Egypt's T-62s 1973
Shazli wrote that prior to the 1973 war Russia supplied Egypt with 200 T-62 tanks. With its 115mm gun, the T-62 was better armed than the T-55. Still Cairo's main tank, the T-55 had only a 100mm gun. T-62s represented a long overdue improvement. They promised to erode Israel's qualitative superiority. Sadat, however, was concerned about their possible effect on his regime. Fearing that a division of these tanks would be too powerful, and launch a coup, the government created two independent armored brigades. Both saw action early in the war. The infantry needed armor to back them up as soon as possible after the crossing. Therefore, the T-62s crossed the canal in the wake of the October 6 assault.
One of the T-62 equipped brigades, the 15th Armored, was attached to the 18th Infantry division at the northern end of the Second Army's bridgehead in Sinai. The other, the 25th Armored, was with the 7th Infantry farther south, in the Third Army sector. The 15th was the first to be committed to battle.
On October 8, when Egypt's 2nd infantry bested Israeli reserves, the 15th armored, near Kantara, did not fare as well. Elements of the brigade advanced and suffered losses. Four T-62s are said to have been destroyed in one engagement and probably more in another.
Adan's book, On the Banks of the Suez, mentions a little known engagement involving the 15th. On October 11 the Israelis saw a dust cloud approaching from the vicinity of the canal. T-62s of the 15th were advancing toward them. One of Adan's brigade commanders, Natke, positioned tanks to meet the Egyptians. The ensuing battle lasted only a few minutes. Fifteen T-62s were set ablaze and the rest retreated. The 15th lost, but still accomplished something. Its gunners killed an Israeli company commander and Mulla, a battalion commander.
Adan wrote that a few days later, on the 14th, the 15th attacked again. Sixty T-62s went into battle and 30 were lost. Rabinovich also claimed 30 tanks hit but provided a more detailed account. After nine T-62s were knocked out in an initial skirmish the 15th regrouped, and launched a second attack which cost it 21 tanks. As a later post will show, the figure of 30 T-62s destroyed, like other claims that day, is almost certainly exaggerated.
After the Israelis crossed the canal, the commander of the Second Army proposed that the 15th brigade be sent back west of the canal to bolster Egyptian defenses. Shazly liked this plan but Sadat and his cronies refused.
The other T-62 equipped brigade, the 25th Armored, is best known for its awful fate on October 17. In an attempt to sever the Israeli crossing point, it was ordered northward along the shore of the Bitter Lake. As Shazly foretold, the 25th fell into a trap and was slaughtered. Generally that is all that is known of the 25th. It did, however, see action prior to the 17th.
According to one version of events, the 25th participated in the premature offensive of October 13, in the Third Army sector. Fifteen of its tanks were knocked out. Therefore, with 75 left, it moved northward on the 17th and lost 65 of them. Ten survivors fled to Botzer.
Adan, again, includes an obscure account. According to him, before its denouement, the 25th participated in the ill-starred offensive of October 14. Around 0800 that day, Israeli tanks firing at long range knocked out five of its advancing tanks. Undaunted, the 25th resumed attacking around noon. It attempted a flanking maneuver south of the Gidi but was again repelled, losing 15 more T-62s.
In their works, Pollack and Nordeen wrote that on October 17, the Israelis hit 85 out of the 25th's 96 tanks. This doesn't appear credible. Adan said its losses were between 50 and 60 tanks. Determined to cross the canal as soon as possible, Adan's forces didn't recover or count the 25th's losses. Buoyed by the rout, and without precise figures, the Israelis exaggerated.
Nevertheless, there's no doubt the 25th had been neutralized. Its fate speaks volumes about Sadat's incompetence as a military commander. In one online forum an Egyptian wrote that "I wish I could go back in time to kick Sadat's butt and see his frigging face after the 25th got slaughtered..." Egypt's T-62s were formidable and should have contributed much to a victory. Had Shazly been heeded, the 15th and 25th might've stymied Israeli efforts west of the canal. Instead they fared poorly because of Sadat, who squandered them in futile attacks.
Reference: The Crossing of the Suez by Shazly
One of the T-62 equipped brigades, the 15th Armored, was attached to the 18th Infantry division at the northern end of the Second Army's bridgehead in Sinai. The other, the 25th Armored, was with the 7th Infantry farther south, in the Third Army sector. The 15th was the first to be committed to battle.
On October 8, when Egypt's 2nd infantry bested Israeli reserves, the 15th armored, near Kantara, did not fare as well. Elements of the brigade advanced and suffered losses. Four T-62s are said to have been destroyed in one engagement and probably more in another.
Adan's book, On the Banks of the Suez, mentions a little known engagement involving the 15th. On October 11 the Israelis saw a dust cloud approaching from the vicinity of the canal. T-62s of the 15th were advancing toward them. One of Adan's brigade commanders, Natke, positioned tanks to meet the Egyptians. The ensuing battle lasted only a few minutes. Fifteen T-62s were set ablaze and the rest retreated. The 15th lost, but still accomplished something. Its gunners killed an Israeli company commander and Mulla, a battalion commander.
Adan wrote that a few days later, on the 14th, the 15th attacked again. Sixty T-62s went into battle and 30 were lost. Rabinovich also claimed 30 tanks hit but provided a more detailed account. After nine T-62s were knocked out in an initial skirmish the 15th regrouped, and launched a second attack which cost it 21 tanks. As a later post will show, the figure of 30 T-62s destroyed, like other claims that day, is almost certainly exaggerated.
After the Israelis crossed the canal, the commander of the Second Army proposed that the 15th brigade be sent back west of the canal to bolster Egyptian defenses. Shazly liked this plan but Sadat and his cronies refused.
The other T-62 equipped brigade, the 25th Armored, is best known for its awful fate on October 17. In an attempt to sever the Israeli crossing point, it was ordered northward along the shore of the Bitter Lake. As Shazly foretold, the 25th fell into a trap and was slaughtered. Generally that is all that is known of the 25th. It did, however, see action prior to the 17th.
According to one version of events, the 25th participated in the premature offensive of October 13, in the Third Army sector. Fifteen of its tanks were knocked out. Therefore, with 75 left, it moved northward on the 17th and lost 65 of them. Ten survivors fled to Botzer.
Adan, again, includes an obscure account. According to him, before its denouement, the 25th participated in the ill-starred offensive of October 14. Around 0800 that day, Israeli tanks firing at long range knocked out five of its advancing tanks. Undaunted, the 25th resumed attacking around noon. It attempted a flanking maneuver south of the Gidi but was again repelled, losing 15 more T-62s.
In their works, Pollack and Nordeen wrote that on October 17, the Israelis hit 85 out of the 25th's 96 tanks. This doesn't appear credible. Adan said its losses were between 50 and 60 tanks. Determined to cross the canal as soon as possible, Adan's forces didn't recover or count the 25th's losses. Buoyed by the rout, and without precise figures, the Israelis exaggerated.
Nevertheless, there's no doubt the 25th had been neutralized. Its fate speaks volumes about Sadat's incompetence as a military commander. In one online forum an Egyptian wrote that "I wish I could go back in time to kick Sadat's butt and see his frigging face after the 25th got slaughtered..." Egypt's T-62s were formidable and should have contributed much to a victory. Had Shazly been heeded, the 15th and 25th might've stymied Israeli efforts west of the canal. Instead they fared poorly because of Sadat, who squandered them in futile attacks.
Reference: The Crossing of the Suez by Shazly
22 Comments:
If it was a mistake for the T-62s to attack, how else could they have won a victory?
I didn't say it was a mistake to attack, just engage in _futile_attacks. Egypt's generals, including Shazli and Third Army commander Wassel, strongly opposed the October 17th attack. Around 3 A.M. on the 17th, Wassel called headquarters, Center Ten, to claim technical problems would prevent the tanks from attacking that day. He was that desperate to avoid a catastrophe.
The 17th almost certainly would've fared better and achieved more, had it been withdrawn west of the canal by the 16th and established ambush positions in the Geneifa Hills.
Sadat obviously did not have a good understanding of military strategy. He should have thought things over and listened to the right advisors.
Must admit that military strategy is over my head although I will keep trying to follow your blogs. What I am more concerned with is political and economic strategy. How can we get justice for the Palestinians and other Muslims worldwide after the Israeli+US aggressions against them.
In order to survive and prosper in the face of the West's attacks, ISIS will need allies, and it should find them not only among Muslims but also among other groups that have reason to hate the US or NATO. I think about this a lot, and I wonder if they are thinking about it too
July 21, 2016
First, I'd like to repeat here what I just said in the Murtagi thread. Information on page 40 of RECONSTRUCTING A SHATTERED EGYPTIAN ARMY may explain why the communication system broke down in the '67 war. I got that book only a few days ago and may learn more as I continue to read it.
I doubt very much that there will be justice for the Palestinians. Netanyahu's claim to favor the two state solution is mere public relations. By building hundreds of new jewish homes in Palestinian areas, he's doing what he can to derail all hope of a two state solution. As I've predicted--and you've read my book--the Israelis will eventually expel the Palestinians from much if not all of the territories. That may coincide with, and contribute to, an end to internecine Arab warfare and a refocusing on Israel.
There's virtually no possibility ISIS will get allies. From the start they've been so amateurish politically they've succeed in alienating everyone. The whole world is against them. There are indications ISIS will abandon its "caliphate," go back underground and rely exclusively on terror.
Lastly, back on topic, had Shazly been heeded, starting on October 15, Egypt could've contained the IDF penetration before it reached either Ismailia or Suez. I'm pretty sure the T-62 equipped 15th and 25th brigades were among those he wanted withdrawn back west. I know military matters of a half century ago aren't your principal concern, but I appreciate your following my blogs. :)
Hi Tim--to get back off-topic to a previous one, I recently read an update on you-know, that weird dimming star that ends in --52 and is also known as Tabby's star, but already I can't remember what the update was, I think it was just more speculation as to what could be causing it. But then just this morning I happened to remember something from a novel I wrote many years ago that might explain it (as if we didn't already have too many possible explanations) but this is an interesting idea I think. A very advanced species of aliens (or we Earthlings in the future) builds a Dyson sphere around their sun with a radius equal to Earth's orbital radius (they're so advanced it only takes them 10,000 years to build it!) So, they enjoy living on their wonderful artificial planet for a million years or so, which is a long enough time to make the whole enterprise worthwhile, but during that time they become aware of the fact that stars are extremely intelligent, conscious and moral, and they are each all in constant communication with thousands of other stars, an extraordinarily rich and active social life. But our Dyson sphere was enormously frustrating to the Sun because it made it far more difficult for it to converse with all his other star pals. Of course stars are full of compassion so the Sun bore his loneliness and suffering with no complaints but at last we evolved to the point maybe where we didn't actually need our artificial planet anymore and agreed to dismantle it. But THAT process was done quickly, cheaply and rather carelessly, like we didn't want to put a whole lot of money into it since it was no good to us, so maybe we just kind of let it fall apart. So big chunks of it were gradually sent crashing harmlessly into the sun, and it eased off the pressure on the sun in such a way that for a few hundred or thousand years the sun burned more intensely before gradually cooling off.
Well, it fits the observations! :)
August 19, 2016
Great to see you back Roger! I also saw an update on Tabby's star. Seems they're still baffled. By the way, how are you doing now? I heard of wildfires near LA, but surely you're not in danger where you are. I saw your blog but didn't see any place to comment to posts. Are you still putting up fliers? You've been doing that since our snail mailing days.
I can't see the current big fire from downtown LA probably due to the tall buildings in the way. Calif. is certainly having a lot of big fires this summer but the only one that was spectacular from DTLA was a month or so ago and all we saw of it was the smoky sky which casts a lovely golden (or ugly last-days of Pompei) brown light over everything. I am thinking a lot about posting more flyers, I think this time about "FIGHT FOR GOOD JOBS - Automation and free trade are destroying millions of jobs . . ." (notice how Trump and Hillary are talking about the evil of free trade but totally ignoring the even greater evil of automation which is not itself evil of course but DOES require the gov't to do something about it which it won't without Revolution. But I feel like I really need to wait until the gov't actually starts reporting job LOSSES in its monthly reports before I can really get active on this issue. Maybe by November . . .
I really ought to try to find out how to fix my website so people could post comments to it, but I only get 2 hours a day at the computer terminal at the library, which is so unbelievably slow that it eats up the whole 2 hours just getting a tiny few bits of news, leaving me with no time to do anything more--extremely frustrating. Maybe one of these days I'll get a laptop or tablet, I wonder if that will go faster but even if not it should give me more internet time
August 20, 2016
You've seen my writings; I've long predicted automation will eliminate the bulk of jobs for humans. On some forum it was noted that machines always led to more, not less, jobs in the past, but in the future it'll be different because of self-directing and self-repairing software, or AI. Do you think you can really stop progress? Of course you'd hardly define loss of jobs for people as progress, but it may be inevitable. If machines can do something better and more cheaply, they're bound to take over.
In my writings I foresee a revolution, but not until _after_ a machine takeover. The revolution I envisage will strengthen the State, which will have to employ people en masse, hence grow greatly in power and scope.
Some laptops are only about $200 but someone recommended I get one for $1,700. The costlier type, he said, is less likely to be targeted by viruses and hackers. But I guess any computer of your own would be better than a library computer which you can only use for 2 hours a day.
Yeah, it is interesting on how our views of the future may diverge or overlap. I want to make a bunch of points (1) It is really illusory to think that "machines led to more, not less, jobs in the past". Here is how I see that because I have had to grapple with this question of were the Luddites wrong, then, to think that they should destroy the machines of their day which I think was the early 1800s and the conclusion I have reached was that the reason England prospered in the 1800s DESPITE automation was precisely due to colonial-imperialism and the slave trade--England prospered by ravaging India and Africa. These also brought prosperity to America. THAT rotten prosperity died in the Great Depression -- let me call that the FIRST GD--caused partly by the great impetus of automation in the 1920s. So the only way THAT unemployment-- massive job-loss--was solved was thru World War II. Thus each time the machines have partially taken over in the past, true more jobs were created, but they were created only by the evils of imperialism and war. And we are now up against the parallel situation. (2) progress HAS to be defined in human terms, Unless PEOPLE benefit, it ISN'T progress no matter how hi-tech it may be. You mention "doing something better and more cheaply" but so what unless PEOPLE benefit from it? I mean machines don't take over by themselves, they take jobs because SOME PEOPLE benefit from using them to replace (other) humans. I know you could argue that that will change when machines develop the ability to reproduce themselves, but I would argue that the Revolution doesn't require that machines TOTALLY take over, it is only necessary for them to take enough of the jobs so that the unemployed people rise up, which can happen even with only 15-30% unemployment.
(3) To get back to progress, how DO you define it? I would argue that it is in mass uplift of the quality of human life, such as by advancing living standards, education, health care medical advances, expanding knowledge, empowerment, space travel (and its associated freedom, adventure, etc.), etc.
I haven't seen my friend who offered to buy me a tablet (while I was hoping for a laptop) for quite a while, it depends on how generous he is, of course it's his money so I'm not going to feel bad if all he buys for me is a cheap tablet or whatever.
I define progress in some of the ways you do--expanding knowledge, education, and space travel. But basically progress just means increasing sophistication and capability. Advancing technology is a key part of this but so is ideology. No use having great space technology if values and institutions ensure that little of the available wealth is invested in it, because 100 times more is spent on booze, junk food and porn. And yes, military misadventures--notably Iraq-- too. :) A civilization, btw, can be far advanced without any humans at all--just robots and cyborgs. That's what civilization may look like in just 200 years.
I'm leery of empowering the masses given the irresponsibility and ignorance of so many people.
You can't get a tablet yourself? I don't have one but this PC is OK. Can you recontact your friend and remind him?
Progress has to mean improvement in the quality of LIFE. Robots and cyborgs are not progress in my opinion because they are not ALIVE IMO do you disagree? Do you think they are conscious or have souls? I don't think we have any way of knowing for sure, but IMO they are not conscious and have no souls and cannot be the end of progress, I mean the end-goal or objective--what we should try to work for. Truly I would favor banning them partly for the reason that they MIGHT take over the universe from living creatures, which would be the greatest possible imaginable disaster of the Universe, do you disagree? Yet I must admit that I wrote a novel where a guy has a robot for a "girl-friend" and it's a wonderful thing, but I can't think offhand of how to reconcile that with my belief that we must ban them. But I do know this, which is that we could have vast progress without any robots at all. But I admit that I don't have an answer for what a lonely guy who needs a girlfriend is supposed to do without a robot. For me personally, I was so lucky because I had co-workers who helped arrange for me to get together with a girl who worked in another department and she became my girlfriend making 1985-1989 the happiest years of my life. But what if a guy is not so lucky as to have co-workers who help him out like that?
For sure, empowering the people with democracy and the right to bear arms and all will result in enormous disasters, wars, economic collapses etc., due to people's rottenness, irresponsibility and stupidity, but I would still do it as so much better than disempowering them. They will still ultimately I am sure support Space etc. admittedly along with tons of vice and rot.
August 23, 2016
I don't know if AI will have consciousness like ours. But if machines can do things more efficiently than humans, I think inevitably they'll replace the bulk of them. Certainly in the workplace, or maybe there for starters. You may wish to ban robots but the problem is that any nation or corporation which did that probably wouldn't be able to compete.
About that gf: When we corresponded via postal mail around 25 years ago, you sent a couple of pictures of that person. I think I still have them here.
If people are irresponsible and stupid, it would be in their own best interest to be disempowered. What could be worse than the longterm consequences of what they're causing now, such as environmental degradation? What the world needs is an enlightened nondemocratic system, determined to overcome problems, and meet challenges.
Btw I just ordered and received Randle's latest book, ROSWELL IN THE 21ST CENTURY. It might provide new information for a future edition of my own work. :)
The only reason AI and robots would replace humans as employees is that HUMAN employers with consciousness WANT them to, and if those humans' companies defeat (outcompete) all the businesses that still employ humans, then that would still leave HUMANS at the top of the hierarchy of power--namely, the World Government which by that time would probably run all the world's businesses. Yet too maybe a robot world gov't could begin competing against the human WG and wind up getting most of the votes due to its superior policies and efficient provision of services. Perhaps that is something like what you have in mind and I am thinking of incorporating it into my vision for the future of the WG but in my version it would still be up to HUMAN voters to decide to support the AI WG. And the result would presumably be great good government, universal prosperity and the Space Age, great a happy ending to that point--maybe by 2150 or so although I guess you don't see it coming that soon?
But you know, since we humans do not believe ourselves to be THAT stupid, we will STILL seek our own empowerment although I am so overwhelmed by the rottenness of our current gov't that I have to dedicate my life to overthrowing them, but if AI WG were bringing us good gov't, universal prosperity and Space Age, then we or I wouldn't see any need to overthrow them, which seems then like we wouldn't need any more empowerment for ourselves--the freedom and abundance of Space would suffice for a fulfilling life.
Wow, I'm glad you still may have pics of my old gf Lilia. I hope she has found a good man and has a happy life but I can't expect to ever hear from her again but I would like to see her photo again if you could easily find and post it although I know I have pictures of her stashed away somewhere.
Tell me more about your new book
August 24, 2016
Sure humans will remain at the top of the hierarchy of power. But if most of humanity is unemployed, it will lose most of its perogatives and be utterly dependent on the State--either on the dole, in a bureaucracy or in the military, as I've written. Also other crises besides unemployment will, in my scenario, finish off democracy by that time--possibly 2050-2100. Do you still have my old book? The newer versions are essentially the same but go into much greater detail on certain aspects of UFOlogy.
If you like I could mail the pics back, but email me your current address just in case what I have now is obsolete.
I've begun reading Randle's new book and discern a contradiction. Maybe that'll be the subject of a new blog post. :)
The vision I have of the Solar System Government--or the Humanity Gov't we might call it--in the Space Age in the period 2150-2300 or so possibly, when billions of people are either living on other worlds or travelling in Space, is that it's a Golden Age of government based on voluntary contributions and voluntary compliance based primarily on people's recognition that the gov't is serving the people and advancing civilization so naturally they want to help with that. With the human race so spread out across such vast distances, this SSG or HG cannot really coerce people given as you would note the low level of technology then prevailing so it's really a great liberation of our species. But precisely due to the fading-out of government and labor (not only will the robots do all the work, but the gov't will have stored up such vast wealth that basically anything anybody wants they can just go pick it up off the shelf free at any market), decline will inevitably set in, and disintegration of the System and Gov't--like who needs it when everything's free and so forth--but those great stores will eventually deplete and then after or during the new Dark Ages, new governments and civilizations will start growing in various spots around the Solar System, and they will be extremely varied in nature, some capitalist, some socialist, some religious, some secular, etc. etc. But I foresee this too: During this period like the 2200s, the robots may well rule-- in that society by then will be so vast and complex that it would be beyond human ability to figure out what policy is best, so the highest-level humans will turn to the computers who have effective IQs in the millions range, to make suggestions which the humans will follow as long as they seem to be working, which could be for 100-200 years.
My address (for the last 5 years or so and some day I do hope to move but I will probably be here for at least one more year) is 206 W. 6th St., #619, L.A. CA 90014. It would be nice if you send me 1 or 2 of the pics or maybe half of what you have (I don't know how many you have) but it does comfort me a little to know that you have them!--so no need to send all of them if you have more than one, indeed if 1 is all you have I'd rather you keep it for me.
I look forward to hearing more about Randle's book etc.
I doubt the masses will get a lot of free goods when machines replace them at work. You've seen my scenarios. I think the unemployed will get state jobs or a dole, neither very lucrative. People will hardly be in a position to benefit when they're no longer needed. When unemployment wrecks the market for consumer goods, and the State becomes the employer, the State will become the market--for State goods like weapons and spacecraft. Given people's preference for individual luxuries and amenities, that, IMO, a machine takeover leading to State dominance is the only way there will be sufficient emphasis on space to make colonizing the solar system possible.
I may send you both photos. They pertain to your life; I have no need of them.
Randle's book mostly rehashes what I've already read, several times, but I'm not finished, and it's good to have a hard copy summary of his recent blog views. I may have some comments on Roswell in a new blog post soon.
Btw you no doubt heard of the newly discovered planet around Proxima Centauri. Interesting but I doubt it's habitable. Maybe it's like Venus.
People WILL be in a position to benefit if they--we--are willing and able to fight for it, to fight for our share and rising wealth and prosperity even though the rich don't need us, but of course they DO need us as consumers so that is another reason why we could benefit; also the State might include values like housing, health care, education, and food and even jobs for the people as well as infrastructure to be part of their objective, as they always have, like FDR and the USSR and all. Rulers want to be loved by their people and they know that the way to earn their love is by improving their lives like this. This is what goes wrong in so many poor countries that wind up with brutal dictatorships that actually make it SEEM like the rulers hate their people but what actually happens is that when they get into power they find that they don't have the money to serve their people, so the people start revolting and so then the rulers turn repressive and this is all the fault of the rich countries--led by the US--which ought to help poor countries finance their efforts to help their people.
Well I admit I am probably way too optimistic because I persist in thinking that people are going to start listening to me which they never have sigh...
Ok fine thanks if you want to send both photos. I look forward to hearing more about Randle and all. I haven't heard much yet about that newly-found Proxima Centauri planet. Why do you think it might be like Venus? I can't offhand recall how it happened that Venus wound up so different from Earth, I know I should know that. I guess that early on it was maybe 300 F too hot for all that CO2 to stay chemically bound to the rocks so it got into the atmosphere and REALLY heated it up?
Unfortunately if most people are unemployed they won't do much consuming anymore. As I wrote the State will be the main beneficiary. Plenty of states had ample support despite low standards of living. The reich and USSR were examples.
As long as the present system is outwardly doing OK I never expected many people to listen to me either. :)
I just finished ROSWELL IN THE 21ST CENTURY. Randle seems dispirited and despairing of the case. He notes the old saying "when you eliminate the impossible (in this case all earthly explanations) what is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth" isn't sufficient to establish an ET event. For that, we need a "breakthrough" like real documentation or physical evidence via the government or maybe a private citizen. Instead all we have is witness testimony, much of which has been discredited. I get the impression he now thinks Roswell is in limbo, at a dead end and likely to stay that way. I concur for now, but think eventually, when circumstances are right, the truth WILL be revealed. You've seen my writings on that.
The planet around Proxima Centauri is a bit larger than Earth and gets approximately the same solar energy. I understand it's uncertain whether it has an atmosphere but it probably does. I doubt a tidally locked world like can have abundant life so it may have a largely CO2 atmosphere, hence is more like Venus than earth, even if it isn't really hot.
Btw did you see my latest post? It would be great if you could comment on that too, the next time you comment.
Hope the two pics get there safe and sound.
August 28, 2016
Correction: last paragraph, comment above, I meant the same amount of STELLAR energy.
Thanks for report on Randle's book. Has anything new been happening with UFOs in the last year or two? I hadn't read that the newly-found planet was tidally locked and that seems strange because I would have thought that it was too far from its star to be locked like that, doesn't it seem strange to you? But also I don't see why a tidally locked planet couldn't support abundant life if there is liquid water and O2 or CO2 atmosphere.
I hope to have time to get to your recent post within the next few days :)
August 30, 2016
Sure, last year was the "Roswell Slides" affair--the latest hoax, as I assumed it would be....I think the fiasco, and lack of any breakthrough, has soured Randle on the Roswell case. Maybe I'll post something on his book and views later.
If the planet around Proxima Centauri is within the habitable or "goldilocks" zone, unfortunately that ensures tidal locking, simply because the habitable zone, around a red dwarf, is very close to the star.
Tidal locking (especially a 1:1 tidal lock, like the moon) may rule out advanced life because only one half of the planet is ever exposed to stellar radiation. Even if the planet only gets the amount of stellar energy Earth does--far less than Mercury--the day side will get too hot and the night side too cold. In addition, nearly all the volatiles essential for life, notably water but also probably CO2, will end up frozen on the night side. Since the latter is never exposed to stellar heating, generally its volatiles remain frozen and unavailable to life. A tidally locked world could have a water cycle, if glaciers from the night side extend to the day side, melt and form liquid water. But it would still be a slow and cruddy water cycle compared to Earth's.
I sure hope you comment soon on my latest post, on better strategies Iraq might have pursued.:)
Post a Comment
<< Home