The other star

Beyond the boundaries of established science an avalanche of exotic ideas compete for our attention. Experts tell us that these ideas should not be permitted to take up the time of working scientists, and for the most part they are surely correct. But what about the gems in the rubble pile? By what ground-rules might we bring extraordinary new possibilities to light?

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

The other star

Unread postby pavlink » Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:19 am

To best of my knowledge at the moment.

The solar companion star:

name: Avrora
diameter: half Jupiter's
density: 100 times the Sun's density
orbital period: 24750 years ( current earth years )
closest approach: 15 000 AU
time of closest approach: now
current position: RA: 06:05:53 Dec: 23:29:30
peak emission wavelength: IR - H band ( 1.45-1.7μm )
archive photo: DSS collored http://files.kostovi.com/DSS_colored.png

visible light photo: http://files.kostovi.com/060555p232919_ ... 3699_l.png
Look for a faint ( just 20% more bright than the "black" background ) circle

diagram: http://files.kostovi.com/ca2012.jpg
We live in a double star system.
We need to study double star systems.

Solar System as 4D energy vortex
http://files.kostovi.com/8835e.pdf
pavlink
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 7:14 am

Re: The other star

Unread postby D_Archer » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:05 am

There is nothing to see...?

Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
User avatar
D_Archer
 
Posts: 1087
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: The other star

Unread postby pavlink » Wed Jun 26, 2013 7:39 am

D_Archer wrote:There is nothing to see...?


Unfortunately it is impossible to have visual spectrum picture of an infrared object.
For a proper picture you need IR telescope.
Yet if you check the pixel composition, with a program, there is a circle where indicated by the diagram.
We live in a double star system.
We need to study double star systems.

Solar System as 4D energy vortex
http://files.kostovi.com/8835e.pdf
pavlink
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 7:14 am

Re: The other star

Unread postby oz93666 » Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:12 pm

pavlink wrote:T
diameter: half Jupiter's
density: 100 times the Sun's density


Diam sun ...1.3914 M Km ..... Diam Jupiter ... 0.139822M Km ........ Diam Avrora ... 0.069911

Sun's diameter is 20times greater than Avrora ..... volume is 8,000 times greater ....

So Avrora has mass of one eightieth that of the sun .... 0.0125 solar mass

That can't be right!! ... Jupiter is ... 0.0009543 solar mass and 5.2 Au from the sun it's pull on the sun would be much greater than Avrora who we are told never gets nearer than 15 000 AU
oz93666
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 3:12 pm

Re: The other star

Unread postby Cargo » Tue Jun 27, 2017 8:06 pm

*I see the circle, near the lower-right of the upper-left quadrant. That would be pretty cool.
Cargo
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: The other star

Unread postby Michael Anteski » Wed Jun 28, 2017 6:16 am

In my Ether Model, in our quantum/atomic bodies, including our eyes, our visual ability is mediated by quantum photons, but there is also an underlying ether matrix, composed of elemental ether units. These units are vastly more numerous than the photons (and exist everywhere, but are not detectable to us) but are not part of the atomic structure which mediates our visualization. So there can be a "dark" star in the vicinity of the solar system which is highly etheric, and we can't see it.

This kind of Ether Model, which is that underlying our quantum/atomically-structured world, in which forces are non linear spin, wave, vector mechanisms, there exists an unstructured ether matrix composed of elemental ether units acting electrically and perfectly-linearly (these units being elemental are identical, and interact perfectly linearly) is the only way to rationally account for quantum entanglement.)
Michael Anteski
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:37 am
Location: Massachusetts

Re: The other star

Unread postby Cargo » Wed Jun 28, 2017 9:05 am

That's just gobbledygook.
Cargo
 
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: The other star

Unread postby kevin » Wed Jun 28, 2017 9:41 am

Michael Anteski wrote:In my Ether Model, in our quantum/atomic bodies, including our eyes, our visual ability is mediated by quantum photons, but there is also an underlying ether matrix, composed of elemental ether units. These units are vastly more numerous than the photons (and exist everywhere, but are not detectable to us) but are not part of the atomic structure which mediates our visualization. So there can be a "dark" star in the vicinity of the solar system which is highly etheric, and we can't see it.

This kind of Ether Model, which is that underlying our quantum/atomically-structured world, in which forces are non linear spin, wave, vector mechanisms, there exists an unstructured ether matrix composed of elemental ether units acting electrically and perfectly-linearly (these units being elemental are identical, and interact perfectly linearly) is the only way to rationally account for quantum entanglement.)



Wonderfull thinking, and matches into that which is detectable.
Kevin
kevin
 
Posts: 1095
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:17 am

Re: The other star

Unread postby Michael Anteski » Thu Jun 29, 2017 6:11 am

The idea of an "etheric" star, which would be "dark" to our eyes, is part of a detailed theory, of a universal ether, which I have presented in this Forum in a few previous threads, if anyone wants to look it up.

One of the key ideas of the ether model is that an ether, composed of elemental units that interact vibrationally and linearly, originated, in the beginning, from a first-world, in which only elemental "points" were oscillating. Then the oscillations transitioned to a vibrational ether. That would mean that everything from then on, including atoms and their constituent particles, are made of these elemental ether units. -In quantum entanglement, the "entangled" quantum particles stay connected with each other through the ether, because their building blocks of elemental ether units are able to vibrate together with the elemental ether units in the underlying ether-matrix.

Following a "first" world, and then a second "ether world," our structured atomic/quantum world was the next step. In our world, a star that operates via fusion processes involving Helium and Hydrogen could co-exist with another star that operates similarly, except that iin the case of a "dark" star, the energy process is less quantized, and more etheric, in nature. In our earth world, our eyesight works via atomic/quantum mechanisms, so we would not be able to see a star that is less quantized, and more etheric.
Michael Anteski
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:37 am
Location: Massachusetts

Re: The other star

Unread postby Michael Anteski » Thu Jun 29, 2017 6:11 am

The idea of an "etheric" star, which would be "dark" to our eyes, is part of a detailed theory, of a universal ether, which I have presented in this Forum in a few previous threads, if anyone wants to look it up.

One of the key ideas of the ether model is that an ether, composed of elemental units that interact vibrationally and linearly, originated, in the beginning, from a first-world, in which only elemental "points" were oscillating. Then the oscillations transitioned to a vibrational ether. That would mean that everything from then on, including atoms and their constituent particles, are made of these elemental ether units. -In quantum entanglement, the "entangled" quantum particles stay connected with each other through the ether, because their building blocks of elemental ether units are able to vibrate together with the elemental ether units in the underlying ether-matrix.

Following a "first" world, and then a second "ether world," our structured atomic/quantum world was the next step. In our world, a star that operates via fusion processes involving Helium and Hydrogen could co-exist with another star that operates similarly, except that iin the case of a "dark" star, the energy process is less quantized, and more etheric, in nature. In our earth world, our eyesight works via atomic/quantum mechanisms, so we would not be able to see a star that is less quantized, and more etheric.
Michael Anteski
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 5:37 am
Location: Massachusetts

Re: The other star

Unread postby Markhsmit » Tue Aug 29, 2017 10:25 pm

How about Sirius?

http://binaryresearchinstitute.com/bri/

Sirius Statistics
Also Known As: Alpha Canis Major, the Dog Star
Distance From Earth: 8.6 light years
Constellation: Canis Major
Sirius A Star Type: Class A - Main sequence white star
Sirius B Star Type: White Dwarf
Sirius A Mass: 2.02 x Sun
Sirius B Mass: 0.98 x Sun
Sirius A Luminosity: 25 x Sun
Sirius B Luminosity: 3% of Sun
Sirius A Diameter: Approx 1.5 million miles (2.4 million km) - 171% x Sun
Sirius B Diameter: Approx 7,300 miles (11,800 km) - 92% x Earth
Sirius A Temperature: Approx 10,000C (18,000F)
Sirius B Temperature: Approx 25,000C (45,000F)
Age of System: Approx 240 million years old

Speculated to be a fairly new system...

Cheers!
Mark
Markhsmit
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 8:07 am

Re: The other star

Unread postby oz93666 » Wed Aug 30, 2017 3:04 am

Markhsmit wrote:How about Sirius?
Cheers!
Mark


One thing that's 100% certain is that sirius is not our binary star , despite what some occultists think, the distance is just too far ...

sirius A orbits sirius B at an average distance of 20 Au every 50 years

we are 540,000AU from sirius A and B !!! ..... infinitely too far for the required gravitational tie, gravity diminishes at the square of the distance!

Our companion cannot be one of the known stars , assuming the official distances are correct , they're all too far away , and they all move as expected .
oz93666
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 3:12 pm

Re: The other star

Unread postby Markhsmit » Wed Aug 30, 2017 5:33 pm

Thanks for your reply.

Yes, Sirius is far away, so gravity would be "disturbed" by closer large objects. However, is there an explanation that EU could provide for the "entanglement" or "wiring" of specific stars? I don't know, I am just asking.

Sirius is moving towards us, but not at a fast rate. Given the theory of Sirius as our binary star, the thought is (based on "The Great Yeat", the precession of the equinoxes, and the Yuga cycle, all known 2-5 thousand years ago), we are now at about the furthest distance. Since this is a binary system, there is an arc with each star that begins to straighten out such that each star begins more and more of a trajectory towards each other, gaining in speed.

The Egyptians were very fond (or concerned) with Sirius. I hate it when I read that this was all about the rising of the Nile. The Egyptians were much smarter than that! Anyway, Sirius was a central part of their astrological religion. In fact it is claimed some dieties were based on "the Dog Star". Apparently one of the lower shafts in the Great pyramid points towards Sirius. It could be said that the sky has changed since then, and so what? Howiever, the internet (for what it's worth) claims growing astronomical evidence that Sirius does not move with the other stars, but remains somewhat stationary. If that is true, how interesting!

Many ancient cultures worshiped Sirius, and I doubt this was because it was bright. A book on mystery schools I am reading as a pastime called it "the sun behind the sun". A Google of Sirius has some pretty fun fringe stuff. It is quite possible that ancient pictograms contain Sirius. What else would disrupt our solar system or bring catastrophic destruction from the sky, in the form of comets or meteorites? I am aware other explanations have been proposed, still I am not convinced of those, yet.

Anyway, just a hobby I indulge in. It is fun to read about and contemplate alternative theories about our universe!

Cheers!
Markhsmit
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 8:07 am

Re: The other star

Unread postby oz93666 » Wed Aug 30, 2017 8:34 pm

Markhsmit wrote:Thanks for your reply.

Yes, Sirius is far away, so gravity would be "disturbed" by closer large objects. However, is there an explanation that EU could provide for the "entanglement" or "wiring" of specific stars? I don't know, I am just asking.


EU can offer no theory that would explain an orbit with sirius ... except that the distances of the stars commonly accepted are grossly out ( that is possible) , but if it were our companion it should move , and that should be detectable I believe....

Sirius certainly comes up again and again in mythology ,ancient religion, even in recent occultism (crowley) ,so there must be some reason...

It seems many of the big pyramids , sphinx and serapeum were built by ET's thousands of years before the pharaohs ,could be they came from sirius , and when the pharaohs took over , after the ET's departed , the legend persisted in a distorted form...
oz93666
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 3:12 pm

Re: The other star

Unread postby nick c » Thu Aug 31, 2017 7:55 am

There are 6 star systems containing 9 stars that are closer to our solar system than is the Sirius system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... own_dwarfs
If the Sun and Sirius are companion stars then would it not follow that most if not all of these 9 stars must also be a part of the system?
It seems to me that these stars simply traveling through the galaxy together and are not in an orbital relationship. Where is the evidence supporting an orbital relationship?
User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut


Return to New Insights and Mad Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: kevin and 2 guests