Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.

Betelgeuse will be visible as a Supernova in March of 2025

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Tom O'Neil said:

Can my python code formula be correct by using the ancient Egyptian or Extra-Terrestrial Great Pyramid to Betelgeuse proportion measurements to predict light delay to gravitational wave; as seen by a gravitational wave on January 14, 2020 from Betelgeuse? I say yes!

Here is my calculation for Betelgeuse due to a gravitational wave release on January 14, 2020 which I believe Betelgeuse exploded on 1491.

My calculation here from python code due to my Gravity Geometric calculation predicts like orbital decay near 1% for difference in speed of gravity to light speed:
529.1  534.64 = 0.98963788717641777644770312733802100 x 0.98963788717641777644770312733802 = 98.963788717641777644770312733802100 - 98.963788717641777644770312733802 = 1.03 % lag delay of light from Betelgeuse due to core collapse in 1491 from a gravity wave on January 14, 2020.

```
import time
print('''Two to the power of Exponential growth of Gravities
Constant <G> multiplied by the fine structure contant                multiplied by 12 hours divided by n.

To obtain a light year delay from a gravitational wave on            January 14, 2020 sourced at Betelgeuse enter these        parameters:

divide Proton: 2489
Spin Number: .594
Enter Parsec's: 150
Subtract Parsec's: 5
________________________________________ ''')
while True:
n = int(input("Enter Number to divide Proton: "))
s = float(input("Spin Number: "))
Parsec = int(input("Enter number of Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
Plus_Parsec = int(input("Add Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
Minus_Parsec = int(input("Subtract Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
start_time = time.time()
G_constant = (.00000000006674)
proton_width = (((0.00000000000001)*s)/(n))
gravity_wave = ((proton_width))
G = ((pow(2,((1 +(((.00000000006674*.0072973*(12/n))*((( 1 ))))))))))
Gravities_Geometry = ((G*3.14))
Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source = (((((((G))/(gravity_wave))*86400*365)/((Gravities_Geometry)-((G/2))))/9461000000000000))/1000000

Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity = (3.26*(Parsec+(Plus_Parsec-Minus_Parsec)))
difference = (Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity-Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source)
print('{0:.14f}'.format(G_constant),'Gravitational Constant')
print('{0:.99f}'.format(proton_width),'Proton Width')
#	print('{0:.110f}'.format(gravity_wave),'Gravity Wave')
print(G,'G as exponential growth')
print('{0:.15f}'.format(Gravities_Geometry),'Gravities_Geometry')

print("{:,}".format(Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity),'Ligos distance approximation from luminosity in light years')
print('{0:,.1f}'.format(Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source),'Distance Gravity Wave traveled going by ONeils Gravity Geometric')
print("{:,}".format(difference),'difference from Ligo and Geometric source in light years')
e = int(time.time() - start_time)
print('{:02d}:{:02d}:{:02d}'.format(e // 3600, (e % 3600 // 60), e % 60))```

Why do you keep posting a program?  it doesn't prove anything, the calculations are based on what ever the user enters.

• 1

Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Why do you keep posting a program?  it doesn't prove anything, the calculations are based on what ever the user enters.

Extra Terrestrials say you are wrong Sir LIgo had to use these parameters to obtain Betelgeuse:

```divide Proton: 2489
Spin Number: .594
Enter Parsec's: 150
Subtract Parsec's: 5```
• 1

Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tom O'Neil said:

Extra Terrestrials say you are wrong Sir LIgo had to use these parameters to obtain Betelgeuse:

```
divide Proton: 2489
Spin Number: .594
Enter Parsec's: 150
Subtract Parsec's: 5```
```while True:
n = int(input("Enter Number to divide Proton: "))
s = float(input("Spin Number: "))```
• 1

Share on other sites

Guess we'll have to check this thread in 2025 if any of us are still alive.

• 1
• 2

Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Tom O'Neil said:

lmfao

That's not a valid analysis technique.  But I guess at least you are consistent - that's how you approach everything, it seems.

Here's a hint - if you want to be listened to, then YOU need to listen and start by actually acknowledging your errors.  Several FATAL errors have been pointed out to you, but your only response is to post more bull****.  You seem to have an almost endless supply.

• 2
• 1

Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

That's not a valid analysis technique.  But I guess at least you are consistent - that's how you approach everything, it seems.

Here's a hint - if you want to be listened to, then YOU need to listen and start by actually acknowledging your errors.  Several FATAL errors have been pointed out to you, but your only response is to post more bull****.  You seem to have an almost endless supply.

That's your perception, could it be wrong? I say yes!  Is my observational perception to a greater degree more valid than ChrLzs, Ancient astronaut theory says yes!

• 3

Share on other sites

• GP
• alienz
• AA

Pending:

• Niburu
• alien abduction
• witness reports
• Reichsflugscheibe
• to be continued ...
• 1

Share on other sites
On 7/10/2021 at 1:20 AM, Tom O'Neil said:

On January 14, 2020 the folks at Ligo Laser Interferometer Labs reported a mysterious gravity wave which does not fit the normal signature of a Black Hole merger nor a Neutron Star Black Hole Merger.  Some have suggested the signature gravity wave may very well have been a Supernova event, because of its short duration.

Just prior to the gravity wave burst the star Betelgeuse has undergone some unusual dimming in 2019.

The problem is the people of Ligo could not pin-point the location of the gravity wave burst yet they have stated it may have come from the Orion Constellation where Betelgeuse resides.

Gravity waves when traveling through space do not bend around stars as does light, therefore gravity waves would arrive at earth before a Supernova flash.

Since gravity waves is cutting edge science and not enough data has been retrieved to be compared for lag time of light to a gravity wave arrival time; as this is all theory at the moment trying to predict the speed of lights lag time compared to gravity waves from a distant object in space, I have found a calculation.  However, my theory is based on a measurement that Betelgeuse's distance in light years is 535 from the Great Pyramid.  Something tells me a very advanced civilization built the pyramids which exceeded our technology and to me it could be extra-terrestrial.  Mankind has not been able to approximate Betelgeuse's light year distance properly and there is several speculations of its distance online.

Knowing the exact distance in light years to Betelgeuse is pivotal if one were to predict a Supernova flash shortly from Betelgeuse in the future due to a gravity wave emission. I wrote a program in python which predicts the difference from a gravity wave geometric calculation to light years that maybe able to predict when Betelgeuse goes Supernova if it did indeed explode in 1491. This calculation I came up with .99307 x 535 = 529.84795 from my python program. The lag for the light delay should arrive sometime in March of 2025 knowing that the difference in light years is about 5.15205.

Here is a vid that explains what I have done:

For the below code here is some input information for black holes I used to determine distance from the data at Ligo Labs:

When using my python code you input:

Enter Number to divide Proton: 10000
Spin Number: 1
Enter number of Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: 410
Add Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: 160
Subtract Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: 180

or another one

_______________

Enter Number to divide Proton: 1000000
Spin Number: 8
Enter number of Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: 5300
Add Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: 2400
Subtract Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: 2600

Here is the code I programmed for the gravity geometric in python:

```
import time

print('''Two to the power of Exponential growth of Gravities

Constant <G> multiplied by the fine structure contant multiplied

by 12 hours divided by n.

________________________________________ ''')

while True:

n = int(input("Enter Number to divide Proton: "))

s = int(input("Spin Number: "))

Parsec = int(input("Enter number of Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))

Plus_Parsec = int(input("Add Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))

Minus_Parsec = int(input("Subtract Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))

start_time = time.time()

G_constant = (.00000000006674)

proton_width = (((0.00000000000001)*s)/(n))

gravity_wave = ((proton_width))

G = ((pow(2,((1 +(((.00000000006674*.0072973*(12/n))*((( 1 ))))))))))

Gravities_Geometry = ((G*3.14))

Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source = ((((((G))/(gravity_wave))*86400*365)/((Gravities_Geometry)-((G/2))))/9461000000000000)

Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity = (1000000*3.26*(Parsec+(Plus_Parsec-Minus_Parsec)))

difference = (Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity-Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source)

print('{0:.14f}'.format(G_constant),'Gravitational Constant')

#    print('{0:.99f}'.format(proton_width),'Proton Width')

#    print('{0:.110f}'.format(gravity_wave),'Gravity Wave')

print(G,'G as exponential growth')

print('{0:.15f}'.format(Gravities_Geometry),'Gravities_Geometry')

print("{:,}".format(Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity),'Ligos distance approximation from luminosity in light years')

print('{0:,.1f}'.format(Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source),'Distance Gravity Wave traveled going by ONeils Gravity Geometric')

print("{:,}".format(difference),'difference from Ligo and Geometric source in light years')

e = int(time.time() - start_time)

print('{:02d}:{:02d}:{:02d}'.format(e // 3600, (e % 3600 // 60), e % 60))```

@All

I finally found another Gravity Wave Measurement measured against the diameter of the proton. The first gravity wave found was (GW150914) measured at a 10,000th of the diameter of a proton. It had a spin of -.01 and so in my python code it would be a 1 spin. I should explain Luminosity Distance, it is an approximation in the linear direction because light bends around massive objects on its way from deep space to the measuring point. At some junctures light can bend greater than other junctures, because of mass differences and this is why it’s an approximation for very deep objects. Often times Luminosity will be printed like this:
5300+2400−2600.

So to find the total light years. You would multiply 1,000,000*3.26*(5300+(2400-2600))light years

Quote

Five years ago the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) detected a ripple in spacetime that was just one ten-thousandth the width of a proton
[www.scientificamerican.com]

As I desperately searched the net to see if my Gravity Geometric was correct; I finally stumbled on to an article regarding the gravity wave (GW190521) measured at a 1,000,000th of the diameter of a proton. I then looked at the spin for the GW190521 and it was an .08 and so in my python code it would be an 8 spin which also plays a role in the calculation.

Quote

Then, on 21 May 2019, those waves passed through our planet. Did you feel it? Probably not; the expansion and contraction of space would've stretched you less than a millionth of the diameter of a proton.
[www.syfy.com]

This was great that I found two measurements to test my Gravity Geometric to see how it faired against the approximate luminosity distance measuring stick. And just as I imagined at greater distances than smaller Luminosity as an approximation increases with time, because light bends around other massive objects on its way to where its being measured. On the other hand gravity takes a straight path to the target being measured unhindered by mass. So this is why I'm so excited to show the result. I'm not using Luminosity to show distance and perhaps as I just discussed light not being accurate, that I'm spot on for light years with my Geometric Result.

Nostradamus reckons its November this year.

Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, toast said:

Reichsflugscheibe

What is this?  There is no translation and my german is rusty.   is scheibe disc in english?

Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Desertrat56 said:

What is this?  There is no translation and my german is rusty.   is scheibe disc in english?

Exactly, Scheibe=disc.

• 1

Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, toast said:

Exactly, Scheibe=disc.

so would that be "flying disc empire" in english?

Share on other sites

Group Burst Detectors H1,L1,V1 Time of Signal 2020-01-14 02:08:18.230000 UTC Time Sent 2020-01-14 02:48:21 UTC False Alarm Rate once per 25.84 years Central Frequency 64.698303 Hz Duration 0.013534 seconds

Map of Orion Constellation for gravity wave S200114f

The short burst was part of the problem for Ligo to accurately pinpoint the source of a gravity wave on January 14, 2020 and sourcing gravity wave locations is complicated as I understand. This was their shortest burst ever, indicative of a core collapse, because no black hole mergers nor black hole neutron star mergers fit such a short burst. It looks as though they collected some heading information for an area of the sky without the complete pin point location. My ratio calculation of 16.17M ☉ really predicts it to be a fit for Betelgeuse from the limited information provided here with frequency and burst duration. When compared to the first gravity wave ever detected of 65M ☉ from a black hole merger the details provided were 260Hz and .15 seconds duration for GW150914. Without all the information basically we have an artifact to decode in the sky. A 535 light year accurate distance reading would imply this calculation which fits with orbital decay for light retardation.

Their analysis reported a present-day mass of 16.5 to 19 solar mass--which is slightly lower than the most-recent estimates. The study also revealed how big Betelgeuse is, as well as its distance from Earth. The star's actual size has been a bit of a mystery: earlier studies, for instance, suggested it could be bigger than the orbit of Jupiter. Their analysis reported a present-day mass of 16.5 to 19 solar mass

Above image Betelgeuse 16.17M ☉

My calculation here from python code due to my Gravity Geometric predicts like orbital decay near 1% for difference in speed of gravity to light speed:

Python Code link Gravity Geometric Calculation

529.1 ÷ 534.64 = .989 x 100 = 98.963 | 100- 98.963 = 1.03 % delay of light from Betelgeuse due to core collapse in 1491 from a gravity wave on January 14, 2020.
PSR 1913+16 orbital decay The speed of gravity (more correctly, the speed of gravitational waves) can be calculated from observations of the orbital decay rate of binary pulsars PSR 1913+16 (the Hulse–Taylor binary system noted above) and PSR B1534+12. The orbits of these binary pulsars are decaying due to loss of energy in the form of gravitational radiation. The rate of this energy loss ("gravitational damping") can be measured, and since it depends on the speed of gravity, comparing the measured values to theory shows that the speed of gravity is equal to the speed of light to within 1%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity

That sky chart makes this gravity wave event and Betelgeuse seem to be close together. The actual coordinates should be considered, though.

Betelgeuse: 5 hours, 55 minutes, 10 seconds; +7 degrees, 24 minutes, 24 seconds

Localization of S200114F: 7 hours, 20 minutes, 28 seconds to 7hours 28 minutes, 48 seconds; +16 degrees, 53 minutes, 7 seconds to +17 degrees, 44 minutes, 5 seconds.

At their closest, Betelgeuse and S200114F are along a line of similar declination, but 1 hour and 25 minutes apart in Right Ascension. Assuming my calculations are correct, that places them a bit over 21 degrees apart in the sky

Although localization depends on the waveform morphology, approximately 50% of detected signals would be imaged after observing 100–200 deg2 in 2015 and 60–110 deg2 in 2016, although knowledge of the waveform can reduce this to as little as 22 deg2. Unlike many electromagnetic observations, gravitational-wave source position uncertainties are very large, typically larger than 100 deg2. Therefore, gravitational-wave searches produce probability distributions over the sky, rather than single locations, from which meaningful quantities are derived. These probability distributions can have very complicated shapes, including severe fragmentation and spatially separated support. A thorough understanding of these distributions can inform the design of follow-up programs as well as the choice of which events should be pursued. Gravitational-wave source position uncertainties are very large

Not so many people are familiar with Orbital Decay with a light delay, Shapiro Delay with light and Einstein's General Relativity regarding the .12 second delay of light at 1.75 arc seconds. The information I have provided points to a Betelgeuse core collapse. I understand that many people need instant visible evidence yet due to the hard facts that work on the medium of light we will have to wait until the year 2025 to see evidence of Betelgeuse as a Supernova from a gravitational wave on January 14, 2020.

Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Is it possible when the visible Supernova of Betelgeuse in March of 2025 happens, could this python code which proves the Orbital Delay of 1%; would the calculation earn me a Noble Peace Prize?

import time
print('''Two to the power of Exponential growth of Gravities
Constant <G> multiplied by the fine structure contant multiplied
by 12 hours divided by n.
To obtain a light year delay from a gravitational wave on January
14, 2020 sourced at Betelgeuse enter these parameters:

divide Proton: 2489
Spin Number: .594
Enter Parsec's: 150
Subtract Parsec's: 5
<a href="<a href="https://interradial-scale.000webhostapp.com/">Betelgeuse will be visible as a Supernova in March of 2025</a>
________________________________________ ''')
while True:
n = int(input("Enter Number to divide Proton: "))
s = float(input("Spin Number: "))
Parsec = int(input("Enter number of Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
Plus_Parsec = int(input("Add Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
Minus_Parsec = int(input("Subtract Parsec's for Luminosity Distance: "))
start_time = time.time()
G_constant = (.00000000006674)
proton_width = (((0.00000000000001)*s)/(n))
gravity_wave = ((proton_width))
G = ((pow(2,((1 +(((.00000000006674*.0072973*(12/n))*((( 1 ))))))))))
Gravities_Geometry = ((G*3.14))
Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source = (((((((G))/(gravity_wave))*86400*365)/((Gravities_Geometry)-((G/2))))/9461000000000000))/1000000
Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity = (3.26*(Parsec+(Plus_Parsec-Minus_Parsec)))
difference = (Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity-Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source)
print('{0:.14f}'.format(G_constant),'Gravitational Constant')
print('{0:.99f}'.format(proton_width),'Proton Width')
#    print('{0:.110f}'.format(gravity_wave),'Gravity Wave')
print(G,'G as exponential growth')
print('{0:.15f}'.format(Gravities_Geometry),'Gravities_Geometry')

print("{:,}".format(Ligos_approximation_Black_hole_merger_from_luminosity),'Ligos distance approximation from luminosity in light years')
print('{0:,.1f}'.format(Distance_to_Gravity_Waves_Source),'Distance Gravity Wave traveled going by ONeils Gravity Geometric')
print("{:,}".format(difference),'difference from Ligo and Geometric source in light years')
e = int(time.time() - start_time)
print('{:02d}:{:02d}:{:02d}'.format(e // 3600, (e % 3600 // 60), e % 60))

Edited by Tom O'Neil

Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

Nostradamus reckons its November this year.

Thanks sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo much for reposting all of Tom O'Neill's drivel, in order to make that fabulously funny response.

You really put a lot of thought into your posts, Rabid Mongoose...  (Sorry, I just can't think of you as a Cookie Monster.)

• 1

Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Tom O'Neil said:

Is it possible when the visible Supernova of Betelgeuse in March of 2025 happens, could this python code which proves the Orbital Delay of 1%; would the calculation earn me a Noble Peace Prize?

Only if you did it whilst wearing a pair of women's lace knickers on you head.  Preferably pink (the Norwegians prefer pink ones)

Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

so would that be "flying disc empire" in english?

Somehow yes, but not really because "Reichsflugscheibe" is a proper name. "Flugscheibe" should sound a to be old Germany language, long before the term UFO came up. "Reich" = third Reich plus "Flugscheibe" = "Reichsflugscheibe" (with an "s" which mean the Flugscheibe is developed/owned by the "Reich") = "Wunderwaffe" of the third Reich. I know, the German language can be real horror for non-native speakers and I can tell you, for at least 20% of the Germans as well.

Share on other sites
2 hours ago, toast said:

Somehow yes, but not really because "Reichsflugscheibe" is a proper name. "Flugscheibe" should sound a to be old Germany language, long before the term UFO came up. "Reich" = third Reich plus "Flugscheibe" = "Reichsflugscheibe" (with an "s" which mean the Flugscheibe is developed/owned by the "Reich") = "Wunderwaffe" of the third Reich. I know, the German language can be real horror for non-native speakers and I can tell you, for at least 20% of the Germans as well.

Just call it what it is: Nazi Flying saucer

I saw a documentary about them so they must be real .....

• 1
• 1

Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This is amazing with calculations from the gravitational wave of effective spin with .594 it shows the newly formed Neutron Star for Betelgeuse with a 3.26 ms.

divide Proton: 2489
Spin Number: .594
Enter Parsec's: 150

https://replit.com/@TommyONeil/Calculates-light-year-delay-from-a-gravitational-wave#main.py

Edited by Tom O'Neil

Share on other sites
On 7/20/2021 at 11:29 PM, Cookie Monster said:

Nostradamus reckons its November this year.

Considering Nostradamus' usual hitrate that means we can confidently exclude november then.

Btw can you elaborate in which quatrain he "reckons" this ?

Share on other sites
On 7/20/2021 at 11:29 PM, Cookie Monster said:

Nostradamus reckons its November this year.

Did he really??

Well, *I* predicted it to happen in 2021 :

If I had drank more, I could have come up with day and hour too, haha!

Gawd...

Share on other sites
On 7/19/2021 at 8:23 PM, Tom O'Neil said:

The above image is a localization of a gravitational event from the Orion Constellation which I would say is very close to Betelgeuse.  The gravity wave event on January 14, 2020 regarding S2OO114f is indicative of a very short burst timing wise so its likely a core collapse.

And we can stop right there.

"Orion Constellation" is not a flat spot on a flat planisphere, as you seem to think it it.  It is composed of seven main stars (and 81 minor ones ... at least visible.)  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(constellation)

Betelgeuse is 500-600 light years from Earth.  Rigel is 860 light years away (and hundreds of light years from Betelgeuse.)  Belatrix is around 250 light years from us and hundreds of light years from those other stars.

You don't get a "gravitational event from the Orion Constellation" any more than you get a tornado in Dallas, Texas affecting London, England.  They're too far away.  You might get one from a single star or other stellar object, but you're not getting it from a constellation.

• 3
• 1

Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Kenemet said:

And we can stop right there.

"Orion Constellation" is not a flat spot on a flat planisphere, as you seem to think it it.  It is composed of seven main stars (and 81 minor ones ... at least visible.)  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_(constellation)

Betelgeuse is 500-600 light years from Earth.  Rigel is 860 light years away (and hundreds of light years from Betelgeuse.)  Belatrix is around 250 light years from us and hundreds of light years from those other stars.

You don't get a "gravitational event from the Orion Constellation" any more than you get a tornado in Dallas, Texas affecting London, England.  They're too far away.  You might get one from a single star or other stellar object, but you're not getting it from a constellation.

People often forget that the constellations are a purely manmade concept. They came to be when people still believed in the geocentric model of the universe. Sadly some people still do.

• 4

Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, Kenemet said:

And we can stop right there.

"Orion Constellation" is not a flat spot on a flat planisphere, as you seem to think it it.

Exactly..  Two things...

First, for anyone who expects to be taken seriously on the topic of astronomy to then talk about the Orion asterism as if it was a gravity source ... well, it's ludicrous and laughable.  Asterisms and Constellations and 'Star Signs' are essentially meaningless.  Most of them, as Kenemet explained are at HUGELY varying distances, and the stars that form the pattern as viewed from earth are not related in anyway, and certainly do not form a coherent gravity source.

And yet here we have Tom O'Neill, who has (as the second thing..) now suddenly morphed into 'Holy Spirit' and has a new photo (trying to escape from responsibility for earlier postings, Tom/Holy?), basing a string of completely invalid 'calculations' on the 'foundation' of an utterly false (indeed, ridiculous) premise that belongs in the bin.

Tom, join a flippin' astronomy club (and ask questions rather than try to spread your silliness further), or perhaps read an Astronomy book for children....

It's garbage posting and is a complete waste of time and a waste of UM's resources.

Edited by ChrLzs
• 3
• 1