Revising my 26th book of science:: AP-Faraday Law replacing Nebular Dust Cloud theory (Physics series for High School Book 3)

When I first published this book in 2019, unfortunately it was not on the level of High School students comprehension. I have to tone it down for these young minds to learn what it is I am saying. So I make a massive overhaul revision that the High
School students can grasp fully the ideas.

Revising my 26th book of science:: AP-Faraday Law replacing Nebular Dust Cloud theory (Physics series for High School Book 3)

I am in the process of revising my 26th book of science. It starts with the story of the Nebular Dust Cloud theory and why that is a terribly phony theory of science.

--- quoting Wikipedia on this theory ---
The nebular hypothesis is the most widely accepted model in the field of cosmogony to explain the formation and evolution of the Solar System (as well as other planetary systems). It suggests the Solar System is formed from gas and dust orbiting the Sun
which clumped up together to form the planets. The theory was developed by Immanuel Kant and published in his Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens (1755) and then modified in 1796 by Pierre Laplace. Originally applied to the Solar System,
the process of planetary system formation is now thought to be at work throughout the universe. The widely accepted modern variant of the nebular theory is the solar nebular disk model (SNDM) or solar nebular model.[1] It offered explanations for a
variety of properties of the Solar System, including the nearly circular and coplanar orbits of the planets, and their motion in the same direction as the Sun's rotation. Some elements of the original nebular theory ar

|
|
V


groups.google.com/g/sun/c/v8D6GcEnRLQ

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 11:42:26 AM UTC-4, Man of Your dreams wrote:

|
|
V

groups.google.com/g/sun/c/v8D6GcEnRLQ

Super nova rate in our galaxy, roughly once a lifetime (long lifetime 100 years).

https://www.google.com/search?q=super+nova+rate+in+our+galaxy&oq=super+nova+rate+in+our+g&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j33i10i160l4j33i299l2j33i22i29i30j33i15i22i29i30j33i22i29i30.12939j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Roughly 10,000 in a million years. Scatter them randomly in the plane of our galaxy, area Pi x (5E4)^2 light years squared. Divided that area by 10,000 to get roughly 75 x 10E4 light-years squared. Take the square root of that number to get roughly 900
light-years. So once in a million years on average a super nova will explode within 450 light-years of any spot in our galaxy. Now of course super nova events are not likely scattered completely at random in our galaxy so the 450 number really depends on
where you are in our galaxy.

So a super nova blast giving rise to a shock wave that helps to collapse some galactic cloud so as to form stars seems plausible. Right AP?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 11:16:05 AM UTC-5, Andy Everett wrote:

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 11:42:26 AM UTC-4, Man of Your dreams wrote:

|
|
V

groups.google.com/g/sun/c/v8D6GcEnRLQ

Super nova rate in our galaxy, roughly once a lifetime (long lifetime 100 years).

https://www.google.com/search?q=super+nova+rate+in+our+galaxy&oq=super+nova+rate+in+our+g&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j33i10i160l4j33i299l2j33i22i29i30j33i15i22i29i30j33i22i29i30.12939j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Roughly 10,000 in a million years. Scatter them randomly in the plane of our galaxy, area Pi x (5E4)^2 light years squared. Divided that area by 10,000 to get roughly 75 x 10E4 light-years squared. Take the square root of that number to get roughly 900

light-years. So once in a million years on average a super nova will explode within 450 light-years of any spot in our galaxy. Now of course super nova events are not likely scattered completely at random in our galaxy so the 450 number really depends on
where you are in our galaxy.

So a super nova blast giving rise to a shock wave that helps to collapse some galactic cloud so as to form stars seems plausible. Right AP?

Andy, a rare event is a supernova. A common event is stars the size of the Sun. A rare event does not cause a common event. You need not monkey business around with numbers to tell you rarity never produces commonality.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 1:30:23 PM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 11:16:05 AM UTC-5, Andy Everett wrote:

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 11:42:26 AM UTC-4, Man of Your dreams wrote:

|
|
V

groups.google.com/g/sun/c/v8D6GcEnRLQ

Super nova rate in our galaxy, roughly once a lifetime (long lifetime 100 years).

https://www.google.com/search?q=super+nova+rate+in+our+galaxy&oq=super+nova+rate+in+our+g&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j33i10i160l4j33i299l2j33i22i29i30j33i15i22i29i30j33i22i29i30.12939j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Roughly 10,000 in a million years. Scatter them randomly in the plane of our galaxy, area Pi x (5E4)^2 light years squared. Divided that area by 10,000 to get roughly 75 x 10E4 light-years squared. Take the square root of that number to get roughly

900 light-years. So once in a million years on average a super nova will explode within 450 light-years of any spot in our galaxy. Now of course super nova events are not likely scattered completely at random in our galaxy so the 450 number really
depends on where you are in our galaxy.

So a super nova blast giving rise to a shock wave that helps to collapse some galactic cloud so as to form stars seems plausible. Right AP?

Andy, a rare event is a supernova. A common event is stars the size of the Sun. A rare event does not cause a common event. You need not monkey business around with numbers to tell you rarity never produces commonality.

Compared to our lifespan a super nova is a rare event in our galaxy but compared to the lifespan of a typical star a super nova event is not rare in some relatively small region of our galaxy.

Google search, "do super nova help in star formation"

https://www.google.com/search?q=do+super+nova+help+in+star+formation&sxsrf=APwXEdcp_F52_i2Oz0woD3Omob2bJC_vBQ%3A1682965063336&ei=RwJQZKb-E6Wq5NoPpcOi-A0&ved=0ahUKEwjmvZO23dT-AhUlFVkFHaWhCN8Q4dUDCBA&oq=do+super+nova+help+in+star+formation&gs_lcp=
Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQDDIFCAAQogQyBQgAEKIEMgUIABCiBDIFCAAQogQ6CggAEEcQ1gQQsAM6BAgAEEc6BwgjELACECdKBAhBGABQ0sEDWPXTA2DO4QNoCnACeACAAW-IAe4BkgEDMi4xmAEAoAEByAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

"Star formation can be triggered by compression from wind or supernova-driven shock waves that sweep over molecular clouds. Because these shocks will likely contain processed elements, triggered star formation has been proposed as an explanation for
short-lived radioactive isotopes (SLRIs) in the Solar system."

Google search, "what part if any do supernovae play in galactic star formation"

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+part+if+any+do+supernovae+play+in+galactic+star+formation&sxsrf=APwXEdcZTCHMWMsv2-L2aRVol4HaJhWkog%3A1682965281043&ei=IQNQZLCTAp2v5NoPubGYwA4&ved=0ahUKEwjwp_ud3tT-AhWdF1kFHbkYBugQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=what+part+if+any+do+
supernovae+play+in+galactic+star+formation&gs_lcp=Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQA0oECEEYAFAAWABgAGgAcAF4AIABAIgBAJIBAJgBAKABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

"A supernovae creates shock waves through the interstellar medium, compressing the material there, heating it up to millions of degrees. Astronomers believe that these shock waves are vital to the process of star formation, causing large clouds of gas to
collapse and form new stars."

Google search, "at what rate are stars being formed in our galaxy"

https://www.google.com/search?q=at+what+rate+are+stars+being+formed+in+our+galaxy&oq=at+what+rate+are+stars+being+formed+in+our+galaxy&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i22i29i30.16611j1j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

"So, on average, we expect that roughly six to seven new stars form in the Milky Way every year. "

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 2:26:04 PM UTC-4, Andy Everett wrote:

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 1:30:23 PM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 11:16:05 AM UTC-5, Andy Everett wrote:

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 11:42:26 AM UTC-4, Man of Your dreams wrote:

|
|
V

groups.google.com/g/sun/c/v8D6GcEnRLQ

Super nova rate in our galaxy, roughly once a lifetime (long lifetime 100 years).

https://www.google.com/search?q=super+nova+rate+in+our+galaxy&oq=super+nova+rate+in+our+g&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j33i10i160l4j33i299l2j33i22i29i30j33i15i22i29i30j33i22i29i30.12939j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Roughly 10,000 in a million years. Scatter them randomly in the plane of our galaxy, area Pi x (5E4)^2 light years squared. Divided that area by 10,000 to get roughly 75 x 10E4 light-years squared. Take the square root of that number to get roughly

900 light-years. So once in a million years on average a super nova will explode within 450 light-years of any spot in our galaxy. Now of course super nova events are not likely scattered completely at random in our galaxy so the 450 number really
depends on where you are in our galaxy.

So a super nova blast giving rise to a shock wave that helps to collapse some galactic cloud so as to form stars seems plausible. Right AP?

Andy, a rare event is a supernova. A common event is stars the size of the Sun. A rare event does not cause a common event. You need not monkey business around with numbers to tell you rarity never produces commonality.

Compared to our lifespan a super nova is a rare event in our galaxy but compared to the lifespan of a typical star a super nova event is not rare in some relatively small region of our galaxy.

Google search, "do super nova help in star formation"

https://www.google.com/search?q=do+super+nova+help+in+star+formation&sxsrf=APwXEdcp_F52_i2Oz0woD3Omob2bJC_vBQ%3A1682965063336&ei=RwJQZKb-E6Wq5NoPpcOi-A0&ved=0ahUKEwjmvZO23dT-AhUlFVkFHaWhCN8Q4dUDCBA&oq=do+super+nova+help+in+star+formation&gs_lcp=

Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQDDIFCAAQogQyBQgAEKIEMgUIABCiBDIFCAAQogQ6CggAEEcQ1gQQsAM6BAgAEEc6BwgjELACECdKBAhBGABQ0sEDWPXTA2DO4QNoCnACeACAAW-IAe4BkgEDMi4xmAEAoAEByAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

"Star formation can be triggered by compression from wind or supernova-driven shock waves that sweep over molecular clouds. Because these shocks will likely contain processed elements, triggered star formation has been proposed as an explanation for

short-lived radioactive isotopes (SLRIs) in the Solar system."

Google search, "what part if any do supernovae play in galactic star formation"

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+part+if+any+do+supernovae+play+in+galactic+star+formation&sxsrf=APwXEdcZTCHMWMsv2-L2aRVol4HaJhWkog%3A1682965281043&ei=IQNQZLCTAp2v5NoPubGYwA4&ved=0ahUKEwjwp_ud3tT-AhWdF1kFHbkYBugQ4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=what+part+if+any+

do+supernovae+play+in+galactic+star+formation&gs_lcp=Cgxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAQA0oECEEYAFAAWABgAGgAcAF4AIABAIgBAJIBAJgBAKABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

"A supernovae creates shock waves through the interstellar medium, compressing the material there, heating it up to millions of degrees. Astronomers believe that these shock waves are vital to the process of star formation, causing large clouds of gas

to collapse and form new stars."

Google search, "at what rate are stars being formed in our galaxy"

https://www.google.com/search?q=at+what+rate+are+stars+being+formed+in+our+galaxy&oq=at+what+rate+are+stars+being+formed+in+our+galaxy&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i22i29i30.16611j1j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

"So, on average, we expect that roughly six to seven new stars form in the Milky Way every year. "

From, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova_remnant

"In either case, the resulting supernova explosion expels much or all of the stellar material with velocities as much as 10% the speed of light (or approximately 30,000 km/s). These speeds are highly supersonic, so a strong shock wave forms ahead of the
ejecta. That heats the upstream plasma up to temperatures well above millions of K. The shock continuously slows down over time as it sweeps up the ambient medium, but it can expand over hundreds or thousands of years and over tens of parsecs before its
speed falls below the local sound speed."

"hundreds or thousands of years" at 10 percent the speed of light.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Alright, Andy is not happy with common-sense-- that a rare event cannot translate into a commonality event. Rare supernova cannot create the common frequent existence of Solar System type stars of the universe.

These are not exact figures but easily applicable to the case at hand. The Universe to a Big Banger is 14 billion years old. (AP is not a Big Banger but a Dirac new radioactivities growing the Universe.) The Solar System is between 4 and 5 billion years
old. There are about 10^12 galaxies in the observable universe and each galaxy has about 10^12 star-systems. Using Andy's figure of 1 supernova every 100 years.

The mass of a supernova is typically 1.5 Sun mass as seen in SN 1994D.

The Stars of a typical galaxy number as 10^12 stars of which it is safe to say 10^11 of those stars are in the range of our Sun's mass.

So here we are faced with the dilemma of age of 1.4*10^10 years age of Universe in the Big Bang. Taking Andy's estimate of 1 supernova every 100 years, means we have the Possibility of a Solar System formation, of one solar system every 1.4*10^10 divided
by 100 equals 1.4*10^8. Yet the commonality of Sun like solar systems in every galaxy is 10^11 such solar systems, off by roughly a 1000. But Andy is assuming every supernova results in a new solar system, and not have the debris just become Space debris.

Now, Andy, if the numbers were that every star-system has 1,000 supernova to give birth to that star system, you would be in the correct frame of mind, and not me. But because, Supernova are rare and there are roughly 1,000 star systems for every
supernova to create that star system, means I am in the correct.

As I said-- Rarity never causes Commonality, so from a logical standpoint, Andy, you really have no legs to stand on in this argument.

AP

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 4:27:10 PM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

Alright, Andy is not happy with common-sense-- that a rare event cannot translate into a commonality event. Rare supernova cannot create the common frequent existence of Solar System type stars of the universe.

These are not exact figures but easily applicable to the case at hand. The Universe to a Big Banger is 14 billion years old. (AP is not a Big Banger but a Dirac new radioactivities growing the Universe.) The Solar System is between 4 and 5 billion

years old. There are about 10^12 galaxies in the observable universe and each galaxy has about 10^12 star-systems. Using Andy's figure of 1 supernova every 100 years.

The mass of a supernova is typically 1.5 Sun mass as seen in SN 1994D.

The Stars of a typical galaxy number as 10^12 stars of which it is safe to say 10^11 of those stars are in the range of our Sun's mass.

So here we are faced with the dilemma of age of 1.4*10^10 years age of Universe in the Big Bang. Taking Andy's estimate of 1 supernova every 100 years, means we have the Possibility of a Solar System formation, of one solar system every 1.4*10^10

divided by 100 equals 1.4*10^8. Yet the commonality of Sun like solar systems in every galaxy is 10^11 such solar systems, off by roughly a 1000. But Andy is assuming every supernova results in a new solar system, and not have the debris just become
Space debris.

Now, Andy, if the numbers were that every star-system has 1,000 supernova to give birth to that star system, you would be in the correct frame of mind, and not me. But because, Supernova are rare and there are roughly 1,000 star systems for every

supernova to create that star system, means I am in the correct.

As I said-- Rarity never causes Commonality, so from a logical standpoint, Andy, you really have no legs to stand on in this argument.

AP

Rough estimates, 1 supernova per century, "rare" but roughly 6 to 7 stars born per year, not so rare. So how does a "rare" event give rise to no so rare event? Because the rare event over time effects a relatively large volume in our galaxy.

Have any of your ideas become mainstream science? You have been swinging for decades now one would think you might have hit a homerun by now?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 6:11:35 AM UTC-5, Andy Everett wrote:

Rough estimates, 1 supernova per century, "rare" but roughly 6 to 7 stars born per year, not so rare. So how does a "rare" event give rise to no so rare event? Because the rare event over time effects a relatively large volume in our galaxy.

No wonder Andy is a failure of science-- he contradicts himself in every sentence.

Have any of your ideas become mainstream science? You have been swinging for decades now one would think you might have hit a homerun by now?

Andy Everett still chugs on slant cut of cone is ellipse when in truth it is a oval. And Everett still chugs on Boole logic with 2 OR 1 = 3, with AND as subtraction. Andy is probably a victim of air pollution, can not think straight even he tried to.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/2/2023 9:35 AM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

On Tuesday, May 2, 2023 at 6:11:35 AM UTC-5, Andy Everett wrote:

Rough estimates, 1 supernova per century, "rare" but roughly 6 to 7 stars born per year, not so rare. So how does a "rare" event give rise to no so rare event? Because the rare event over time effects a relatively large volume in our galaxy.

What would be wrong with a supernova event triggering 100 or 1000 stars
to form? Perhaps a huge one triggering a million stars to form? We
already know of clusters of stars in the galaxy which appear of near the
same age as each other and their orbits indicate they started off close
to each other in the past, even if spread out now. The Sun is in one of
these clusters.

No wonder Andy is a failure of science-- he contradicts himself in every sentence.

As expected, Plutonium avoids the argument and make ad hominem against
another poster.

Have any of your ideas become mainstream science? You have been swinging for decades now one would think you might have hit a homerun by now?

Remember, Archie is there with a wiffle ball bat facing a MLB pitcher.
Not too many homeruns there, especially if the pitcher is laughing
instead of pitching.

Andy Everett still chugs on slant cut of cone is ellipse when in truth it is a oval.

More off topic ad hominems against Andy, meaning ArchiePoo can't counter
Andy's arguments. Even worse, Arky attacks Andy for not believing Arky's
false claim. Almost like attacking someone for not believing 2+2=5.

And Everett still chugs on Boole logic with 2 OR 1 = 3, with AND as subtraction.

More off topic ad hominems against Andy, arguing absurdities as if factual.

Andy is probably a victim of air pollution, can not think straight even he tried to.

So ArchiePoo, you have no arguments against Andy's statements, so all
you can do is attack the person?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)