beecee

No I havn't and that's rather common knowledge. And knowing you from elsewhere, you also most certainly have not. As yet you have failed to show why any hypothetical assembly such as the Oort cloud can be classed as part of the solar system. And while we are at it, in your first post on this thread you rattle off many figures which I doubt you just keep in your head...Perhaps a reference would have been nice? [No I don't doubt them, but honesty as to how you acquired them would be appreciated] as follows....... Be that as it may, I am pretty certain taking into account the hypothetical nature of the Oort cloud, that the terminal shock bow and heliosheath where the solar wind is turned back and of course where "particle numbers" dramatically fall off, as I referenced earlier is correct, informally or otherwise. You take it easy now OK? I believe I have given a quick outlook and description of Oumuamua according to the data we have, so really, other then your usual pathetic pedant, I don't really believe I need accept anything that is not generally accepted anyway. Since the reason I have raised Oumuamua, has completely escaped you, I will enlighten...It shows and mentions that interstellar lopers, that are not part of our solar system, can and are identified on the odd occasion, and will have deemed to leave the solar system, when it leaves the heliosphere and is beyond the terminal shock zone, not considering the hypothetical Oort cloud of course.

Thanks T. McGrath, nice answer.

Yes, over the last couple of years any player that gets a head knock, serious enough to cause any notable unusual behaviour including being knocked to the ground, is immediatley taken off and replaced. He is then given what we call a HIA, Head Injury Assessment by a doctor, and in most occasions is rested from the rest of the game and even future games.

Wasn't the hypothetical notion that Jupiter and Saturn may have migrated inwards and then again outwards in those violent early days of the solar system, due to the discovery and observations of the many exoplanets that were "hot Jupiters" ?

Well since Grid Iron [yuk!] is the generally chosen winter football code in the US, that is probably understandable. Soccer in Australia, has grown tremendously over the last 20 years or so, but still is not the foremost football code in any of the states...In my own state of NSW, we have the greatest game of all, Rugby League, with soccer probably next in line with Rugby Union....Victoria along with SA has Australian Rules or as I like to call it, Arial Ping pong [Apologies to any Victorians out there] Queensland again is Rugby League, along with WA also. But on the odd occasions the rareity of a sport in a particular country may not mean a lack of world class champions..Australia has won gold medals at the Winter Olympics for example. Here's an example of the greatest game of all...[OK, OK I'm bloody well biased! ]

Bingo! My point exactly!

https://phys.org/news/2018-06-speculative-wormhole-echoes-revolutionize-astrophysics.html Speculative wormhole echoes could revolutionize astrophysics June 12, 2018, Plataforma SINC The scientific collaborations LIGO and Virgo have detected gravitational waves from the fusion of two black holes, inaugurating a new era in the study of the cosmos. But what if those ripples of space-time were not produced by black holes, but by other exotic objects? A team of European physicists suggest an alternative—wormholes that can be traversed to appear in another universe. Scientists have deduced the existence of black holes from a multitude of experiments, theoretical models and indirect observations such as the recent LIGO detections, which are believed to originate from the collision of two of these dark gravitational monsters. But there is a problem with black holes—they present an edge, called an event horizon, from which nothing can escape. This is in conflict with quantum mechanics, whose postulates ensure that information is always preserved, not lost. One of the theoretical ways to deal with this conflict is to explore the possibility that the alleged black holes we 'observe' in nature are no such thing, but rather some type of exotic compact objects (ECOs), such as wormholes, which do not have an event horizon. Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-06-speculative-wormhole-echoes-revolutionize-astrophysics.html#jCp LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL the paper: https://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.024040 Echoes of Kerr-like wormholes: ABSTRACT: Structure at the horizon scale of black holes would give rise to echoes of the gravitational wave signal associated with the post merger ringdown phase in binary coalescences. We study the waveform of echoes in static and stationary, traversable wormholes in which perturbations are governed by a symmetric effective potential. We argue that echoes are dominated by the wormhole quasinormal frequency nearest to the fundamental black hole frequency that controls the primary signal. We put forward an accurate method to construct the echoes’ waveform(s) from the primary signal and the quasinormal frequencies of the wormhole, which we characterize. We illustrate this in the static Damour-Solodukhin wormhole and in a new, rotating generalization that approximates a Kerr black hole outside the throat. Rotation gives rise to a potential with an intermediate plateau region that breaks the degeneracy of the quasinormal frequencies. Rotation also leads to late-time instabilities that, however, fade away for small angular momentum. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Wormholes, Einstein Rosen Bridges? These are speculated to exist at the singularity region of a BH. So can we also logically speculate that what we are seeing are "naked singularities"? Wormholes of course are allowed for by GR. an extract from the article....."The confirmation of echoes in the LIGO or Virgo signals would be a practically irrefutable proof that astrophysical black holes don't exist," Bueno says, adding, "Time will tell if these echoes exist or not. If the result were positive, it would be one of the greatest discoveries in the history of physics." I have a problem with the above....Any future confirmation of echoes would validate wormholes and/or ERB's, but why would they invalidate BH's? Why couldn't both exist? [It certainly would show that the five affirmed discoveries of binary BH accretion events were not BH's, but why does that supposedly invalidate BH's in general? ]

Hi T McGrath.... Which seems to suggest that the equations used to calculate these upper limits are faulty/wrong, and/or the equations as is, are neglecting some as yet unknown or unseen "property" of the degenerate mass ? But how would that remain as unseen? Certainly is...thanks.

Thanks. I see the points as I have listed them, just plain common sense, aligning with the goal of the scientific methodology. A small percentage of the many "amateurs" that frequent science forums, seem to suffer from delusions of grandeur and other baggage that I won't go into at this time, and just as obviously, what they are proposing in essence actually fail at the first two points. In my opinion Newtonian mechanics is not wrong per se: GR is simply a more accurate method of measuring things....much as a tape measure is sufficient in measuring a window frame say, without the need to use Vernier calipers. Whatever replaces GR will not invalidate GR, just extend the parameters at which GR is confined to. I believe this forum out of the three I have over the years been a part of, enforce sensible rules aligning with the scientific method better then the other two. To add to my other comment on what you have said, most of course do not pass the first two points, particularly re evidence. And just to digress for a moment, it's nothing short of amazing, how some with religious baggage out to invalidate or deflate science in general, will often use science itself, to supposedly in their minds achieve their goal.

Not sure if this is in the right section or not, so perhaps a mod can move it if required? Some people that frequent science forums, [obviously the best type] will inevitably say they have a new theory about some aspect of the universe/life etc.They put there ideas in various forcefull ways full of confidence and much bravado, seemingly ignorant of the fact that professional scientists are forever testing and retesting incumbent theories: Afterall that's there job....sometimes they are in error, sometimes they may make mistakes [BICEP2] but surely that is part of the human makeup and should be expected from time to time. Anyway I believe that all those that believe they have something better then the incumbent theory/model should first be required to tick off all the following points. Anyone with alternative theories they wish to discuss should follow a few simple procedures: [1] Don't present the theory as fact...don't present it as something that is "faite compli" It most certainly isn't: [2] Gather all the experimental and Observational evidence to support your claims... [3] Whatever you have at the very least, must be able to explain and predict better then the incumbent model: [4] Your theory almost certainly is going to be challenged, and will need to run the gauntlet: [5] You will be told you are incorrect and your theory is wrong in most cases: [6] Throwing a tantrum will not win you any support: [7] You’re going to be asked tough questions. When someone asks you a question answer it. [8] When someone demonstrates a point you made is wrong, acknowledge that it is wrong and accept it: [9] Peer review may not be perfect, but it is absolutely necessary. The participants of any forum one sets out his alternative theory on, are your peers. Accept that: [10] If you think you have accomplished a theory over riding Evolution, SR, GR the BB QM or Newton, you most certainly have not: 100 years and more of past giants, and the 100's of books and papers since, means that you will not invalidate such overwhelmingly supported ideas in a few words or posts: Accept that from the word go: [11] In all likelyhood you are not Einstein, Newton, Hawking Bohr or Feynman: Don't pretend to be. [12] And finally always be prepared to modify your ideas/model/theories, and of course make sure you know the incumbent model you are thinking of over throwing perfectly.

Also found this.....http://binaryresearchinstitute.com/bri/interstellar-space-beyond-our-solar-system-stranger-than-expected/ Our heliosphere is our home in the galaxy, and understanding how it protects us as it interacts with local interstellar material is important as we plan future space travel beyond Earth and think about the conditions surrounding our Solar System in the distant past and future. Our heliosphere is like a protective cocoon being inflated in the interstellar medium by the Sun’s million mph solar wind. As our Sun orbits the center of the galaxy every 225 million years, it bobs in and out of the disk of the galaxy like a horse on a merry–go–round. As it does this, it passes through areas of the interstellar medium that are more and less dense, causing the heliosphere to change in shape and size. Denser areas can compress the heliosphere, while less dense regions allow the bubble to expand. In addition, the strength of the solar wind varies over the Sun’s cycle, “breathing” periodically, also contributing to this. Understanding how all of these things affect the heliosphere is important so that we can better understand how the heliosphere protects us. It is a crucial layer of protection against dangerous cosmic rays that are harmful to living things. As cosmic rays approach the heliosphere, they are deflected, and the majority of them are not able to pass into the inner Solar System. Fortunately, our Earth’s magnetic field is usually able to shield life on Earth from the remaining cosmic rays.However, astronauts on deep space missions cannot bring the Earth’s protection with them. We must also consider how the heliosphere will protect us in the distant future or how it did protect us in the past. Understanding the heliosphere and how it protects us is part of understanding our home in the galaxy. To access the Astrophysical Journal Supplement papers, please visit the journal website. The IBEX papers and an accompanying editorial will be published online on January 31. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: also https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/ibex/news/nobowshock.html The heliosphere surrounding our solar system is buffeted by strong magnetic fields, shown here as the black, diagonal, upward-pointing arrows. The heliosphere and the interstellar material of the local cloud pass by each other at a speed of 52,000 miles per hour, as shown by the blue arrow. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/ibex/news-listing/index.html

A so far as yet undiscovered Oort cloud and of course as mentioned in many texts, if it exists in the numbers generally thought that constitutes the Oort cloud, surrounds the solar system, and is at best only lightly gravitationally bound to it. Let's also look at what is or is not gravitationally bound to our solar system. Firstly of course gravity only falls of as the inverse square of the distance, so we can see the problem in that when discussing what is or is not part of our solar system, particularly with something still rather hypothetical like the Oort cloud. Recently our system, solar system that is, had an interstellar visitor called "Oumuamua"...being reminded of that, I found the following, https://www.theguardian.com/science/across-the-universe/2017/nov/20/interstellar-object-confirmed-to-be-from-another-solar-system some interesting extracts..... so admittedly still not certain. But then this.... In other words they can be well inside the solar system, that is inside the terminal shock zone and heliosheath bubble, yet be not part of the solar system. So informally or otherwise, I think its safe to assume that Voyager is in interstellar space [ie, the space between stars] and has exited our solar system as generally accepted without hypotheticals.

Interstellar space, the space between stars, or the interstellar medium is described as follows.....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_medium In astronomy, the interstellar medium (ISM) is the matter and radiation that exists in the space between the star systems in a galaxy. This matter includes gas in ionic, atomic, and molecular form, as well as dustand cosmic rays. It fills interstellar space and blends smoothly into the surrounding intergalactic space. The energy that occupies the same volume, in the form of electromagnetic radiation, is the interstellar radiation field. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: NB: We see a reference to the space that exists between the star systems. Of course each star system, which may mean more then one star gravitationally bound, may also contain planetary systems, our own being called the solar system with reference to Sol, the latin word for Sun.

Thanks Mordred. The original link was wrong....my apologies. The above is the correct link.

Apologies if I have that wrong. [the SSSC I mean] 25 or so years ago, there were plans afoot, in fact I think construction had already begun, of what was to be known as the Stanford, Superconducting Super Collider. It was then shelved/scrapped for obviously short sighted reasons. my questions, [1] How much more powerful and bigger then the LHC was this going to be? [2] How much further down the standard particle model road would we now be if it was completed to operational standards? [3] Could/would it be possible for construction to begin again? Why not make it an international concern if costs were/was the issue?

Undiscovered? Sure! The discovery of one, two, or half a dozen trans neptunian objects does not constitute a discovery of the Oort cloud as generally envisaged. Again etpet Voyager 1 has been deemed to have entered inter stellar space, THE SPACE BETWEEN STARS as dictated by the terminal bow shock and many sources I have given including Ed Stone a scientist on the project, agree with that census of opinion. The gravity of other stars does/would/can dominate the area proposed for the hypothetical Oort cloud....hypothetically this is why we suppose where our long term comets come from: Remember gravity falls of as the inverse square of the distance between two masses. Do you know what that means? But lets not get too far into pedant. Again, https://www.space.com/22729-voyager-1-spacecraft-interstellar-space.htmlThe study team wanted to know if Voyager 1 left the solar system sometime before April 2013, so they combed through some of the probe's older data. They found a monthlong period of electron oscillations in October-November 2012 that translated to a density of 0.004 electrons per cubic inch (0.006 electrons per cubic cm). Using these numbers and the amount of ground that Voyager 1 covers — about 325 million miles (520 million kilometers) per year — the researchers calculated that the spacecraft likely left the solar system in August 2012. I accept the logical piece I have just given you previously. If you object to those numbers, you need to explain why. If we are going to play my link is bigger then your link all day, we maybe here a long time. Fraser of course is a handy source of knowledge, but I tend to accept the scientific methodology in all its glory and the evidence proposed. So done or otherwise, the Voyager 1 probe has certainly left our solar system and is now in interstellar space, or the space between stars..

I don't believe I need to inform them of anything they don't already know. https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/solar-system/oort-cloud/overview/ 1 PREDICTED PLACE The Oort Cloud is a predicted, but undiscovered region of space. Comments by Ed Stone, Voyager project scientist

And again, the Oort cloud is still rather speculative. https://www.space.com/22729-voyager-1-spacecraft-interstellar-space.html

I insist on nothing other then generally the solar system is determined by the terminal shock where the solar wind meets interstellar space...and of course the Oort cloud is still rather hypothetical and not much is known about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliosphere From my link if you had of read further...... The duo completed its primary mission in 1989, and then kept on flying toward the edge of the heliosphere, the huge bubble of charged particles and magnetic fields that the sun puffs out around itself. Voyager 1 has now popped free of this bubble into the exotic and unexplored realm of interstellar space, scientists say. They reached this historic conclusion with a little help from the sun. A powerful solar eruption caused electrons in Voyager 1's location to vibrate signficantly between April 9 and May 22 of this year. The probe's plasma wave instrument detected these oscillations, and researchers used the measurements to figure out that Voyager 1's surroundings contained about 1.3 electrons per cubic inch (0.08 electrons per cubic centimeter). That's far higher than the density observed in the outer regions of the heliosphere (roughly 0.03 electrons per cubic inch, or 0.002 electrons per cubic cm) and very much in line with the 1.6 electrons per cubic inch (0.10 electrons per cubic cm) or so expected in interstellar space. The study team wanted to know if Voyager 1 left the solar system sometime before April 2013, so they combed through some of the probe's older data. They found a monthlong period of electron oscillations in October-November 2012 that translated to a density of 0.004 electrons per cubic inch (0.006 electrons per cubic cm). Using these numbers and the amount of ground that Voyager 1 covers — about 325 million miles (520 million kilometers) per year — the researchers calculated that the spacecraft likely left the solar system in August 2012. That time frame matches up well with several other important changes Voyager 1 observed. On Aug. 25, 2012, the probe recorded a 1,000-fold drop in the number of charged solar particles while also measuring a 9 percent increase in fast-moving galactic cosmic rays, which originate beyond the solar system." ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: NB: As I have already informed you, the Oort cloud is still rather speculative and not much is really known about it. Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud The Oort cloud(/ɔːrt, ʊərt/),[1]named after the Dutch astronomer Jan Oort, sometimes called the Öpik–Oort cloud,[2] is a theoretical cloud of predominantly icy planetesimals proposed to surround the Sunat distances ranging from 50,000 and 200,000 AU (0.8 and 3.2 ly) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Note "proposed" and "surround"

You do understand that we only have your word for that? Secondly you as yet do not have a theory, only a hypothesis: When your hypothesis is professionally critiqued and your evidence considered, is when a decision favourable or otherwise will be made. Thirdly of course you are in the wrong section...as an un critiqued hypothetical, you should be in speculations. And of course you do realise that astronomers/cosmologists and scientists in general study and research for years to achieve professional status, and as such also have access to many incredible state of the art instrumentalities, both on Earth and in space. No as yet I have not read your hypothetical.

Nice detailed info etpet...just a correction... Voyager 1 has been deemed to have now left the solar system and is inter stellar spapce, and has been now for a number of years, and Voyager 2 is still in the heliosheath. https://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/status/ "Voyager 1 is in "Interstellar space" and Voyager 2 is currently in the "Heliosheath" -- the outermost layer of the heliosphere where the solar wind is slowed by the pressure of interstellar gas" Also the parameters of our solar system are thought to be realized at what is called the "terminal shock" boundary or where the solar wind ends and is turned back and interstellar space begins. https://www.space.com/22729-voyager-1-spacecraft-interstellar-space.html The Oort cloud of course is still rather hypothetical and at best is only only loosely gravitationally bound to our solar system. Probably why Voyager 1 has been deemed for all intents and purposes to have left the solar system. https://space-facts.com/oort-cloud/ While some contact is still possible with the Voyager probes, contact with both Pioneer probes have ceased.

Pioneers 1 and 2??? They were launched in the late fifties just after the start of the space race bewteen the USSR and the newly formed NASA. Both have I'm sure now crashed back to Earth. Are you thinking of Pioneers 10 and 11? These were launched in the seventies and explored the out solar system and both are probably now leaving the solar system along with the two Voyagers.

Or is this simply evidence that maybe the standard particle model needs reevaluating? https://www.livescience.com/62721-sterile-neutrino-detected-fermilab.html A Major Physics Experiment Just Detected a Particle That Shouldn't Exist: Scientists have produced the firmest evidence yet of so-called sterile neutrinos, mysterious particles that pass through matter without interacting with it at all. The first hints these elusive particles turned up decades ago. But after years of dedicated searches, scientists have been unable to find any other evidence for them, with many experiments contradicting those old results. These new results now leave scientists with two robust experiments that seem to demonstrate the existence of sterile neutrinos, even as other experiments continue to suggest sterile neutrinos don't exist at all. That means there's something strange happening in the universe that is making humanity's most cutting-edge physics experiments contradict one another. more at link.... the paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.12028.pdf 30 May 2018 The MiniBooNE experiment at Fermilab reports results from an analysis of νe appearance data from 12.84 × 1020 protons on target in neutrino mode, an increase of approximately a factor of two over previously reported results. A νe charged-current quasi-elastic event excess of 381.2 ± 85.2 events (4.5σ) is observed in the energy range 200 < EQE ν < 1250 MeV. Combining these data with the ¯νe appearance data from 11.27 × 1020 protons on target in antineutrino mode, a total νe plus ¯νe charged-current quasi-elastic event excess of 460.5 ± 95.8 events (4.8σ) is observed. If interpreted in a standard two-neutrino oscillation model, νµ → νe, the best oscillation fit to the excess has a probability of 20.1% while the background-only fit has a χ 2 -probability of 5 × 10−7 relative to the best fit. The MiniBooNE data are consistent in energy and magnitude with the excess of events reported by the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector (LSND), and the significance of the combined LSND and MiniBooNE excesses is 6.1σ. All of the major backgrounds are constrained by in-situ event measurements, so non-oscillation explanations would need to invoke new anomalous background processes. Although the data are fit with a standard oscillation model, other models may provide better fits to the data.

Readily observed of course when one releases the gas in a pressure spray can. Yeah remember "debating" the BICEP2 original results with a couple of anti science and GR nuts on another forum. Quickly they jumped onto the bandwagon criticizing science in general as trying to pull the wool over the general populace's eyes. While most certainly the original "discovery release" was premature, it still took scientists themselves particularly those involved with some findings with the Planck experiment, to retract the original results and the likely occurrence of those results being muddied due to dust and debris. I saw it as a confirmation of science and the absolute fact that results and theories are being tested and reappraised all the time. Again, thanks for a great easily understood answer and other relevant information that you gave.

In Oz its tripod as in try.