Re: Challenge to Jim Scotti

Article: <6ioorm$ijk@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> 
Subject: Re: Challenge to Jim Scotti
Date: 6 May 1998 04:27:34 GMT

In article <6iit17$4i4$2@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
>>> an object can orbit the barycenter of a binary system if it is 
>>> far enough out.  
>
>> Pardon?  What happened to GRAVITY!!  Would you 
>> expect your Earth to orbit your Sun if placed several 
>> thousand AU out?  What you are describing is several 
>> million AU out!
>
> Yep, I would expect the Earth to orbit the Sun even if several 
> thousand AU out.  And binary stars have all variety of 
> separations with limits caused by external perturbations 
> (like the tug of the galaxy and of passing stars and so forth).  

(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
You give all manner of lattitude to star systems being influences by
gravity, but that lowly planet trying to orbit the barycenter of a
binary system can be WAY out there and not get lost?  You truly do go
through contortions to justify your inability to deal with the Universe
around you with your limping and inadequate math!  Admit it!  You math
formulas cannot DEAL with even the Universe you have seen, and when
projected out to account for hypothetical situations, they fail
utterly!  This is absurd!
(End ZetaTalk[TM])

In article <6iit17$4i4$2@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
> Obviously a million AU out is too far to be stable for very long
> if at all.  If your 2 suns are 10 AU apart, your planet can orbit 
> easily at hundreds or thousands of AU without any problem.

(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
A million AU out would not BE an orbit.  Period.  And if 2 Suns were 10
AU apart, according to your laws of gravity, they should have been one
before this discussion could ever ensue.  Please try to get grounded.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])

In article <6iit17$4i4$2@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
>>> Of course, there are also orbits that resemble figure 8s, 
>>> but they aren't elliptical anymore. 
>
>> Are these orbits you have seen, or speculated upon?  Please
>> differentiate.  There are NO such orbits!
>
> We've seen a pretty small part of the Universe.  These are 
> speculative orbits as much as anything, ...

(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
As we said, there are NO such orbits.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])