The SUN is getting closer

Jan 27, 2020
53
20
55
I guess I'm a bit flummoxed by the title - The Sun is Getting Closer implies that the Earth's orbit is shrinking over time, when of course, it isn't.

Russian dynamicists Gregoriy A. Krasinsky and Victor A. Brumberg calculated, in 2004, that the sun and Earth are gradually moving apart. Not by a great deal – just 15 cm per year – but since that’s 100 times greater than the measurement error, something must really be pushing Earth outward. But what is the mechanism?

One idea is that the Sun is losing enough mass, via fusion and the solar wind, to gradually be losing its gravitational force (see Astronomical unit may need to be redefined) (𝐹 = 𝐺𝑀1𝑀2/𝑟2). Other possible explanations include a change in the gravitational constant G, the effects of cosmic expansion, and even the influence of dark matter. None of the latter have proved satisfactory.

Takaho Miura of Hirosaki University in Japan and three colleagues think they have the answer. In an article submitted to the European journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, they argue that the sun and Earth are literally pushing each other away due to their tidal interaction.

A similar process is gradually propelling the moon’s orbit outward: Tides raised by the moon in our oceans are gradually transferring Earth’s rotational energy to lunar motion. Consequently, each year, the moon’s orbit expands by about 4 cm and Earth’s rotation slows by 0.000017 second.

Likewise, Miura’s team assumes that our planet’s mass, and the mass of the inner two planets - Mercury and Venus, are raising a tiny but sustained tidal bulge in the sun. They calculate that, thanks to just the Earth, the sun’s rotation rate is slowing by 3 milliseconds per century (0.00003 second per year). According to their explanation, the distance between the Earth and sun is growing because the sun is losing its angular momentum.

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17228-why-is-the-earth-moving-away-from-the-sun/#ixzz6JA7ACDBS
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sally
Jan 13, 2020
12
0
30
How about, every 12,000 years or so the Sun micro-nova's and the ensuing output blasts the Earth a bit farther away from the Sun.
 
Jan 27, 2020
53
20
55
How about, every 12,000 years or so the Sun micro-nova's and the ensuing output blasts the Earth a bit farther away from the Sun.

You mention 12,000 years.

This corresponds to the Milankovitch Cycles.

12,000 years from now the Northern Hemisphere will experience summer in December and winter in June because the axis of the earth will be pointing at the star Vega instead of its current alignment with the North Star or Polaris. This seasonal reversal won't happen suddenly but the seasons will gradually shift over thousands of years.

Astronomer Milutin Milankovitch* developed the mathematical formulas upon which these orbital variations are based. He hypothesized that when some parts of the cyclic variations are combined and occur at the same time, they are responsible for major changes in the earth's climate (even the ice ages). Though he did his work in the first half of the 20th century, Milankovich's results weren't proven until the 1970s.

The small changes set in motion by Milankovitch cycles operate separately and together to influence Earth’s climate over very long timespans, leading to larger changes in our climate over tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years. Milankovitch combined the cycles to create a comprehensive mathematical model for calculating differences in solar radiation at various Earth latitudes along with corresponding surface temperatures. The model is sort of a climate time machine: it can be run backward and forward to examine past and future climate conditions.

It was Milutin Milankovitch's belief that obliquity** was the most important of the three cycles for climate, because it affects the amount of insolation in Earth’s northern high-latitude regions during summer (the relative role of precession versus obliquity is still a matter of scientific study).

He calculated that Ice Ages occur approximately every 41,000 years. Subsequent research confirms that they did occur at 41,000-year intervals between one and three million years ago. But about 800,000 years ago, the cycle of Ice Ages lengthened to 100,000 years, matching Earth’s eccentricity cycle. While various theories have been proposed to explain this transition, scientists do not yet have a clear answer.

Milankovitch’s work was supported by other researchers of his time, and he authored numerous publications on his hypothesis. It wasn’t until about 10 years after his death in 1958 that the global science community began to take serious notice of his theory. In 1976, a study in the journal Science by Hays et al. using deep-sea sediment cores found that Milankovitch cycles correspond with periods of major climate change over the past 450,000 years, with Ice Ages occurring when Earth was undergoing different stages of orbital variation.

A 1976 study, published in the journal Science examined deep-sea sediment cores and found that Milankovitch's theory corresponded to periods of climate change. Indeed, ice ages had occurred when the earth was going through different stages of orbital variation.

* The Serbian astrophysicist Milutin Milankovitch is best known for developing one of the most significant theories relating Earth motions and long-term climate change. He dedicated his career to developing a mathematical theory of climate based on the seasonal and latitudinal variations of solar radiation received by the Earth.

** Obliquity: axial tilt, also known as obliquity, is the angle between an object's rotational axis and its orbital axis, or, equivalently, the angle between its equitorial plane and orbital plane. It is different from orbital inclination.

See:
  • Hays, J.D. John Imbrie, and N.J. Shackleton. "Variations in the Earth's Orbit: Pacemaker of the Ice Ages." Science. Volume 194, Number 4270 (1976). 1121-1132.
  • Lutgens, Frederick K. and Edward J. Tarbuck. The Atmosphere: An Introduction to Meteorology.
  • https://www.britannica.com/biography/Milutin-Milankovitch
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sally
Apr 4, 2020
3
0
10
Its true the sun diameter is increasing but it is not possible for the sun's surface to touch the earth's surface. The sun at its highest point of increase in diameter( one million years from 1990), it will stop radiating but pull or push components around it depending on the composition of its nucleus. At that same time the earth shall also be radiating like the sun but its sole component shall be carbon. During such a time who ever is around must be careful and alert because such a period might collide with THE WAR OF WARS,a period when machines /transformers shall want their independence. As individuals we must always be thinking of how we can pass through such most dangerous times in case any of us or our grand grand children are present.
 
Jan 13, 2020
12
0
30
I guess I'm a bit flummoxed by the title - The Sun is Getting Closer implies that the Earth's orbit is shrinking over time, when of course, it isn't.

Russian dynamicists Gregoriy A. Krasinsky and Victor A. Brumberg calculated, in 2004, that the sun and Earth are gradually moving apart. Not by a great deal – just 15 cm per year – but since that’s 100 times greater than the measurement error, something must really be pushing Earth outward. But what is the mechanism?

One idea is that the Sun is losing enough mass, via fusion and the solar wind, to gradually be losing its gravitational force (see Astronomical unit may need to be redefined) (𝐹 = 𝐺𝑀1𝑀2/𝑟2). Other possible explanations include a change in the gravitational constant G, the effects of cosmic expansion, and even the influence of dark matter. None of the latter have proved satisfactory.

Takaho Miura of Hirosaki University in Japan and three colleagues think they have the answer. In an article submitted to the European journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, they argue that the sun and Earth are literally pushing each other away due to their tidal interaction.

A similar process is gradually propelling the moon’s orbit outward: Tides raised by the moon in our oceans are gradually transferring Earth’s rotational energy to lunar motion. Consequently, each year, the moon’s orbit expands by about 4 cm and Earth’s rotation slows by 0.000017 second.

Likewise, Miura’s team assumes that our planet’s mass, and the mass of the inner two planets - Mercury and Venus, are raising a tiny but sustained tidal bulge in the sun. They calculate that, thanks to just the Earth, the sun’s rotation rate is slowing by 3 milliseconds per century (0.00003 second per year). According to their explanation, the distance between the Earth and sun is growing because the sun is losing its angular momentum.

Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17228-why-is-the-earth-moving-away-from-the-sun/#ixzz6JA7ACDBS
Hey, Great post, thanks. I get the feeling that you might find this of interest
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMr-5HHnAmU

Let me know your thoughts maybe?
 
Jan 27, 2020
53
20
55
Sally -

I think I'm going to need some time to examine this man's credentials, digest this, and look into this so called synchronous process.

Hartmann
 
Mar 4, 2020
128
10
105
We measure a large amount of mass being accelerated from our star to well out pass Neptune. Continuously. Stars shine mass too. Think of the eons of stars. And if stars start out as hydrogen, then a side product is fission into isolated charge. The earth's shield protects us from fission products.

This has to have an effect on the strength of the star's gravity. According to all theory. And it decreases the density of free isolated charge in the star. The other particle ratios go up. Over time, this must have some effect.
 
Jan 27, 2020
53
20
55
We measure a large amount of mass being accelerated from our star to well out pass Neptune. Continuously. Stars shine mass too. Think of the eons of stars. And if stars start out as hydrogen, then a side product is fission into isolated charge. The earth's shield protects us from fission products.

This has to have an effect on the strength of the star's gravity. According to all theory. And it decreases the density of free isolated charge in the star. The other particle ratios go up. Over time, this must have some effect.
[/QUOTE


First of all, attention must be paid to the proper terms. Are you describing coronal mass ejections when you state "large amount of mass being accelerated from our star to well out pass Neptune?" If so, this must be clearly elucidated. Are coronal mass ejections accelerated beyond Neptune? And, if so, what is the total mass of such an ejection vis a vis the total mass of the sun? Eons of stars are mentioned. An eon is the largest division of geologic time, comprising two or more eras, while in astronomy an eon is equated to one billion years. Are you describing a set of stars through a particular length of time or just a finite number of stars however large?

In any case, not all stars begin as pure hydrogen.

Stars may be classified by their heavy element abundance, which correlates with their age and the type of galaxy in which they are found.

Population I stars include the sun and tend to be luminous, hot and young, concentrated in the disks of spiral galaxies and are usually found in the spiral arms. With the currently accepted model of heavy element formation in supernovae explosions, the gas from which they formed had been seeded with the heavy elements formed from previous giant stellar explosions. About 2% of the total belong to Population I stars.

Population II stars tend to be found in globular clusters and the nucleus of a galaxy. They tend to be older, less luminous and cooler than Population I stars. They have fewer heavy elements, either by being older or being in regions where no heavy-element producing predecessors would normally be found. Astronomers often describe this condition by saying that they are "metal poor", and this coefficient of "metallicity " is used as an indication of stellar age.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sally
Mar 4, 2020
128
10
105
Ok. I meant no reference to CMEs.

The word eons, to me, means all of time. One eon, to me, is a large slice of time. So, the eons of stars describes all the stars in all the time.

We see no evidence of any of this charge re-combining. It would emit. There would be some kind of background radiation of some sort. A component of dipole formation perhaps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sally
Dec 22, 2019
12
0
30
Has the earth's orbit changed due to the horrendous power of the Bikini Atoll tests?
I read somewhere that if a bomb the size of the 2 that were dropped on Japan by the USA were exploded every day for 10 years it would still fall short of the insane power first test.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY