Influences of stars on earth..such as neutrinos

[dad]

30 August 2018 dad: A ignorant question when the line (arrow from an imaginary bow) fantasy is what he wrote.
An imaginary arrow of an imaginary length from an imaginary bow does not give any "exact source".

The source was given by the science article and was pinpointed on a diagram of Orion, in case you missed that.

TXS 0506+056: "Its approximate location on the sky is off the left shoulder of the constellation Orion". That could be from "the left shoulder".

Not sure what you are quibbling about.

Back to a delusion that the Hebrew "fool" constellation is holding a bow.
All we know about the Hebrew "fool" constellation is that there was a rope or belt which is probably Orion's belt because that is distinctive ("Kesîl" appears as a constellation and as a fool, e.g. Proverbs 10:1).

There are different ideas of what the 'guy' was holding or doing. The point is that the neutrinos are pinpointed to be coming from the star guy! Influencing earth. Ha.

 

[Doveaman]

The bible mentions influences from stars on the earth. God Himself also named some constellations such as Orion.

I have wondered ho distant stars could possible actually influence the world. One example of something coming from the stars is neutrinos! How they influence the earth I don't think we fully know. They are high energy though apparently.

All stars are electrically connected, including our sun, which influences the earth:

Stars: Electrically Connected

 

[dad]

All stars are electrically connected, including our sun, which influences the earth:

Stars: Electrically Connected

No plugs or wires?

 

[Doveaman]

No plugs or wires?

Both plugs and wires.

Everything Electric

 

[dad]

Both plugs and wires.

Everything Electric

To the stars?

 

[Doveaman]

To the stars?

Yup.

 

[dad]

Yup.

Let me guess the 'wire' is actually plasma?

 

[Doveaman]

Let me guess the 'wire' is actually plasma?

Yup.

Plasma consists of flowing charged particles (electrons, protons, ions) that generate constricted electric fields around them to form electric power-lines.

 

[RealityCheck01]

The source was given by the science article and was pinpointed on a diagram of Orion, in case you missed that.

10 September 2018 dad: Makes his lie about the location of TXS 0506+056 in the OP explicit (no bow in that figure).
The bull's-eye in that image is off the arm that holds onto the shield in the Orion figure. Orion's shield
"West from Bellatrix lie six stars all designated Pi Orionis (π1 Ori, π2 Ori, π3 Ori, π4 Ori, π5 Ori and π6 Ori) which make up Orion's shield."
"Bellatrix serves as Orion's left shoulder" (the brighter Betelgeuse is the right shoulder).

30 August 2018 dad: A ignorant question when the line (arrow from an imaginary bow) fantasy is what he wrote.

 

[RealityCheck01]

All stars are electrically connected, including our sun, which influences the earth:

10 September 2018 Doveaman: Obvious delusions from the electric universe cranks.
Read the description of what you posted, Doveaman. As soon as you see "Electric universe", you know that you are looking at deluded pseudoscience.
Then there is the title: "Stars: Electrically Connected and Externally Powered". Astronomy 101 usually includes students doing the calculation that the Sun needs to be internally powered so that thermal pressure increases with depth to balance the increasing gravitational pressure. That deluded video has the Sun collapse to a white dwarf !

What makes the video more deluded is that we have detected the neutrino flux from the internal nuclear fusion that does power the Sun and other stars.

Next you cite the electric universe delusion that anything they imagine is a Birkeland current is a Birkeland current. This is a Birkeland current. They have only been found around the Earth and that needed a spacecraft inside them, not images. There are several plasma mechanisms that create filamentary, twisted structures that these cranks fantasize about.

Next you cite the main source of the delusions - the Thunderbolts "cult" wit their "prophets" (Talbott, Thornhill and Scott). From an electric cometh thread at ISF:
18 November 2010: The lies, failures and successes of Thunderbolts Deep Impact predictions by Wal Thornhill
10th April 2015: The ignorance, delusions and lies in the Thunderbolts web site, videos, etc.
13 April 2018: A couple of the delusions in Scott's Birkeland current paper.

The electric comet delusion has at least 45 years without a scientific electric comet model or observations to support it!

Next is a "Plasma consists of flowing charged particles (electrons, protons, ions) that generate constricted electric fields around them to form electric power-lines." lie. This is a Birkeland current. It is a specific case of the solar wind plasma interacting with the magnetic field of the Earth and the Earth's ionosphere. It is possible that the aurora on other planets are caused by Birkeland current. They are planetary phenomena.

 

[RealityCheck01]

1. 20 August 2018 dad: A "Be clear" lie when I have stated the facts several times.
2. 20 August 2018 dad: A "seem to ignore the fact that the light from stars is only seen here" lie when I have stated that several times.
3. 20 August 2018 dad: Back to a delusion of "distance enters the picture"
4. 24 August 2018 dad: Repeats the lie that I have not shown that the list is evidence that the nature of time is the same outside of the Solar System
5. 24 August 2018 dad: A lie of a "defeated" list when no evidence or even coherent argument against the items has been produced.
6. 24 August 2018 dad: An idiotic "prove that the Greeks or others ..." question.
7. 24 August 2018 dad: A "religious distances" delusion about measured distances.
8. 30 August 2018 dad: Ignorance and lie about parallax with a "religious twaddle" delusion.
9. 30 August 2018 dad: A ignorant question when the line (arrow from an imaginary bow) fantasy is what he wrote.
10. 30 August 2018 dad: An ignorant "comes from the arm" assertion.
11. 30 August 2018 dad: Back to a delusion that the Hebrew "fool" constellation is holding a bow or a shield.
12. 10 September 2018 dad: Makes his lie about the location of TXS 0506+056 in the OP explicit (no bow in that figure).

 

[dad]

10 September 2018 dad: Makes his lie about the location of TXS 0506+056 in the OP explicit (no bow in that figure).
The bull's-eye in that image is off the arm that holds onto the shield in the Orion figure. Orion's shield
"West from Bellatrix lie six stars all designated Pi Orionis (π1 Ori, π2 Ori, π3 Ori, π4 Ori, π5 Ori and π6 Ori) which make up Orion's shield."
"Bellatrix serves as Orion's left shoulder" (the brighter Betelgeuse is the right shoulder).

30 August 2018 dad: A ignorant question when the line (arrow from an imaginary bow) fantasy is what he wrote.

The source is Orion. Whether a bow or belt or shield or whatever...form there earth is influenced.

If we go with the shield thingie, fine..let's look at the source in this pic.


https://images.theconversation.com/...lib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip

Nuff said? Ha.

 

[RealityCheck01]

The source is Orion. Whether a bow or belt or shield or whatever...form there earth is influenced.

24 September 2018 dad: Repeats the trivial fact of light and neutrinos from stars "influencing" every body that they hit !

This has nothing to do with continuing fantasies about the Greek Orion constellation. Orion is a Greek mythical hunter holding a club and a shield. This is not an unknown "fool" Biblical constellation which probably includes the Greek Orion belt. That makes the OP wrong.

10 September 2018 dad: Makes his lie about the location of TXS 0506+056 in the OP explicit (no bow in that figure).

An image of the Greek Orion constellation with the location of TXS 0506+056 as below the arm holding a shield and as the original article stated by the left shoulder.

24 September 2018 dad: Emphasizes the OP lie about the location of TXS 0506+056 and a bow.
No answer to
18 July 2018 dad: Cite the Bible text stating influences from stars in Orion.
so
24 September 2018 dad: A "Just like God says, the stars influence earth!" lie in the OP.

There are rhetorical questions about people influencing the stars as God does (Job 38:31). There are stars as markers for seasons (Genesis 1:14). There is some poetic language in a song (Judges 5:20).

 

[dad]

24 September 2018 dad: Repeats the trivial fact of light and neutrinos from stars "influencing" every body that they hit !

Not sure how trivial it is.

This has nothing to do with continuing fantasies about the Greek Orion constellation. Orion is a Greek mythical hunter holding a club and a shield. This is not an unknown "fool" Biblical constellation which probably includes the Greek Orion belt. That makes the OP wrong.

Since the bible quotes the Almighty talking about Orion, I have no reason to assume that the Greeks did not hear about the stars in the sky in their day and worked with that.

I had thought the archer was referring to Orion, but apparently Orion is the hunter. Oh well, I guess they hunted

24 September 2018 dad: A "Just like God says, the stars influence earth!" lie in the OP.

Since the OP pointed out that the source of neutrinos hitting us was in the stars, I am not sure how you think you can claim otherwise.

There are rhetorical questions about people influencing the stars as God does (Job 38:31). There are stars as markers for seasons (Genesis 1:14). There is some poetic language in a song (Judges 5:20).

I disagree with your assessment. Stars in the bible are important, and are there for man to do things like mark time. There is also a clear spiritual connection to stars.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Not sure how trivial it is.

A little thing called the inverse square law makes the influence obviously trivial.
Neutrinos from stars hitting the Earth is trivial because we have billions of solar neutrinos every second passing through us and doing nothing. The flux of photons hitting the Earth from stars is also trivial when compared to sunlight.

 

[RealityCheck01]

1. 20 August 2018 dad: A "Be clear" lie when I have stated the facts several times.
2. 20 August 2018 dad: A "seem to ignore the fact that the light from stars is only seen here" lie when I have stated that several times.
3. 20 August 2018 dad: Back to a delusion of "distance enters the picture"
4. 24 August 2018 dad: Repeats the lie that I have not shown that the list is evidence that the nature of time is the same outside of the Solar System
5. 24 August 2018 dad: A lie of a "defeated" list when no evidence or even coherent argument against the items has been produced.
6. 24 August 2018 dad: An idiotic "prove that the Greeks or others ..." question.
7. 24 August 2018 dad: A "religious distances" delusion about measured distances.
8. 30 August 2018 dad: Ignorance and lie about parallax with a "religious twaddle" delusion.
9. 30 August 2018 dad: A ignorant question when the line (arrow from an imaginary bow) fantasy is what he wrote.
10. 30 August 2018 dad: An ignorant "comes from the arm" assertion.
11. 30 August 2018 dad: Back to a delusion that the Hebrew "fool" constellation is holding a bow or a shield.
12. 10 September 2018 dad: Makes his lie about the location of TXS 0506+056 in the OP explicit (no bow in that figure).
13. 24 September 2018 dad: Repeats the trivial fact of light and neutrinos from stars "influencing" every body that they hit !
14. 24 September 2018 dad: Emphasizes the OP lie about the location of TXS 0506+056 and a bow.
15. 24 September 2018 dad: A "Just like God says, the stars influence earth!" lie in the OP.

 

[dad]

A little thing called the inverse square law makes the influence obviously trivial.
Neutrinos from stars hitting the Earth is trivial because we have billions of solar neutrinos every second passing through us and doing nothing. The flux of photons hitting the Earth from stars is also trivial when compared to sunlight.

Since you do not know the distance to the stars that law does not have a lot of meaning.

Another question worth exploring is whether neutrinos exist in deep space. We detect them...here

 

[RealityCheck01]

Since you do not know the distance to the stars that law does not have a lot of meaning.

10 October 2018 dad: A lie that we do not know the distances to stars when we have measured billions of distances.
For example, Gaia

The second data release (DR2), which occurred on 25 April 2018,[9][66] is based on 22 months of observations made between 25 July 2014 and 23 May 2016. It includes positions, parallaxes and proper motions for about 1.3 billion stars and positions of an additional 300 million stars, red and blue photometric data for about 1.1 billion stars and single colour photometry for an additional 400 million stars, and median radial velocities for about 7 million stars between magnitude 4 and 13.

The lie is even more obvious when he has been going on about the irrelevant distance to the source of the neutrino and light pulses in this thread. See 20 August 2018 dad: Back to a delusion of "distance enters the picture".

 

[RealityCheck01]

Since you do not know the distance to the stars that law does not have a lot of meaning.

10 October 2018 dad: Ignorance about the inverse square law weakening distant sources.
This is a geometric property of any particle (neutrino or photon) emitting source. We do not need to know the exact distance to a source to know that a source millions of light-years away as in this thread will be enormously weaker than the Sun which is 1.58125e-5 light years away. Thus: A little thing called the inverse square law makes the influence obviously trivial

 

[RealityCheck01]

Another question worth exploring is whether neutrinos exist in deep space. We detect them...here

10 October 2018 dad: A fantasy that neutrinos do not exist in deep space?
Of course we detect them here - we do not have neutrino observatories outside of the Solar System yet . We also detect their source and he has been going on about this source throughout this thread. Thus the neutrinos travelled from their source to us. Ditto for the associated light from the source.

Is this a fantasy that the neutrinos vanish at the source and magically appear here? Or he is debunking his own argument by having the source inside the Solar System?