[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

The overwhelming majority of meteorites in LEO are like grains of sand. They have Whipple bumpers on the ISS that catch meteorites of that size:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whipple_shield
If they didn't have those, then they would be punctured quite regularly.

How many hits can such a shield withstand? What size objects? How to protect numerous and huge solar panels? The Pioneers and Voyagers allegedly flew vast distances, including the Kuiper Belt and the Oort Cloud, and never collided with anything in space? This is statistically impossible. Not to mention the degree of diffusion (scattering) of the radio signal proportional to the distance.

[alancalverd]

The Pioneers and Voyagers allegedly flew vast distances........and never collided with anything in space?

That's why it is called "space" - it is mostly empty.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Whipple shields cover an insignificant area of the spacecraft. How about meteorites hitting the exposed parts of the satellite? How about wear and tear of whipple shield?

[Kryptid]

The Pioneers and Voyagers allegedly flew vast distances

No, they actually flew vast distances.

This is statistically impossible.

Show us the math.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

That's why it is called "space" - it is mostly empty.

Space is almost empty, but despite this, thousands of meteors burn out in the earth's atmosphere in just one night? None of the rovers recorded a single meteorite fall on the surface of Mars, given that its official size is not much smaller than that of Earth, and the atmosphere is much thinner than Earth's. That is, much more meteorites should reach the surface of Mars, including objects of such sizes that burn up in the earth's atmosphere.
<Link Removed> explains all the paradoxes of the official one.

Mod edit: Keep all of the talk about your model confined to the thread that I told you to keep it confined to.

[Kryptid]

Space is almost empty, but despite this, thousands of meteors burn out in the earth's atmosphere in just one night?

Yes. Even something as small as a grain of sand can produce a visible shooting star.

Now how about showing us your math?

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Quote from: AlexandrKushnirtshuk on Today at 22:52:06
This is statistically impossible.
Show us the math.

Look. A very expensive scientific project - the launch of a spacecraft over a long distance, during which (with a certain probability) this spacecraft can be destroyed by a meteorite at any moment, not to mention numerous other breakdowns and failures that can disable this very expensive spacecraft.The feasibility of such a project is zero. Such a project is senseless and impractical.

[Kryptid]

Look. A very expensive scientific project - the launch of a satellite over a long distance, during which (with a certain probability) this spacecraft can be destroyed by a meteorite at any moment, not to mention numerous other breakdowns and failures that can disable this very expensive spacecraft.The feasibility of such a project is zero. Such a project is senseless and impractical.

Show.
Us.
The.
Math.

[alancalverd]

Space is almost empty, but despite this, thousands of meteors burn out in the earth's atmosphere in just one night? None of the rovers recorded a single meteorite fall on the surface of Mars

That's the difference between a meteor (that burns up completely - very common) and a meteorite (that makes landfall - very rare).

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Farewell. This is my personal ban to your site.

[Kryptid]

Farewell. This is my personal ban to your site.

Does this mean you are going to stop posting science denialism on our website? If so, thank you.

[alancalverd]

How about meteorites hitting the exposed parts of the satellite? How about wear and tear of whipple shield?

Happens all the time, which is why nothing lasts for ever. There is a finite probability of an airplane colliding with a meteor,  a bird, or even another plane, but at any moment there are on average 10,000 planes in the sky because flight is not considered senseless or impractical.   

[evan_au]

None of the rovers recorded a single meteorite fall on the surface of Mars

None of the rovers were equipped with a seismometer - but they were equipped with motors and noisy nuclear heating systems that would have made seismic detection impossible.

But the Insight Mars Lander was, and it waited 128 days for the first rumble.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/first-marsquake-detected-nasa-mars-insight-lander-space

The atmosphere of Mars at ground level has about 1% the pressure of Earth's atmosphere at ground level.
Most meteors approaching Earth burn up at an altitude of around 100km, where the pressure is about 0.2% of Earth's surface pressure. So most meteors would also burn up in Mars' atmosphere. One would have to land pretty close to produce measurable seismic waves.

However, the Moon has no atmosphere, and Moonquakes have been detected from impacting space debris.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_seismology#Moonquakes

Whipple shields cover an insignificant area of the spacecraft.

The Wikipedia article mentions that there are over 100 different configurations of Whipple Shield on the ISS.
For a space station that is composed of around 30 modules (plus lots of solar panels), that sounds like they have tried to cover almost all of the ISS with Whipple shields.
It's true that you can't cover the front of a solar cell with an aluminium Whipple shield - but it is possible to build in redundancy, so that if one solar cell fails (eg due to a micrometeorite impact), it is switched out of circuit.

My model of the Universe explains all the paradoxes of the official one.

And since it is supported by evidence that can't be true, then this theory can't be true, either...

[Bored chemist]

Farewell. This is my personal ban to your site.

Can you take this guy with you ?
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=82016.0

And
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=5520.0

[wolfekeeper]

That's why it is called "space" - it is mostly empty.

Space is almost empty, but despite this, thousands of meteors burn out in the earth's atmosphere in just one night? None of the rovers recorded a single meteorite fall on the surface of Mars, given that its official size is not much smaller than that of Earth, and the atmosphere is much thinner than Earth's. That is, much more meteorites should reach the surface of Mars, including objects of such sizes that burn up in the earth's atmosphere.

Nope. The Earth is a meteorite magnet. The Earth is much bigger than Mars or space probes and so its gravitational field attracts the meteorites so very much more and it gets many more impacts. Because of that the ISS is smothered in Whipple shields, and they have to occasionally go around and replace ones that have been too badly damaged.

The astronauts regularly hear impacts pinging off the hull in fact, both natural as well as man made space debris.

[Origin]

Farewell. This is my personal ban to your site.

Thank you, that will improve the forums overall quality.

[Janus]

Space is almost empty, but despite this, thousands of meteors burn out in the earth's atmosphere in just one night? None of the rovers recorded a single meteorite fall on the surface of Mars, given that its official size is not much smaller than that of Earth, and the atmosphere is much thinner than Earth's. That is, much more meteorites should reach the surface of Mars, including objects of such sizes that burn up in the earth's atmosphere.

Surface area of Earth = 5e8 sq km.  If only 1/2 of that is hit by meteors in a night, and 10,000 meteor hit per night, then we are looking at 1 meteor per every 2.5e 4 sg km   (an area ~ 160km x 160km)  That's spread out pretty thinly.  Put another way, it would take 68.5 years of steady nightly bombardment to bring the average up to 1 meteor per sq km.
"Thousands of meteors per night" sounds like a huge number, but it is pretty insignificant when compared to the size of the the target they are spread across.
Plus, the vast of majority of those meteors are particles the size of a grain of and or smaller.  Even if most of them reached the ground on Mars, you'd practically have to be on top of the impact point to notice it( since the Escape velocity of Mars is a ~45% of Earth's, the average impact of those micrometeorites would have ~1/5 the energy) .   Your grasp of the relative numbers involved is way off.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Show.
Us.
The.
Math.

Math 1
There is a photo animation on the web that shows a solar flare in the direction of one of these satellites. The STEREO Ahead spacecraft supposedly moves along the Earth's orbit, that is, at the same distance from the Sun as the Earth. This is an animation of STEREO A photos from July 23, 2012.



The solar flare flew exactly in the direction of STEREO A. It began at almost exactly 03:00 (UTC), and the first visible particles of coronal matter (white ripples in the animation) flew to STEREO A at about 07:00 (UTC). If the distance from the Sun to the Earth's orbit (on which the STEREO spacecraft are located) were 150,000,000 km, as is officially believed, then the speed of coronal material particles would be 150,000,000 km. / 4 hours / 60 minutes / 60 seconds = about 10,000 km / s. - this is 3% of the speed of light, which is hardly physically possible.

The solar wind is a stream of ionized particles (mainly helium-hydrogen plasma) flowing out from the solar corona at a speed of 300-1200 km/s into the surrounding space.

In addition, it is generally known that the flow of coronal matter from a solar flare reaches the Earth's orbit (in which the STEREO spacecraft are supposedly located) in an average of 150,000,000 km. / 750 km / s / 60 sec. / 60 min. / 24 hours = ~ 2.5 - 3 days. But in fact, the animation of the photos turns out to be 07:00 (UTC) - 03:00 (UTC) = 4 hours. Looks like it turns out this way, because STEREO spacecrafts are located on the orbit of Venus (around the Sun), and SOHO spacecraft is located in common center of mass between the Earth and the Sun in the Solar System (Universe) with approximately the same parameters as in the schematic image below.



Math 2

The duration of an eclipse is directly proportional to the size of the object, all other things being equal (distance and speed). The duration of the total phase of a solar eclipse is 7.5 minutes (the Moon completely covers the Sun for 7.5 minutes). The duration of the total phase of the lunar eclipse is 108 minutes (the Earth completely covers the Sun for 108 minutes). With the same distance between the Moon and the Earth. At the same speed of the Moon (the orbit of the Moon moves with the speed of the Earth). The diameter of the Earth is 12,742 km. Therefore, the diameter of the Moon can be calculated using the following formula: 12 742 * (7.5 / 108) = 885 km. The official diameter of the Moon is 3,474 km. Moreover, the result of calculating the diameter of the Moon quite accurately coincides with the size of the track between South America and Antarctica (875 km. + - 25 km.), which confirms the calculation and minimizes probability of a simple coincidence.



Evidence 1

Two traces on the surface of the Earth (from Sun and Moon).
1) Ratio of diameters approximately 3 to 1.
2) Both have an eastern direction.
3) Both have an eastern position relative to their PreContinents (PreAmerica and PreEurasia).
4) Both have diametrically opposite locations on the surface of the Earth.



In the image below, the sizes of the traces are almost the same due to the projection of the surface of the sphere onto a rectangular plane.



The Unsolved Mystery of the Earth Blobs
http://eos.org/features/the-unsolved-mystery-of-the-earth-blobs

Evidence 2





Evidence 3
Correlation between Betelgeuse brightness and solar activity. Betelgeuse is estimated to be 642.5 light years away. Why is dynamics of brightness of Betelgeuse so closely aligned with the dynamics of solar activity?

Diagram source link:
https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/couldnt-sun-be-cause-global-warming


Diagram source link: https://skyandtelescope.org/observing/fainting-betelgeuse/

Moreover, in addition to the correlation with 10-13 years solar cycles on the Betelgeuse brightness graph, there are clear 1 year cycles of brightness fluctuations also visible. Based on this fact, I assume that Betelgeuse, like all other "stars" and "galaxies", are located in the Oort Cloud and reflect sunlight.

Annual cyclicity of Betelgeuse brightness fluctuations.

The annual cyclical fluctuations in the brightness of Betelgeuse can be explained by the suggestion that in December the Sun is farther from it, and in June - is closer to it (considering the rotation of the Earth and the Sun as in the animation below, the Earth is larger). Betelgeuse is located in the constellation Orion. Sun in Orion (Orion behind Sun) is in June.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Theoretical background: the nature of light and the size of the Universe.

A photon has energy and momentum (weight) but no mass. It is obvious that light is vibrations of some medium (ether). This environment cannot but have resistance, damping or absorbing light vibrations with time and distance. I will describe the essence in simple words so as not to complicate and not drag out the explanation.

1) Water waves.
They spread longer (in time) than sound, but at a shorter distance (at a lower speed). Distribution medium: water.

2) Sound waves.
The lifetime of sound waves is shorter than that of water waves, but the speed (and distance) is greater. Distribution medium: atmosphere (gas).

3) Light waves.
By analogy, the lifetime of light waves should be much shorter than the lifetime of sound waves, but since the speed of light is about 300,000 km/s - the propagation distance is greater. Distribution medium: aether.


(a schematic representation of a photon - a conventional unit of oscillation (wave) of the aether) Image text translation: The movement of one light wave (photon) from the source to complete attenuation and / or absorption by the medium (aether).

At the beginning of the 20th century, scientists rejected the completely plausible hypothesis of the Tired Light, began to carry out fortune-telling by redshifts of the spectrum (like on coffee grounds, only by the spectral emissions), and billions of light years, black holes, dark energies, and distant-distant galaxies rushed.

Light years?

A photon cannot exist not only for years, but even for minutes. Example. Standing in the lake. You throw a stone. First you hear the sound, later the waves come. Waves on water, sound waves in a gaseous medium and light waves in ether are phenomena of the same nature, but of different orders due to the environment. If waves on water “live” for minutes, and sound waves in a gaseous medium “live” for seconds, then light waves in their medium (ether) “live” for a fraction of a second. All this depends on the power of the source of wave oscillations, so it can be assumed that light waves from the Sun can exist for several seconds, but not more (not minutes, and even less years).

Even if in the space environment (vacuum) there is no resistance, there is no heat exchange, then the distance is overcome (volume expansion with distance), which cannot occur absolutely without energy consumption. In addition, the space of the cosmic vacuum cannot be absolutely empty. There cannot but be certain, albeit minimal, resistance and heat transfer. Light years and 8 light minutes from Sun to Earth are physically impossible.

Again. Attentively. This is very important to understand. Overcoming distance in any environment, that is, regardless of the environment, cannot occur without energy consumption (or with zero energy consumption). Since a photon has a very low energy charge, and a very high speed of movement, and no medium (including space) can have absolutely zero resistance, then, accordingly, the lifetime (life) of one photon (wave oscillation of the medium - ether) is very short, not exceeding at least one minute.

Definition*. The lifetime of a unit of wave oscillations (one wave) is inversely proportional to the speed of their propagation (or directly proportional to the inertia of the medium) and is directly proportional to the power of their source.
* - this definition is correct with or without the aether.

[Origin]

Hey!!  What happened to your personal ban?  Well I guess this makes sense.  You have been wrong about everything else you wrote, so it makes sense that your declaration that you are leaving would be wrong too.  Oh well, let your pseudoscience and misinformation flow forth....