Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to re: Build astronomical observatories where it makes sense for the application

An excellent diplomatic reply
E.P. — (archived)

Good move, Ken -

Your response accedes to Morrison et al.'s claim that Nemesis exists, and as a a matter of fact actually elists their support for the lunar detectos by claiiming that the reason for building a lunar observatory is to prove their claim.

A very good move, except that that absolutely excellent diplomatic solution does not provide for the detection of 75m dark carbonaceous chondrites of cometary origin, and in that regard it is defective. i.l. Tunguska type impacts, and these have been quite frequent.

Of course, the other option is to use Occam's razor - there's no need for a Nemesis search, as gravitational perturbations from the passage of our solar system through the plane of the Milky Way is all the injection mechanism one needs, and further this injection mechanism is what is demonstrated by the frequency of impacts.

But the Nemesis folks have kept Occam's razor from being used for years by various means, none of them "scientific", by any definition of the word. That's understandable, as people do not like having their throats slit, even if its done with Occam's razor.

Of couse, their argument will end as geologists' work here on Earth will show that what has hit the Earth has indeed been comets, but that work will be coming in over the years from now, indeed over the next century. The work that has been done so far has been regularly ignored.

But the time for action on the lunar detectors is now. Whether the passive sytem to detect comets is best built in free space or on the Moon is the debater in which you are now engaged. One can only hope that the active system for the detection of small impactors is not thrown out should argument for the other fail.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (53 posts)