Sirius research group claims about Earth's precession

[Michael Mooney]

The first two posts of this thread were moved from the thread 16305, because it’s not very related to that thread’s topic

 

I just came across this very interesting thread while browsing.

 

I have mentioned this a few times before in other threads but I'm wondering if contributors to this thread are aware of the research done by the Homann family over a couple of decades with a telescope fixed on the binary stars, Sirius A and B.

The Sirius Research Group

 

The details are not easily available on this site (it takes some "digging" via your favorite search vehicle), but I have a book (given to me by its author... the title of which will not yet be revealed for good reason) which devotes a chapter to this very precise research on the speed of gravity.

 

In briefest summary... Sirius B passes "in front of" Sirius A as an alignment in line of sight with Earth about every 50 years. Last time that happened the Homann fixed telescope observed the alignment simultaneously with a precisely recorded slowing of Earth's rate of rotation... This for several weeks of slowing as the alignment approached and several weeks of speeding back up again after the alignment passed.

Obviously, since the visible alignment images traveling at lightspeed were simultaneous with the precisely measured slowing of Earth's rate of rotation, this is extremely confirming evidence that the force of gravity travels at lightspeed.

 

That said, please keep in mind that the above is about a *change* in gravitational force on Earth... that the extremely massive neutron star, Sirius B, in direct alignment with its binary partner, actually increased the gravitational pull on earth, measured as a slowing of rate of rotation.

 

Obviously there are not great pauses in gravitational force between masses. Just like sunlight, the mutual pull of gravity between Sun and Earth is *steady* in general, with fluctuations traveling at lightspeed.

I think this "steady" feature of gravity is what caused the early confusion, in Newton's time, that the force must propagate instantaneously... which made him "scratch his head' (to say the least.)

Comments?

Michael

[RCP/CRT/RRT]

I have mentioned this a few times before in other threads but I'm wondering if contributors to this thread are aware of the research done by the Homann family over a couple of decades with a telescope fixed on the binary stars, Sirius A and B.

The Sirius Research Group

 

The details are not easily available on this site (it takes some "digging" via your favorite search vehicle), but I have a book (given to me by its author... the title of which will not yet be revealed for good reason) which devotes a chapter to this very precise research on the speed of gravity.

Why not disclose the author or title?

I believe you are referencing 'Lost Star of Myth and Time' by Walter Cruttenden, yes?

[Michael Mooney]

Why not disclose the author or title?

I believe you are referencing 'Lost Star of Myth and Time' by Walter Cruttenden, yes?

 

Yes. Undisclosed because I am not interested in defending his book, tho he gave it to me personally. Just sharing the section on the Homann research on the the effect of the Sirius A and B alignment on earth, which is very precise and well documented observation and lends extremely good evidence for the argument that gravitational force travels at lightspeed but is constant notwithstanding fluctuations.

 

P.S.: Note to the moderator who titled this thread.

The observed phenomenon of reference above has absolutely nothing to do with Earth's great cycle of the precession of the equinox.

Please change this misleading an irrelevant title.

And the word "claims" dismisses the research, based on clearly observable phenomena as empirical evidence for the speed of gravitational force. (If you want to argue against the validity of the Homman research, do so!

 

Michael

[UncleAl]

a = GM/r^2. Kindly fill in the values for mass and distance and then calculate for us the difference in gravitational acceleration the Sirius system exerts on the Earth under any circumstances. Uncle Al will help you with distance, 8.1 × 10^16 meters.

 

Are you trusted with a checkbook? Can you balance it within 32 orders of magnitude?

 

--

Uncle Al

UNDER SATAN'S LEFT FOOT

Vote a 10 for the experiments!

[modest]

Just sharing the section on the Homann research on the the effect of the Sirius A and B alignment on earth, which is very precise and well documented observation and lends extremely good evidence for the argument that gravitational force travels at lightspeed but is constant notwithstanding fluctuations.

 

Can you please quote a relevant passage, or link a description? Anything that has both "Sirius" and "speed of gravity" (or some variation of that phrase) in the same quote would be nice.

 

~modest

[RCP/CRT/RRT]

Yes. Undisclosed because I am not interested in defending his book, tho he gave it to me personally. Just sharing the section on the Homann research on the the effect of the Sirius A and B alignment on earth, which is very precise and well documented observation and lends extremely good evidence for the argument that gravitational force travels at lightspeed but is constant notwithstanding fluctuations.

That information seems readily available on the Sirius Research website. No real need to have mentioned the book. Unless, it was to illuminate that you were given a copy of the book.

And the word "claims" dismisses the research, based on clearly observable phenomena as empirical evidence for the speed of gravitational force. (If you want to argue against the validity of the Homman research, do so!

Doesn't Homann suggest it requires more research to make a firm conclusion, by admission, other factors could have contributed to the anomaly?

[Michael Mooney]

Can you please quote a relevant passage, or link a description? Anything that has both "Sirius" and "speed of gravity" (or some variation of that phrase) in the same quote would be nice.

 

~modest

 

So far the best I can do for such a link is this:

The Sirius Research Group

 

But this is not as specifically directed to the speed of gravity as Walter Crutenden's book, Lost Star of Myth and Time. He visited the Homman's research center and studied their methods and results in depth, and wrote a very clear summary to the above point, as follows, from page 170:

 

"With a telescope mounted in a fixed position... pointed at Sirius, they (The Hommans) take regular transit readings, recording the exact time this star passes the cross hairs of the telescope each day.

... What they are really measuring is the Earth's exact period of rotation relative to Sirius.

... They have a synch-generated quartz clock and radio tuned to the Universal Time Coordinate signal (UTC audible atomic time) broadcast from Fort Collins, Colorado.

By compiling and averaging multiple readings over various time periods they can get extremely accurate measurements of Earth's daily spin rate in relation to the star Sirius.

They have found two very interesting results: 1) The Earth's rotation period relative to this star is in alignment with the tropical year, not the sidereal year, and 2) when Sirius B went in front of Serius A in 1989 (relative to Earth, as it does every 50 years), the Earth's spin rate slowed down, losing a full second per day for a period of several weeks before the event-- and then speeded up, gaining a second per day for several weeks after the event.

...(This) shows that there is an observable gravitational relationship between our system and the Sirius system."

 

Specifically it shows that this alignment and its gravitational effect coincides with the visible alignment. Therefore gravitational force is observed to travel at the same speed as the image of the alignment, lightspeed.

I hope this is clear.

Michael

[Michael Mooney]

That information seems readily available on the Sirius Research website. No real need to have mentioned the book. Unless, it was to illuminate that you were given a copy of the book.

 

Doesn't Homann suggest it requires more research to make a firm conclusion, by admission, other factors could have contributed to the anomaly?

 

The specific "link" between the Sirius A and B alignment and the slowing of Earth's spin is presently eluding me in the Sirius Research Group links, but is very clear in Crutttenden's book. (See my post above to Modest.)

As to your second point, I don't see how the "link" above could be any more clear since the visible alignment (every 50 years) coincides with the slowing of earths rate of rotation "losing a full second per day for a period of several weeks before the event-- and then speeded up, gaining a second per day for several weeks after the event." (Crutenden.)

 

PS: I just read the link in more depth and found, I think, the answer to your second question in the "Interpretation of Data" section at the end, specifically:

 

As a matter of fact, the International Earth Rotation Service observes significant daily variations in earth's sidereal rotation period.

 

It is also very important to remember that despite some major variations in earth's period of rotation, the mean time interval of the sidereal year or earth's complete orbit period basically remains constant.

 

So, the alignment in synch with the slow down and speed up of the spin is measured against the above constant averaging out the daily variations.

 

Homman concludes:

These observations clearly indicate that the so-called 'precession of the earth' is NOT a scientific fact, and that the Sirius system has a noticeable gravitational influence on our solar system. Obviously, Newton's laws of gravitation cannot explain Einstein's universe. In that respect, it requires further study to see if the 49 year cycle of the Sirius system can provide us with an explanation of the large fluctuations and annual irregularities in earth's rate of rotation that have also been observed around 1941 by experts at the US Naval Observatory.

 

Maybe this is the "more research" to which you refer above, but the coincidence of the visible alignment and the change in spin rate seems very clear.

 

Michael

[Pyrotex]

The trouble is, trying to build a physical model that demonstrates ("demonstrates") the actual force(s) that would slow or speed up any motion of the Earth, including spin or precession, doesn't yield any obvious results. :phones:

 

The "gravity" we feel from Sirius A + Sirius B can be modeled by placing the sum of their masses at their Center of Mass. So, if we focus our efforts on just Sirius B (the white dwarf) then its average distance is, as Uncle Al so kindly provided, 8.1 * 10^16 meters. Its actual distance will vary by approximately plus/minus 10^11 meters over the course of one orbit of the two stars.

 

If we divide 10^11 meters by 10^17 meters, we get 10^-6 -- this means that the distance of Sirius B varies by one part in approximately a million each orbit.

 

Since the force of gravity varies as the square of the distance, this means that the force the Earth "feels" from Sirius B's gravity varies by one part in approximately a million million each orbit.

 

Another thing. Sirius A+B are approximately 12 Light Years (LY) away. That's about 750,000 Astronomical Units (AU). The Sun is just 1 AU away from Earth. If we assumed that Sirius A+B had the same mass as the Sun, then its relative gravitational force would be approximately 2 * 10^-12 of the Sun's. But Sirius A+B mass, let's say, 500 times as much as the Sun, so the relative gravitational force would be 10^-9 as much. So they pull on us with a force approximately one part in a billion as much as the Sun pulls on us.

 

So the absolute force is a billionth as much as we get from the Sun, and even that teensy amount of force varies by (at most) only one part in a thousand billion. That's not much.

 

Now, if that weren't bad enough, we also must realize that this variance in force doesn't act just on the Earth's North Pole, or just on one side of the Earth, but it acts on all of the Earth at the same time. So where does the Earth experience a net torque that would slow/speed up its spin, or slow/speed up its polar precession? :hihi:

 

I've looked at this from every side, and even ignoring Sirius A (which would only make the results even smaller) I cannot see any way for the Earth to feel a net torque (i.e., an "unbalanced" force) on its poles or on any part of the equator.

 

Of course, for several decades, the Stock Market and the height of women's hemlines was highly correlated. Should we therefore conclude that skirts affect the Market? Or that the Market drives the length of skirts?

 

Sometimes coincidences occur. [Note to self: market new bumper sticker. "COINCIDENCES HAPPEN"]

 

In fact, Million-to-One odds happen 8 times every day in New York City.

[RCP/CRT/RRT]

Pyrotex, not that I agree, nor disagree with Sirius Researches findings, just playing devils advocate I suppose. Could the effect on Earths tides make enough of a difference to cause a deviation in rotation?

[modest]

But this is not as specifically directed to the speed of gravity as Walter Crutenden's book, Lost Star of Myth and Time. He visited the Homman's research center and studied their methods and results in depth, and wrote a very clear summary to the above point, as follows, from page 170:

 

"With a telescope mounted in a fixed position... pointed at Sirius, they (The Hommans) take regular transit readings, recording the exact time this star passes the cross hairs of the telescope each day.

... What they are really measuring is the Earth's exact period of rotation relative to Sirius.

... They have a synch-generated quartz clock and radio tuned to the Universal Time Coordinate signal (UTC audible atomic time) broadcast from Fort Collins, Colorado.

By compiling and averaging multiple readings over various time periods they can get extremely accurate measurements of Earth's daily spin rate in relation to the star Sirius.

They have found two very interesting results: 1) The Earth's rotation period relative to this star is in alignment with the tropical year, not the sidereal year, and 2) when Sirius B went in front of Serius A in 1989 (relative to Earth, as it does every 50 years), the Earth's spin rate slowed down, losing a full second per day for a period of several weeks before the event-- and then speeded up, gaining a second per day for several weeks after the event.

...(This) shows that there is an observable gravitational relationship between our system and the Sirius system."

 

Specifically it shows that this alignment and its gravitational effect coincides with the visible alignment. Therefore gravitational force is observed to travel at the same speed as the image of the alignment, lightspeed.

I hope this is clear.

 

Thank you, Michael. I appreciate that.

 

This claim is blatantly absurd at face value.

 

First off, Earth can't have lost a second per day for several weeks in 1989. That's insane. They think no one would notice that a day got shorter by half a minute? You could measure that with a bad wristwatch let alone all the atomic clocks and observatories around the world. Observatories were doing VLBI in the 80's. The length of a day was being measured to sub-millisecond accuracy at the time:

 

-source

 

EDIT:

It occurs to me that I should explain this graph as it may not be readily apparent to you what it shows. The greatest deviation shown in the length of a day in 1989 is about 2.5 milliseconds. Over short time periods this is due to weather and temperature. Over longer time periods (notice the trend is sloping downwards) it shows that the moon is slowly slowing Earth's rotation.

 

If the earth slowed by a approximately 20 seconds (over the period of a few weeks) the graph would need to be 8,000 times larger in order to show the change. In other words: 20 seconds is 8,000 times larger than the typical 2.5 millisecond changes astronomers are used to. That's impossible. It would have been front page news around the world:

"Earth's rotation expect to completely stop in a few thousand years!"

... the headlines would have said. The claim is blatantly absurd. It is twilight zone crazy.

END EDIT

 

A day simply cannot have gotten a second shorter every day for several weeks without throwing the whole planet into apocalyptic terror.

 

Second, Sirius A and B are so near each other in the sky that the eclipse of one over the other can have no tidal effect on the earth. If the moon and sun which obviously have far greater gravitational impact on the earth than Sirius A and B and move across the whole celestial sphere cannot shorten a day by a second per day then Sirius obviously cannot.

 

Setting Sirius aside, the gravitational force has no aberration (technically, nowhere near the aberration of light) even though changes in the gravitational field propagate at the speed of light. If you look up at the sun you will see where it was 8 minutes ago. Its true, instantaneous, position is 20 arc seconds in front of where it appears to be. This is because light takes time to get here causing aberration in the apparent position of the sun. Good measurements show that the earth is accelerated toward the true, instantaneous, position of the sun rather than toward the spot that the sun appears to be.

 

This measured and determined fact disagrees with the reported Sirius observation. What exactly the lack of aberration of gravity means is open to interpretation. Both Newtonian gravity and General Relativity predict that gravity will not have aberration. In Newtonian gravity this is because the force of gravity is communicated instantaneously. In GR the reasons are far more complicated. They are shown here:

 

[gr-qc/9909087] Aberration and the Speed of Gravity

 

That gravity has no aberration is explained and supported here:

 

ABC Online Forum

http://www.citebase.org/abstract?id=oai:arXiv.org:gr-qc/9909087

 

~modest

[Boerseun]

Well, playing Devil's Advocate, let's say the Sirius arrangement did cause the Earth to slow down with a second or two (forget for a minute Pyro's completely valid point that there will be zero net torque on the Earth)...

 

Right. Now the day has slowed with a second.

 

A couple days/weeks/months later, the Sirius system has moved out of alignment.

 

According to Michael's OP, the Earth regained the lost seconds.

 

Whatever the mechanical realities of the initial slowing, there is no conceivable way that the Sirius system can speed the planet up again. This planet is huge and heavy, and adding rotational speed to this ball of wax to the tune of only one second per day will require such an enormous amount of energy, and will at the same time be so calamatous (volcanoes will erupt everywhere and earthquakes will ravage the planet as that "small" rotational speed change overcomes tectonic friction) that nobody would have missed it.

 

But whatever the case might be, there is no conceivable mechanism in the alignment of the Sirius system that can speed the Earth up again.

[Buffy]

But whatever the case might be, there is no conceivable mechanism in the alignment of the Sirius system that can speed the Earth up again.

While not probable, it's possible that no one noticed that that particular week, everyone drove their cars only in a westerly direction....I vaguely remember not getting to work that week....

 

If this were played upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction, :)

Buffy

[Michael Mooney]

Pyrotex and Modest,

Thank you both. I am convinced that you both have thoroughly debunked Crutenden's "claim" as quoted from his book.

 

Crutenden walked into a restaurant where I was eating, handed me the book and walked away without comment. Maybe he recognized me from one of my seminar presentations... I don't know.

(I had been posting at Myspace on "The Speed of Gravity" at the time. and thought this was the answer... supported by the above *amazing* synchronicity.)

 

Anyway, since I introduced his misinformation here, I will send him a copy of both your posts, (to his website promoting his book) and see if he owns his mistake or not.

 

I was obviously misled.

When you're right you're right, and when you're wrong you're wrong. He was wrong and so was I for taking his misinformation at face value.

But science is the better for it.

Thank you

Michael

[Pyrotex]

Pyrotex, not that I agree, nor disagree with Sirius Researches findings, just playing devils advocate I suppose. Could the effect on Earths tides make enough of a difference to cause a deviation in rotation?

Excellent question. I'm gonna give you pozrep for that one. :)

 

The answer is, conditionally, YES. It is the drag on the Earth caused by the tides from the Sun and Moon that are currently slowing down our day by about 1 second every mumble-mumble hundred years.

 

BUT, tidal forces are the difference between the gravitational pull of the Moon/Sun on two points on opposite sides of the Earth. This tidal force varies not by the inverse square of distance (to the Moon/Sun) but by the inverse 4th power of distance.

 

So, assuming Sirius A+B had about the same mass as the Sun, the tidal force felt on Earth would be the square of "one billionth as much" -- that is, the tides from Sirius are on the order of magnitude, 10^-18 as much as the tides from the Sun. :eek2: :eek2:

 

The Sun pulls tides (somebody check this) of around 2 meters. High tide minus low tide.

 

2 * 10^-18 meters would be 2 * 10^-9 nanometers.

 

A nanometer is about the size of a dozen atoms or a smallish molecule.

 

2 * 10^-18 meters would be approx a ten billionth the size of an atom. That would be within a couple of orders of magnitude of the size of a Carbon atom's nucleus.

 

So! Do you think a tide that small would slow or spin the Earth up to ANY measurable degree? I do not.

[yukonjak]

Wow...you guys are smart...sounds complicated...

 

I read the book...reminded me of Chariots of the Gods...lots of mixed up associations and questionable data interpretations...

another "end of the world" synopsis...

new agers will believe anything they don't understand...