Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jack the Bodiless · 11-05-2002, 06:13 AM

As for the Uranus stuff:

According to current theories of planetary formation, there is a tendency for planets, as they form from the initial contracting dust cloud, to pick up a rotation in the same plane and direction as their orbit.

Once formed, there is a very slight interaction between the planet and nearby masses. The mass must be close enough for there to be a significant difference in the gravitational field strength exerted by the mass between the nearside and farside of the orbiting object: this is the case for the Earth's Moon and the moons of the outer planets, but NOT for planets orbiting the Sun. Except for the innermost ones, but gravitational interactions between each other tend to scramble the effect of the Sun's "tidal lock" on the inner planets.

By far the most significant factor, however, is the random angle of impact of the planetesimals which formed the planet. For instance, the Earth-Moon system is thought to have gained its rotation from the impact of a Mars-sized planet. A similar huge off-center impact and fusion could have toppled Uranus. It is thought that the present family of planets are the survivors of a much larger population of planetesimals, many the size of small planets themselves, which collided in the early history of the Solar System.

wehappyfew · 11-05-2002, 08:15 AM

The Uranus tilt might have a simple explanation if you apply the physics involved in this article:

<a href="http://skyandtelescope.com/news/current/article_772_1.asp" target="_blank">http://skyandtelescope.com/news/current/article_772_1.asp</a>

This article was brought up in the thread:
<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001599" target="_blank">Saturn and Neptune debunk the YECs</a>

Does anyone know the precession period for Uranus?

I predict, based on the interaction observed with Saturn, that Uranus will also have a precession period that is locked to the orbital regression period of Neptune (or is a simple ratio of it).

Since Uranus is much closer to Neptune that Saturn is, it should be no surpise the orbital tilt has been inclined more severely than Saturn has (if this effect is responsible).

The really ironic part is, this tilt would require many millions of years to develop, so citing it as YEC evidence is bass-ackwards.

Dark Jedi · 11-05-2002, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wehappyfew:
<strong>Dark Jedi,

The sodium YEC argument is very poor, and this example is worse than most. All you have to do in this case is ask...

"where does the 5 ppm sodium in river water come from?"

The answer is a lot of it comes directly from sea salt carried by rain. Tiny droplets of ocean spray picked up by the wind make excellent condensation sites for rain. Without the tiny droplet of sea salt, the rain drop would not condense.

Another large part of river sodium is dissolved evaporites. These were preciptated in restricted basins which allowed ocean water to flow in, but not out, thus concentrating the salt until it precipitates. The Mediterranean Sea has up to 3,000 meters of salt on the bottom from the Miocene, when the Straits of Gibralter closed up partially. The Med evaporated completely dozens of times over a several hundred thousand year span.

Part three to the answer is the fact that much of the dissolved sodium comes from chemical erosion of rock that have been recycled by plate tectonics. Sodium is incorporated into basalts at mid-ocean ridges, which then get subducted, partially melted, and the magma becomes new rocks on land, which are the source of some of that sodium. It's part of a cycle.

The short answer is that the sodium-into-the-ocean is not a one way process. If you want more details, I can dig up some good websites and references.</strong>

It looks like the discussion is going this way. What are those sites?

Dark Jedi · 11-05-2002, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wehappyfew:
<strong>
Of course.

Give us the URL of the debate and I'll follow up with an additional $.03 worth.</strong>

It is located <a href="http://www.augustachronicle.com/ubb/Forum21/HTML/000040.html" target="_blank">Here....</a>

Dark Jedi · 11-07-2002, 07:29 PM

Update:

The pundit has fled the scene.

As is common with this one: When trounced he will disappear for a month or two and hope people forget the sound lashing he recieved. He will then continue the discussion as if it had never been addressed, and throw in a new twist he found.

And I didn't get to use that wonderful rebuttal provided herein.

I'll save it for the next resurgance of the mighty Ron.

wehappyfew · 11-08-2002, 03:16 AM

The Rons of Creationism are all too common. All they require is a very short and/or selective memory. Morton's demon is strong in them.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-05-2002, 06:13 AM	#21
Jack the Bodiless Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: UK Posts: 5,815	As for the Uranus stuff: According to current theories of planetary formation, there is a tendency for planets, as they form from the initial contracting dust cloud, to pick up a rotation in the same plane and direction as their orbit. Once formed, there is a very slight interaction between the planet and nearby masses. The mass must be close enough for there to be a significant difference in the gravitational field strength exerted by the mass between the nearside and farside of the orbiting object: this is the case for the Earth's Moon and the moons of the outer planets, but NOT for planets orbiting the Sun. Except for the innermost ones, but gravitational interactions between each other tend to scramble the effect of the Sun's "tidal lock" on the inner planets. By far the most significant factor, however, is the random angle of impact of the planetesimals which formed the planet. For instance, the Earth-Moon system is thought to have gained its rotation from the impact of a Mars-sized planet. A similar huge off-center impact and fusion could have toppled Uranus. It is thought that the present family of planets are the survivors of a much larger population of planetesimals, many the size of small planets themselves, which collided in the early history of the Solar System.

11-05-2002, 08:15 AM	#22
wehappyfew Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Virginia Posts: 43	The Uranus tilt might have a simple explanation if you apply the physics involved in this article: <a href="http://skyandtelescope.com/news/current/article_772_1.asp" target="_blank">http://skyandtelescope.com/news/current/article_772_1.asp</a> This article was brought up in the thread: <a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=58&t=001599" target="_blank">Saturn and Neptune debunk the YECs</a> Does anyone know the precession period for Uranus? I predict, based on the interaction observed with Saturn, that Uranus will also have a precession period that is locked to the orbital regression period of Neptune (or is a simple ratio of it). Since Uranus is much closer to Neptune that Saturn is, it should be no surpise the orbital tilt has been inclined more severely than Saturn has (if this effect is responsible). The really ironic part is, this tilt would require many millions of years to develop, so citing it as YEC evidence is bass-ackwards.

11-07-2002, 07:29 PM	#25
Dark Jedi Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Afghanistan Posts: 4,666	Update: The pundit has fled the scene. As is common with this one: When trounced he will disappear for a month or two and hope people forget the sound lashing he recieved. He will then continue the discussion as if it had never been addressed, and throw in a new twist he found. And I didn't get to use that wonderful rebuttal provided herein. I'll save it for the next resurgance of the mighty Ron.

11-08-2002, 03:16 AM	#26
wehappyfew Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Virginia Posts: 43	The Rons of Creationism are all too common. All they require is a very short and/or selective memory. Morton's demon is strong in them.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.