| |
|
Article: <5aebp4$47e@dfw-ixnews5.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Re: ASTEROID BELT - the Zetas Explain
Date: 1 Jan 1997 18:52:20 GMT
In article <5a8vsi$kmr@pollux.cmc.doe.ca>
>> (Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
>> Dust and boulders and gravel and the like appear DARK,
so
>> you don't see them unless the object is large enough to
appear
>> as a speck on your telescopes.
>> (End ZetaTalk[TM])
>
> A significant mass of bodies in the asteroid belt would be
> noticeable by the number of occultations of background stars
that
> would be seen. Even dust produces scattering/dimming effects
that
> would be noticeable. So once again you are speaking before
thinking.
> ynecgan@cmc.doe.ca (Greg Neill)
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
This is how you FOUND the Asteroid Belt in the first place,
dummy! The larger asteroids DID pass in front of stars. A dust
CLOUD would indeed likewise register, in the same manner that a
sandstorm on the desert in effect blocks vision, though not
altogether light, from passing through. Daylight in a sandstorm
does not appear to be night. The blockage is not COMPLETE, and
only interferes with vision due to the number of times that a
given path is blocked. A compounded interference.
In space, where there is so very much more elbow room, the
dust clouds are disbursed. In point of fact, the stars viewed
consistently THROUGH the Asteroid Belt appear to be DIMMER to you
than they would if you were to be viewing them from some other
vantage point! Even your Hubble deals with this faint clouding,
when peering out through the Asteroid Belt. Thus, you have no
basis of comparison.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])