Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 91 to 99 of 99

Thread: Density wave in spiral Arm

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    6,955
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    I couldn't understand from Shaula if we do see the requested densities between the arms near our location.
    I've very clearly stated numerous times that we do and provided a paper that has performed observational tests of the density wave model.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    This might be a contradiction to the Zurich simulation.
    It isn't. As I have pointed out - the GAIA data shows a disk. Not a disk with large holes in it between spiral arms. Observing other galaxies shows a disk with the arms embedded in it. The Eris paper itself does a comparison to observations (that is how they were evaluating it). There is no significant contradiction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    However, as Shaula claim that this is OK, than I have no further question about this issue.
    I am somewhat disappointed that you characterise what I have said as claims I have made. I have spent a fair amount of time finding and providing papers, data and visualisations to answer your questions and support what I am saying. It is a shame you are dissatisfied with the point we have reached, but if you don't understand the evidence presented and won't accept the assessments made by people (not me) who do then we have probably reached an end point to the discussion. If you want to take it further then either you are going to have to accept published evidence or you are going to have to spend some time studying the underlying physics so that you do understand the evidence presented.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    534
    Quote Originally Posted by Shaula View Post
    I've very clearly stated numerous times that we do and provided a paper that has performed observational tests of the density wave model.


    It isn't. As I have pointed out - the GAIA data shows a disk. Not a disk with large holes in it between spiral arms. Observing other galaxies shows a disk with the arms embedded in it. The Eris paper itself does a comparison to observations (that is how they were evaluating it). There is no significant contradiction.


    I am somewhat disappointed that you characterise what I have said as claims I have made. I have spent a fair amount of time finding and providing papers, data and visualisations to answer your questions and support what I am saying. It is a shame you are dissatisfied with the point we have reached, but if you don't understand the evidence presented and won't accept the assessments made by people (not me) who do then we have probably reached an end point to the discussion. If you want to take it further then either you are going to have to accept published evidence or you are going to have to spend some time studying the underlying physics so that you do understand the evidence presented.

    Dear Shaula

    I really appreciate your great support.

    However, you are using Giga as an ultimate evidence for stars between the arms.

    I have looked at this web, and it doesn't give to me any real information.
    It starts at 441Ly with 2,026,094 stars.
    If you zoon in you see some minor changes in the image, till 20 Ly.
    From that point there is no change in the image till you get to Saturn.
    If you zoom out, you almost get an impression that the sun is located at the center of the galaxy.
    At any zoom and at any image, the number of stars is constant (2,026,094 stars). How could it be?
    It is also stated that the image is in 3D, so how do we know that they only focus on the stars in the disc?
    As the estimated disc thickness at our location is about 1KLY, how do we know that they do not monitor stars outside this disc range?

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,698
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    Dear Shaula

    I really appreciate your great support.
    Then show it by spending time understanding his answers. You've consistently ignored and/or misconstrued all of his information. It's as if you don't actually "appreciate [his] 'great support.' "

    However, you are using Giga as an ultimate evidence for stars between the arms.
    No he is not. Stop deliberately putting words into his mouth. You do it constantly.

    Stop, Dave Lee.

    Just stop.

    It is painfully obvious that you are not interested in learning, as you ignore all efforts to educate you. You obviously have a not-so-hidden ATM agenda, and you have been gaming the system under the guise of "just asking questions" to push it. You will purposefully misconstrue and ignore answers and it has been obvious for some time that you will never accept any but your preconceived answers. So there is no point at all in your continuing. We have you on one side, and everyone else and science on the other. And thus it shall ever be.

    Just stop.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Falls Church, VA (near Washington, DC)
    Posts
    8,230
    Bumped to avoid being lost in cyberspace:
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornblower
    My bold. It is a mystery to me as to why you think we don't find stars in the regions between the arms. Please explain.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee
    My explanation isn't fully correlated with the main stream.
    I am not asking about an ATM theory aimed at explaining such a void. I am asking about what sort of publications or other sources, if any, are causing you to believe that there are such voids.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    6,955
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    However, you are using Giga as an ultimate evidence for stars between the arms.
    No. I am not. I am using it as an easily accessible data set that is available to you to look into in more detail.

    Plus, as I pointed out when you asked for the evidence for just one star in the area between the arms, I gave you WISE data for open clusters that formed in spiral arms and are now found between them. Which you have ignored.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    I have looked at this web, and it doesn't give to me any real information.
    I have given you the link to the GAIA data page. The visualisation was just a quick way to look at the data. If you don't understand it then you still have the option of going back to the GAIA data and doing your own searches and your own visualisations. Given that you are having such trouble interpreting the data I suggest that this is the only way forward for you. I'll admit defeat - I genuinely don't know how to explain it or show it to you in any simpler form. From where I am sitting you have multiple lines of scientific evidence, data you can query yourself and a visualisation that shows you the answer in case you are not willing to spend the time plotting stars yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    If you zoom out, you almost get an impression that the sun is located at the center of the galaxy.
    Not if you take into account the factors I have already mentioned and made a point of mentioning to you when I gave the link - GAIA sees more stars nearby because it can see dimmer stars. So, unsurprisingly, we get a dataset centred on the Sun.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    At any zoom and at any image, the number of stars is constant (2,026,094 stars). How could it be?
    Because that is the number it loads from the larger GAIA dataset. It is not the number on your screen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    It is also stated that the image is in 3D, so how do we know that they only focus on the stars in the disc?
    They don't but, as I said, you can see the disk structure and rotate it around to look at it from several angles. The disk structure that doesn't have huge gaps in it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    As the estimated disc thickness at our location is about 1KLY, how do we know that they do not monitor stars outside this disc range?
    They monitor stars outside the disk. But, again, you can see the disk and you can see that it doesn't have huge gaps in it.

    I guess we will have to leave it there. I am literally at the point where, to me, I am pointing at a horse in a field and you are telling me that horses don't exist and you don't understand what my evidence is for them.

  6. 2018-May-29, 08:29 PM
    Reason
    All been said before.

  7. #96
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Lee View Post
    If you zoom out, you almost get an impression that the sun is located at the center of the galaxy.
    At any zoom and at any image, the number of stars is constant (2,026,094 stars). How could it be?
    It is also stated that the image is in 3D, so how do we know that they only focus on the stars in the disc?
    As the estimated disc thickness at our location is about 1KLY, how do we know that they do not monitor stars outside this disc range?
    If you had bothered to click on the prominent information logo on the image, these questions (and more) are all answered in simple language for the layperson.

  8. #97
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,698
    Quote Originally Posted by AGN Fuel View Post
    If you had bothered to click on the prominent information logo on the image, these questions (and more) are all answered in simple language for the layperson.
    The consistent pattern has been that Dave Lee will ignore anything that threatens his beliefs. Once one contrived "mystery" is resolved after an absurd amount of pain (e.g., "Why don't scientists use gravity in their simulations"), he'll contrive yet another. No amount of explanation will succeed because he is dogmatically certain that anyone that contradicts him (scientists) is certainly wrong, even if he doesn't understand at all the science that shows it. He rejects the scientific method, so engaging him is guaranteed to end in frustration. It will never be otherwise. That Shaula persisted this long is a credit to his dedication to education. Dave may not be as sincere in expressing gratitude to Shaula as one might wish, but I'm sure that other readers of the thread are appreciative of Shaula's generosity in sharing his knowledge. I know that I am.

  9. #98
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornblower View Post
    I am asking about what sort of publications or other sources, if any, are causing you to believe that there are such voids.
    It is uncharitable of me, but did anyone else have a flashback to the Red Dwarf episode "Queeg" when they considered this very pertinent question?

  10. #99
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    14,830
    Some ATM and replies removed. Thread closed to stop more pollution, if there is any good reason to reopen this thread, report it.
    ____________
    "Dumb all over, a little ugly on the side." -- Frank Zappa
    "Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
    "This is really very simple, but unfortunately it's very complicated." -- publius

    Moderator comments in this color | Get moderator attention using the lower left icon:
    Recommended reading: Forum Rules * Forum FAQs * Conspiracy Theory Advice * Alternate Theory Advocates Advice

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •