• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

20151026 - Dr. Michael Lynch – The Ghost Phenomenon - Live Show Chat Thread

Started by jazmunda, October 26, 2015, 04:57:57 PM

henge0stone

Quote from: SciFiAuthor on October 27, 2015, 12:47:57 AM
I know he was sick, but Art should have kept Shostak on as long as he could.

Yeah I think he owes Seth a show. Last show with him was a debacle.






Quote from: gx2music on October 27, 2015, 12:44:34 AM
Dr Zillions hasn't made a coherent sentence in over 2 hours.   He should stay on and be a guest of Hoagland. 
LOL - They both make up words too. Maybe they could have a contest on who could make up the worst ones.

coaster





Can't friggin' WAIT for Friday.  Haven't heard a Ghost to Ghost-type show live with Art in YEARS.

SciFiAuthor

Quote from: henge0stone on October 27, 2015, 12:49:25 AM
Yeah I think he owes Seth a show. Last show with him was a debacle.

I'd have liked to call in to pursue Seth's question about what the chances are of finding a Dyson's sphere are. We actually have no idea what the odds are. Could be terrible, could be great. We don't know.   




trostol

still not a fan of the name Dead Air lol

oh well..lets see what sort of catastrophe RCH has now

henge0stone

I kinda enjoyed the madness. I liked when he tripped over Art's logic.


Catsmile

Welp... if a picture is worth a thousand words.
The guest lived up to his picture plus a zillion tiems moar.



Morgus

Quote from: Mind Flayer Monk on October 27, 2015, 01:09:00 AM
KABC is playing the first hour of tonight's show at midnight.
Interesting - so they don't play the show one hour delayed?
They play 10pm-12am live and 12am-1am the replay of the first hour?

Quote from: Morgus on October 27, 2015, 01:11:54 AM
Interesting - so they don't play the show one hour delayed?
They play 10pm-12am live and 12am-1am the replay of the first hour?

That is what they did tonight.

Robert

Quote from: GravitySucks on October 26, 2015, 11:38:00 PM... One last try. If there was something closer occluding this star, then it would be occluding other stars as well. This is the only one that has been observed.
So there's no conceivable distance & size of object such that its rotation would be occluding this star & not others?  Seems they'd be easy parameters to solve for given the direction of other observable stars in the apparent vicinity.  You have Earth's orbit setting a circular base, & a circle at the other end that encompasses the star in question & not others.  That gives 2 potentially intersecting cones.  If their intersection is only virtual, no solution to the interposed-object hypothesis.  But if their intersection is real, it would be a volume in space in which such an opaque object could sit.  The period of the occultations, if they really are periodic rather than data fit loosely to periodic, gives a rotation rate on an axis lying between Earth's orbit & the star.

henge0stone

I like when Art took another shot at Dames, "I KNOW some some remote viewers are fakes" or something like that.

GravitySucks

Quote from: Robert on October 27, 2015, 06:26:48 AM
So there's no conceivable distance & size of object such that its rotation would be occluding this star & not others?  Seems they'd be easy parameters to solve for given the direction of other observable stars in the apparent vicinity.  You have Earth's orbit setting a circular base, & a circle at the other end that encompasses the star in question & not others.  That gives 2 potentially intersecting cones.  If their intersection is only virtual, no solution to the interposed-object hypothesis.  But if their intersection is real, it would be a volume in space in which such an opaque object could sit.  The period of the occultations, if they really are periodic rather than data fit loosely to periodic, gives a rotation rate on an axis lying between Earth's orbit & the star.
Sounds like you got it all figured out. You're still not right, but it shows you have an inquisitive mind.

It could be a portal too. Somebody left the light on in a parrallel universe and when the portal door is open, we see the light. When the portal door is closed we don't.

But its not.

Do the math. It makes my head hurt.

Peace.

GravitySucks

Quote from: Robert on October 27, 2015, 06:26:48 AM
So there's no conceivable distance & size of object such that its rotation would be occluding this star & not others?  Seems they'd be easy parameters to solve for given the direction of other observable stars in the apparent vicinity.  You have Earth's orbit setting a circular base, & a circle at the other end that encompasses the star in question & not others.  That gives 2 potentially intersecting cones.  If their intersection is only virtual, no solution to the interposed-object hypothesis.  But if their intersection is real, it would be a volume in space in which such an opaque object could sit.  The period of the occultations, if they really are periodic rather than data fit loosely to periodic, gives a rotation rate on an axis lying between Earth's orbit & the star.

OK, this is seriously my last attempt.

Go to ToysRUs and buy every single round object in the store. Take them up to Nome where you paintedvthe basketball on the street. Now start walking around in erratic circles dropping one or two of the toys and let them fall where they may. You may have to get preety far outside of Nome to drop them all. Some will be closer to your house than the painted basketball, some will be farther away, but in relative terms, they will all be around Nome, Alaska.

Now go back to the dot you painted on the street and imagine the one spot that you can fit that only blocks your line of sight to the basketball without blocking your line of site to any of the other round Toys. Maybe a nano particle on your cornea could do it, but nothing in between you and the painted basketball can occlude the basketball and ONLY the basketball unless it is in arms length of said basketball.

This star is not sitting all by itself in some ultra dark quadrant of space.

If that visualization doesn't help you understand, then there is nothing that I can say to sway your opinion. To me, it is very intuitive. I am sure that if you contact the researchers, they would be able to tell you all the math that they used in determining the spectral shifts, periodic dimming, and why they are confident that something really close to the star is doing the occluding.

I don't have a clue what is circling that star and causing the occlusion. I tend to lean towards a natural phenomenom before even thinking of some type of alien structure. BUT I am confident it is within the gravitaional field of the star.

TigerLily

Bravo Gravity. I don't know if Robert "gets it" but I thoroughly enjoyed your explanations

GravitySucks

Quote from: TigerLily on October 27, 2015, 09:29:51 AM
Bravo Gravity. I don't know if Robert "gets it" but I thoroughly enjoyed your explanations
As my professor used to say after everything he wrote on the board in my first class on Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems: "It is intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer".

Man that used to piss me off.

ZomZom

Quote from: guildnavigator on October 26, 2015, 11:27:37 PM
I'm gonna have to invent time travel, go back ten years and eat lead paint chips every day until I reach this show again if I want this guy to make any sense at all.

I'm not EVEN wasting another bowl of weed on this guy.
I'm only about halfway through the archive but this sums things up brilliantly.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod