link to Home Page

Re: ZetaBabble [tm]

In Article <4QjT9.94036$> Dave Tholen wrote:
> ZetaTalk wrote:
>> Please explain why a planet cannot approach one of its foci in
>> rapid speed, such that it is perhaps a quarter of the
>> speed of light, simply because you have not observed it.
> Irrelevant, given that you have claimed that the object is in a
> periodic orbit, Nancy.

Which does NOT mean, Dave, that a periodic orbit IN THE UNIVERSE OF
POSSIBILITIES, is restricted to what is in your simple Tholenized mind.
The question, which point you of course missed, in order to Tholenize,
was WHY is an orbit as the Zetas have described not possible?  What
precludes that, from human astrophics point of view?  And since the
Zetas have not engaged YOU on this matter, Dave, and I long since
decided being Tholenized was an utter waste of time, and since YOU chose
not to comprehend the question and will define it in term of existing
human LIMITED definitions solely, the discussion stops here.  There is
NO reason why a sling orbit could not exist.

> That limits the maximum velocity to something less than the
> escape velocity, which is nowhere close to a quarter of the
> speed of light.

How pathetic.  Tholen thinks the escape velosity of dirty snowballs,
which leave NOT for the reasons he theorizes in any case, applies to
Planet X sized objects.  You think because dirty snowballs sling in and
then leave that you have grasped what causes this?  You can't explain
why the Moon floats up there, can't get Newton and Einstein on the same
page re this, but you're so sure you understand what it takes to escape

    Humans think that a comet's orbit is maintained by its
    momentum. Of the factors affecting a tiny comet that
    approaches the Sun, the force of its current momentum
    is not dominant. Any child who has thrown a ball and
    watched it drop toward the Earth as it sped along its
    trajectory can sense this. Archers allow for this in
    attempting to hit their target, aiming above the
    trajectory to account for the drop. Momentum is an
    effect, not a cause. What caused the momentum
    if not gravity. A ball thrown in space, where there is
    no gravitational influences nearby, will continue
    apace, but a gravity pull behind its path will slow it
    down. When a comet is leaving your Solar System, it
    is heading at an essentially straight line away. Gravity
    behind the comet slows it down, and thus the
    momentum disappears.

    Humans see but what is essentially the end result of
    a comet's orbit, or at least that portion of the orbit that
    involves the Sun's gravity. The tiny comet, dark
    until it enters the Solar System where it flares under
    the influence of the Sun, cannot be located by humans
    while it is out in space. They assume that the orbit is
    broader or at least as broad, when out in space, as that
    seen when the comet becomes visible. It is not. As we
    have explained in detailing the 12th Planet's entry into
    the Solar System, comets aim for the Sun, and if
    influenced away from the Sun by any factor, adjust
    their orbit away from the Sun. Then, as they near the
    Sun and, caught in the grip of this giant's gravity pull,
    accelerate, the increasing speed allows them to come
    closer. Humans only see that part of the orbit where
    the initial adjustment away from the Sun has already
    occurred. They see but half the picture.

    The human argument that the long orbit can be
    determined by the angle of entry, the parabolic curve,
    is therefore absurd. Some long period comets have
    several foci, and some only one. Just how does blind
    man, peeping up from a planet he cannot leave, looking
    out from a Solar System he has never left, know how
    many foci this or that comet has? Since a parabola
    and even an ellipse smoothes to an essentially straight
    line, how do they know how far that straight line goes
    before a turn around is effected? They do not.
    They are guessing.
        ZetaTalk™: Repeating Comets