0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Do you confirm that our scientists at Hubble telescope OBSERVE 512 G stars in a radius of 100Ly around us?
Do you confirm that our scientists OBSERVE for 64 stars in a radius of 50Ly around us?
Hence, do you agree that there is perfect correlation between the calculated G star per 50LY sphere ( in that 100 LY sphere) to the measured 50 Ly sphere around us?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 05/12/2021 16:24:47Do you confirm that our scientists at Hubble telescope OBSERVE 512 G stars in a radius of 100Ly around us?No, there are ABOUT 512 G type stars.Quote from: Dave Lev on 05/12/2021 16:24:47Do you confirm that our scientists OBSERVE for 64 stars in a radius of 50Ly around us?No, there are ABOUT 64 G type stars.Quote from: Dave Lev on 05/12/2021 16:24:47Hence, do you agree that there is perfect correlation between the calculated G star per 50LY sphere ( in that 100 LY sphere) to the measured 50 Ly sphere around us?No, it is not a PERFECT correlation. It is roughly correct though.You said: "Hence, exactly 64 stars in any 50Ly sphere." This is wrong. Why can't you admit you made an error? Are you incapable of errors?
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 19:16:51Of those 64, are 32 in the Northern and 32 in the southern sky?
How can we accept the density wave
It seems to me that the main problem with the modern science
The density wave should explain the spiral galaxy structure.However, in the following article it is stated clearly that it can last for maximal ten rotation periods:https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4418&context=etd"Currently, the theoretical situation is such that quite diverse views co-exist and there is no consensus that a single mechanism is responsible for all of the observed spiral patterns in galaxies. While some experts insist that spiral patterns must last only a galactic rotation or two, other theorists argue that swing amplification can give rise to superposed modes of the system which can last for up to ten rotation periods".So, how could it be that the Milky Way last for so long time?Our scientists claim that it takes 240MY for the sun to set one rotation. In the last 6 BY it had been set about 25 rotation periods.Hence, how the Milky Way could last for 25 rotation periods while the upper limit of the density wave is just 10 rotation periods?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 06/12/2021 04:07:49How can we accept the density waveI don't think we have.That idea is over 50 years old and there have been other ideas since.
My theory is that a spiral galaxy is an action/reaction affect caused by gravity. As stars form due to gravity, the gravitational potential of the galaxy decreases, internally.
So you confirm that there is no real theory for spiral galaxy and the density wave theory is useless.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 06/12/2021 16:28:04So you confirm that there is no real theory for spiral galaxy and the density wave theory is useless.You need to stop telling lies like that right now.
Sorry if I didn't understand you correctly.
You are on record as having no understanding of what science does.
What you don't understand is that an incomplete theory is still useful.It isn't a problem with science, the problem is you.
Unfortunately, I can't share my point of view about that issue as I had been requested by Kryptid not to do so.
However, do you confirm that the entire science community clearly observes that "splinter from a piece of wood on the Sagittarius Arm of the Milky Way" and they all don't have a basic clue how it really works?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 07/12/2021 12:03:10However, do you confirm that the entire science community clearly observes that "splinter from a piece of wood on the Sagittarius Arm of the Milky Way" and they all don't have a basic clue how it really works?Of course not.You are just being silly again.
Please go ahead and explain how that splinter is created?
I'm part of the scientific community, but I don't observe the detailed shape of the milky way.
What kind of force could hold so many stars together in that shape of a wooden splinter?
That's why your assertion is obviously silly.
Why is it so difficult for you?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 08/12/2021 07:06:09Why is it so difficult for you?Again, your error here is one of logic, not science.Can we sort that out before you continue?
what kind of force could keep full of stars together in that wooden 3,000 light-years splinter?
As my logic is irrelevant
Would you kindly help us to overcome this logic problem
our scientists at NASA
our scientists
the entire science community
Maybe when you stop doing that we can get back to the science without your hopeless straw manning.