My Terrible Heresy

I’ve been totally immersed all day in trying to get a rock to land on Chelyabinsk, after passing near the Earth in February 2009. I’ve been flying in chains of rocks to skim from east to west over the surface of the Earth on 15 February 2013.

The chain of rocks numbered 92 to 114 are just passing over the Earth, leaving red and blue trajectories where they’ve just come very near the surface of the Earth. Chelyabinsk is a tiny dot next to the transverse blue terminator line near the middle of the Earth.

che2009-skim2

I’ll try to make some YouTube videos of it at some point.

It’s all (another) terrible heresy of mine, which is to believe that asteroid DA14 and the Chelyabinsk meteor could have been companions. This is a terrible heresy because NASA have told me personally that Asteroids Don’t Have Companions. Only comets are allowed to have companions.

But I’m now almost on the point of showing how they could have been companions, even though they arrive at the Earth going in very different directions, with the Chelybinsk meteor moving from east to west, and DA14 from south to north. But I don’t think I’ll ever get NASA to consider the idea. I shall probably be branded as a heretic. It will be pointed out that I’m also a Global Warming Denializer. And, worst of all, a smoker.

Pah!!! Who would believe somebody like that?

Advertisements

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to My Terrible Heresy

  1. Entry 666: “Frank Davis” — EIR: Entity of Ill Repute.

  2. castello2 says:

    You should ask a real authority. https://grahamhancock.com/

  3. slugbop007 says:

    Albert Einstein smoked a pipe. He came up with some interesting theories.

  4. junican says:

    In all seriousness, Frank, what difference are you trying to elucidate? I really do not understand why what you are trying to describe matters.

    • Frank Davis says:

      I think that people should not accept unquestioningly the assertions of authorities. I think it matters a great deal that people retain a lively scepticism about everything, if they are not to sink into what amounts to religious dogma, and authority worship.

      NASA is one of these authorities. And on 15 February 2013, NASA declared that the Chelyabinsk meteor of that day was completely unrelated to asteroid DA14 that passed close to the Earth on the same day. They said this even before it had been clearly established from which direction the meteor came.

      However for many people, including several of my readers, the near simultaneous arrival of the two rocks suggested that they could have been companions. And since I had my own orbital simulation model (hardly anyone seems to have one of these), I set out to investigate for myself.

      So for the past two and a half years, I’ve been looking for a rock which could be described as a companion of DA14, and which landed on Chelyabinsk on the required day. I soon found that when asteroids/comets break up during close approaches to planets, they form gradually lengthening rock trains lying roughly along their orbital paths. This told me that the companion should lie somewhere in front of or behind DA14, Initially I looked at rocks only a few thousands of kilometres from DA14, but I was unable to get one to land on Chelyabinsk. My co-conspirator/colleague Andrew Cooper then suggested that, since DA14’s orbit passed near to the Earth in February of each year, we could look for a close approach in a previous year. And so I went back, first to 2012, and then 2011 and 2010. It was only when I got back to 2009 that I managed to get a companion rock, trailing several million kilometres behind DA14 to come near the Earth in 2009 and be thrown into a wide orbit that took it around the sun three times in four years, to arrive over Chelyabinsk at 03:20 UT on 15 February 2013.

      What does this mean? And why does it matter? What it means is that the Chelyabinsk meteor could have been a DA14.companion. And NASA should not have ruled out the possibility on the same day that the rock landed. And the possibility should not be ruled out that, when large meteors land on the Earth, they may be accompanied by other meteors, which will land elsewhere on the Earth. Given that the Chelyabinsk meteor had the power of a large nuclear weapon, this ought to be a matter of great interest (although not alarm).

      Anyway, apart from that, it’s great fun to build models of rocks, and to watch how they behave.

      Does that help?

      • garyk30 says:

        “It’s great fun” equals “it gives me pleasure”.

        That is why we smoke, is it not?

      • Rose says:

        Asteroids Don’t Have Companions

        I know asteroids are not comets but anyone who watched Comet Shoemaker–Levy collide with Jupiter in 1994 might wonder about that.

        “Calculations showed that its unusual fragmented form was due to a previous closer approach to Jupiter in July 1992. At that time, the orbit of Shoemaker–Levy 9 passed within Jupiter’s Roche limit, and Jupiter’s tidal forces had acted to pull apart the comet. The comet was later observed as a series of fragments ranging up to 2 km (1.2 mi) in diameter.”
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_Shoemaker%E2%80%93Levy_9

        So what if it was not so much a companion as a former part of DA14?

        Asteroids appear not to be as solid as I thought.

        Cohesive forces prevent the rotational breakup of rubble-pile asteroid (29075) 1950 DA
        2014

        “Space missions and ground-based observations have shown that some asteroids are loose collections of rubble rather than solid bodies.”

        “Here we report that the kilometre-sized asteroid (29075) 1950 DA (ref. 8) is a rubble pile that is rotating faster than is allowed by gravity and friction. We find that cohesive forces are required to prevent surface mass shedding and structural failure, and that the strengths of the forces are comparable to, though somewhat less than, the forces found between the grains of lunar regolith.”
        http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v512/n7513/full/nature13632.html

        “The term regolith refers to any layer of material covering solid rock, which can come in the form of dust, soil or broken rock.”

        I must confess that I know absolutely nothing about the subject and am ashamed to admit that even the copy of Patrick Moore’s Astronomy For The Under Tens I bought a few years ago left me baffled. So do feel free to ignore this entire comment.

        • Frank Davis says:

          I’ve often cited Shoemaker-Levy as the kind of rock train that results from a close approach.

          I’ve generally supposed that DA14 was part of some rock pile that disintegrated during some close approach. But however DA14 was formed, it would have itself have had bits knocked off it by impacts of other asteroids. I’m intrigued that there are meteorites that have fallen on the Earth which have actually come from Mars.

          And I’ve got a book by Patrick Moore called The Amateur Astronomer which I bought when I was about 15, and which I still find baffling in places. So feel free to ignore this comment too.

        • Rose says:

          But however DA14 was formed, it would have itself have had bits knocked off it by impacts of other asteroids

          I was thinking more of the gravitational field that caused Shoemaker-Levy to pull apart 2 years before it finally crashed into Jupiter.,
          It might have been enough to overwhelm these newly discovered “cohesive forces” that hold a rubble pile asteroid together, on a previous close approach to Earth.

          Then again, what do I know.

      • junican says:

        Indeed so. Thanks.

      • Roobeedoo2 says:

        Frank, my friend Hugo has just posted about his programming. It may be of interest:

        https://hugosprobe.wordpress.com/2015/10/05/the-outer-terrain/

  5. John Watson says:

    While I am not a scientist and have not taken much interest in Astronomy for a good many years I think two things stand out. Firstly NASA, like the Global warmists and the Anti-smokers will never concede that there is another point of view besides their own, right up to the second that a very big rock hits Earth destroying life as we know it. Secondly it will not matter to most of us since we will be deceased, however Frank might have the small consolation of placing his thumb on his nose, wriggling his fingers and saying “I told you so” to the few survivors from beyond the grave!

    Such is the arrogance of most of those who have letters after their names and claim to know better than we mere mortals, it also makes Frank more of a scientist than any of them since he challenges the ‘established normality’ as did Newton, Pasteur, Curie and Einstein..

  6. Ian says:

    With regard to another of your topics, I was reminded of Idle Theory when listening to Brian Eno’s John Peel lecture. Eno says, “Art is everything that you don’t have to do”.
    Here is a link: Podcast: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-john-peel-lecture/id478270596?mt=2

    • Frank Davis says:

      I once spent an afternoon with Brian Eno, back in 1994. He was looking for ways to generate music with computers. I found him very likeable. He made me a mug of tea. We talked about all sorts of things. I happened to have a printed essay of mine on Idle Theory with me. He took a great deal of interest in it, and attempted to make a photocopy of the essay. Unfortunately the essay was printed on both sides of rather thin A4 paper, and the text of both sides appeared on the photocopies, making them completely illegible. So he abandoned the attempt. Our conversation then moved on to other matters.

      I subsequently decided that I knew far too little about music to be of any assistance to him, and so didn’t become further involved.

      P.S. Interesting talk by Eno. When was it given? Ah, 2015!

  7. harleyrider1978 says:

  8. harleyrider1978 says:

    VVD MP says anti-smoking group should lose tax-free status
    MP Erik Ziengs wants the government to end the tax-free status of anti-smoking charity Clean Air Nederland, the AD reports on Monday.

    Ziengs is angry that the organisation wants to stop people smoking in their own gardens if it causes a nuisance to others.

    ‘These sort of organisations make my skin creep,’ he told the paper. ‘How far should we go? Should you be banned from holding a barbecue in your garden?’

    Clean Air Nederland is a registered charity which means it does not have to pay tax on donations. Donors can also benefit from tax breaks.

    While freedom of speech is a greater good, ‘it does not have to be financed by tax payers,’ Ziengs told the AD. The Netherlands has already gone far enough to stop smoking in cafes and bars, he said.

    Ziengs said he will ask the junior health minister if the tax free status can be removed from organisations which ‘pit people against each other’.

    http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2015/10/vvd-mp-says-anti-smoking-group-should-lose-tax-free-status/

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Makes my skin creep.

      ‘This political endeavor from the beginning, causing non smokers to blame smokers for smoke related health problems is ridiculous. The suing of Phillip Morris has had a veritable discriminating snowball effect on people that smoke.

      With a higher percentage of non smokers developing lung cancer than smokers, is it not time to realize the real problem, nano particles from pollution that the state chooses to hide?

      To quote Goebbels:

      “If you tell a lie big enough and keep
      repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be
      maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from
      the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus
      becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to
      repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus
      by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

      If only there were more people capable of independent thought, and took the trouble to do a little research, not to mention the profit geared up medical corporate that hide behind this ‘smokescreen.’

    • slugbop007 says:

      Parasites everywhere. Sent Tom V a tweey a few weeks ago. Called him a Uber Nazi.

  9. Rose says:

    I think that people should not accept unquestioningly the assertions of authorities. I think it matters a great deal that people retain a lively scepticism about everything, if they are not to sink into what amounts to religious dogma, and authority worship

    Regarding the carrier bag tax.

    Have you been wondering how the supermarket carrier bags you re-used as rubbish bags and carefully put in the wheelybin could possibly have ended up in the sea?

    Well they didn’t, the study was talking about discarded fishing nets.

    I remember distinctly reading about Gordon Brown’s embarassing mistake in the Times in 2008

    The Times
    Environment

    Series of blunders turned the plastic bag into global villain
    March 8 2008

    “Scientists and environmentalists have attacked a global campaign to ban plastic bags which they say is based on flawed science and exaggerated claims.

    The widely stated accusation that the bags kill 100,000 animals and a million seabirds every year are false, experts have told The Times. They pose only a minimal threat to most marine species, including seals, whales,dolphins and seabirds.

    Gordon Brown announced last month that he would force supermarkets to charge for the bags, saying that they were “one of the most visible symbols of environmental” Retailers and some pressure groups, including the Campaign to Protect Rural England, threw their support behind him.

    But scientists, politicians and marine experts attacked the Government for joining a “bandwagon” based on poor science.

    Lord Taverne, the chairman of Sense about Science, said “The Government is irresponsible to jump on a bandwagon that has no base in scientific evidence. This is one of many examples where you get bad science leading to bad decisions which are counter-productive.”
    http: //www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/environment/article2143689.ece

    https://www.heartland.org/sites/all/modules/custom/heartland_migration/files/pdfs/22954.pdf

    Plastic Bag Fears Based on Misquoted Study – May 1 2008

    “In recent years, polyethylene bags, usually made from petroleum or natural gas, have largely displaced the more cumbersome paper sack as a means of carrying items from the store to the home or office. But their ubiquitous presence has drawn the ire of environmental activists and politicians who claim the bags inflict significant harm on the environment, including causing the death of 100,000 mammals and one million seabirds annually.

    The plastic bag scare, it turns out, is based on a 1987 Canadian study that investigated the harm to marine mammals and seabirds from discarded fish nets. For reasons not fully understood, Australian researchers, in a follow-up study conducted 15 years later, mistakenly attributed the death of 100,000 marine animals to plastic bags instead of the “plastic litter” cited in the Canadian research.

    “Plastic bags do not figure in entanglement. The main culprits are fishing gear, ropes, lines, and strapping bands,” David W. Laist, an analyst with the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission, told the March 8 Times of London.

    “Most mammals are too big to get caught up in a plastic bag,” Laist continued. “The impact of bags on whales, dolphins, porpoises, and seals ranges from nil for most species to very minor for a few species. For birds, plastic bags are not a problem either.”

    Activists Persist

    Despite such assurances, the campaign against plastic bags shows no signs of letting up.

    Earlier this year British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced plans to charge supermarkets for handing out the bags. “The danger that single-use plastic bags inflict on the environment is such that strong action must be taken,” Brown said in the February 29 London Guardian. “If government compulsion is needed to make the change, we will take the necessary steps.”
    http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2008/05/01/plastic-bag-fears-based-misquoted-study

    “The central claim of campaigners is that the bags kill more than 100,000 marine mammals and one million seabirds every year. However, this figure is based on a misinterpretation of a 1987 Canadian study in Newfoundland, which found that, between 1981 and 1984, more than 100,000 marine mammals, including birds, were killed by discarded nets. The Canadian study did not mention plastic bags.

    Fifteen years later in 2002, when the Australian government commissioned a report into the effects of plastic bags, its authors misquoted the Newfoundland study, mistakenly attributing the deaths to “plastic bags.”

    The figure was latched on to by conservationists as proof that the bags were killers. For four years the “typo” remained uncorrected. It was only in 2006 that the authors altered the report, replacing “plastic bags” with “plastic debris”. But they admitted: “The actual numbers of animals killed annually by plastic bag litter is nearly impossible to determine.”
    http: //www.foxnews.com/story/2008/03/08/plastic-bags-evil-think-again-some-scientists-say.html

    I’m not worried over 5p but that’s not the point.

    • Joe L. says:

      Thanks for this, Rose! Armed with this absurd junk science, progessives passed an all-out plastic bag ban here in Chicago that took effect in August. Very small businesses (not sure of the criteria off-hand) are however exempt, but I expect this to be a short-lived temporary exemption (exactly as smoking bans would never stretch beyond workplaces, the indoors, etc., etc.) As I ask myself every time, “What’s next?”

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

    The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

  11. harleyrider1978 says:

    Marlene Sobolik http://bigstory.ap.org/…/ap-analysis-dozens-deaths…
    AH, the EPA says Volkswagon caused the deaths of 16 to 94 deaths. No names, no evidence, just some computer models telling them so. Did they use SAMMEC? Garbage in, garbage out? Isn’t this EXACTLY what they did with smokers? Telling everyone smokers were killing people with second hand smoke? GARBAGE! NO names, NO evidence, just some computer models telling them so!

    AP analysis: Dozens of deaths likely from VW pollution dodge

    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a6925f0af82e44aaa1a1ed4b55d030f6/ap-analysis-dozens-deaths-likely-vw-pollution-dodge

  12. slugbop007 says:

    This week the city of Montreal dumped 8 billion liters of sewage waste into the Saint Lawrence Seaway. At first the mayor said he was outraged and would put a stop to it. Good PR that. Today he said he had no choice. I guess he was too busy banning smoking on terrasses, imposing calorie counts on all restaurant menus and trying to bring back Montréal’s baseball team. Should have thrown him in with the rest of the sludge.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s