Quote:
Originally Posted by baric
Why do you deflect instead of answering the question?
|
Are you trying to deflect my question?
Quote:
A body with a "dynamically dominant mass" is simply another way of saying that it has "cleared its neighboring planetesimals". Do you agree or disagree with that?
If you disagree, can you please describe a scenario in which an orbiting body can achieve a dynamically dominant mass without clearing its neighboring planetesimals?
|
As I explained in
my answer to you, which I linked to just above, Stern's parameter has nothing to do with whether or not the neighborhood has been cleared. It is a function only of mass and period, not the neighborhood. The Earth's parameter value is a hundred times the value for Mercury or Mars--that does not mean that Earth has cleared out its neighborhood a hundred times more.
Quote:
|
I am not crying 'hypocrisy'. I have used that in reference to Stern exactly one time, in the original post, in reference to his supporting of orbital dominance in 2002 but calling it a 'farce' in 2006. The way you make it sound, the title of this post is "ALAN STERN IS A HYPOCRITE!!!!!" and that its a charge I repeat in every post.
|
The title of the
thread is
Alan Stern has definitely flipped, and you've made remarks deprecating his character in more than just the OP--and you've defended the OP throughout. I don't see the distinction.