complex and dynamic pattern related to the processes of objects' creation – it is constantly moving and growing. The complexity of objects is related to the space temperature, the mass of an object and the total sum of tidal forces. Furthermore, the complexity is influenced by the position of an object related to the planet, Sun, as well as the asteroid belt. The important role also belongs to time when object got captured, for how long the object had been near Sun (perihelion) and at what distance.

The goal of this article is to eliminate the biblical-style of thinking of simultaneous creation of all objects and their inability to change during time, as well as to point out that everything could be explained by the already existing evidence and processes.“ from http://www.svemir-ipaksevrti.com/Universe-and-rotation.html#differences-in -structure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Weitter Duckss

https://www.space.com/40643-first-interstellar-immigrant-asteroid-jupiter-orbit.html

Articles continue. about the constant growth of bodies in the universe.
In our discussion (4-5 years ago), there was a question of how the bodies could grow; to the size of Earth etc, when we have small bodies totaling 6% of Earth mass.
In a short time (at the beginning of searching for such objects) we have an answer.  

https://www.space.com/40643-first-interstellar-immigrant-asteroid-jupiter-orbit.htmlhttps://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/small-asteroid-or-comet-visits-from-beyond-the-solar-system

Within the growth of an object, some smaller object is starting a reaction when colliding with a star. If that should remain a rare event, it needs to be a specific event under the specific conditions. The only possible specificity is for that object (the errant objects, incoming from outside the Solar system) to arrive vertically onto one of the poles and to hit the opening of a cyclone that exists on the poles of stars. That way, it would get an opportunity to break into the interior of an object. Comet ISON is the evidence that objects with vertical trajectories really exist in the Universe.”  http://www.svemir-ipaksevrti.com/the-Universe-rotating.html#12b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.