Quote:
Originally Posted by rtomes
Any person who depends on getting their income from their scientific work is never going to look seriously at planetary alignments and sunspots. Why? Because it sounds like astrology. Most people will run a mile before they get associated with that. The main reason that serious papers were published in the 1960s was that NASA needed to be sure that they were not sending astronauts to the moon to get fried by solar flares. So some serious effort went in and as I understand it the only thing that they found that was useful was planetary alignments.
|
If such a scientist can make clear that this would be an important topic, then (s)he would get funded, but one would have to show more that a (quite possible) happestance correlation between two periods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtomes
Well, gravity quite simply does reach into the Sun's core from the planets. That is standard physics. What I need to show is that the amount of this effect is sufficient to have detectable changes in the Sun result. I believe that I can do that.
|
Then you better first read de Jager and Versteegh and then Shirley, because they show that the gravitational influence of the planets, compared with the other forces in the dynamo of the Sun is several orders of magnitude smaller (10 4 times I think to remember).
__________________
Any comments in glorious red are to be considered in ModeratorMode.
善數, 不用籌策 (shàn shù, bù yòng chóu cè)
He who is good at counting, uses no counting tools
“A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is”
道德經, 二十七 (dào dé jīng, 27)
|