Re: Nancy and DejaNews


Article: <5htqmd$8e8@sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy)
Subject: Re: Nancy and DejaNews
Date: 2 Apr 1997 14:32:45 GMT

In article <5hcva8$1ue@nntp1.u.washington.edu> Lamont Granquist writes:
>> The tale told by the angle of the two tails, the ion tail in
>> particular as it points AWAY from the Sun, shows that this
>> comet is NOT at the distance claimed by the conspirators.
>> Hale-Bopp's small size, in comparison to Hyakutake last
>> years, for instance, is explained away by DISTANCE.
>> ZetaTalk[TM]
>
> Nancy, the only way you're going to get the ephemeris that
> JPL has been producing for HB -- to the remarkable accuracy
> of arc minutes over the course of a year -- is for the comet to
> be at the distance that it is at.
> lamontg@nospam.washington.edu

(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
This statement makes absolutely no sense. Accuracy equates to distance? If anything, accuracy increases as distance DECREASES. Those who plotted the orbit of the mythical hale-Bopp, the one that spanned from a nova in 1995 to the REAL comet you see now, should not be credited for having the points they drew across the sky line up where their pen was placed! Look rather to the PROBLEMS with this orbit, and how they handled them. When adjustments were needed, they made them without rationale. The orbit passes Jupiter and it is then they wish to tighten the eccentricity as later information on the REAL comet they were seeking to link up with showed it to have a tighter eccentricity than first presumed. How did they handle this adjustment?

They gave it a tighter eccentricity, but ALSO had it leap up and away from Jupiter by 3 arc minutes, giving it a broader nose as it swings around the Sun. These two orbital maneuvers are CONTRADICTORY. So before you hand out the awards, question the contradictions.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])