if there is no direction in spaceSorry, I'm new here, but who has claimed there is "no direction in space?"
Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there?
Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?
I asked the question in another post...Could you maybe quote this post?
Technically there is no such thing as zero-g. I am not sure how the term zero-g originated, but it is describing things appearing to float in orbit.It's called microgravity.
Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon?There is gravity. The moon is in orbit.
It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there?They are also in orbit.
I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc.The object that is orbiting the larger object is falling toward that larger object. It has enough lateral velocity though that it continuously misses.
So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there?There is gravity.
Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?No.
Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?
"There is no "up" in space. Earth has nowhere to fall to." this comment was made by "RocksEverywhere" on my post "I thought perpetual motion didn't exist"if there is no direction in spaceSorry, I'm new here, but who has claimed there is "no direction in space?"
Okay then what about when they are on space walks, they have to be tethered or they will just float out into space? Wouldn't the gravity hold them to the ISS? So gravity behaves differently in space? It seems gravity behaves like a selective tractor beam.Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?There is gravity in space. The reason things float inside say the ISS is that the ISS is orbiting the earth, and thus is in a constant state of free fall. Essentially the ISS is constantly falling. Everything inside it is falling at the same rate, so there is no relative acceleration, and the impression that there is no gravity is given.
the gravitational attraction of the ISS to the astronauts is very small compared to the force they could push themselves away with. Gravity does not behave differently.Okay then what about when they are on space walks, they have to be tethered or they will just float out into space? Wouldn't the gravity hold them to the ISS? So gravity behaves differently in space? It seems gravity behaves like a selective tractor beam.Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?There is gravity in space. The reason things float inside say the ISS is that the ISS is orbiting the earth, and thus is in a constant state of free fall. Essentially the ISS is constantly falling. Everything inside it is falling at the same rate, so there is no relative acceleration, and the impression that there is no gravity is given.
If you could go out into space, far away from earth, which direction would be up?Well apparently there IS gravity in space so you could take a level with you, but then again from what I've heard so far gravity doesn't seem to behave in any kind of predictable manner so just take a wild guess. I mean according to the inverse square law the Earths gravity increases in strength the further out it goes but they don't mention if that is a constant or if it ever decreases, not to mention the sun's gravity which is holding all the planets in it's orbit, so apparently space is awash in gravity but it seems very selective in nature, it just holds everything perfectly in place except for astronauts on space walks, they have to be tethered. And why do meteors hit the Earth? Wouldn't Earth's gravity grab a hold of them and hold them in orbit? If it's because they have their own propulsion then what is propelling them? It's been said elsewhere in this forum that it's because there is no gravity in space so there is nothing to slow them, or anything else, down from their Big Bang inertia but we've just established that space is awash in gravity so...And apparently we are constantly falling toward the sun which means there is an up and down in space but nevertheless wherever you are on the "globe" everything is upright. And a if we are falling toward the sun eventually we have to slingshot around it, and again gravity seems to display selective, intelligent properties, instead of slinging us out into space it adjusts and holds us perfectly in place etc. etc.
Okay, what about Earth's gravitation? If it's holding the ISS in place why does it not hold the astronauts in place? And why would they push away? And if they did shouldn't the gravity pull them back to it? So it's strong enough to hold a massive structure in place but not an astronaut? And how does gravity decide exactly where to hold the ISS, the moon or satellites? Gravity seems to behave like an intelligent tractor beam.the gravitational attraction of the ISS to the astronauts is very small compared to the force they could push themselves away with. Gravity does not behave differently.Okay then what about when they are on space walks, they have to be tethered or they will just float out into space? Wouldn't the gravity hold them to the ISS? So gravity behaves differently in space? It seems gravity behaves like a selective tractor beam.Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?There is gravity in space. The reason things float inside say the ISS is that the ISS is orbiting the earth, and thus is in a constant state of free fall. Essentially the ISS is constantly falling. Everything inside it is falling at the same rate, so there is no relative acceleration, and the impression that there is no gravity is given.
they are still orbiting the Earth. If they pushed away from the ISS, the gravitational attraction of the ISS to the astronauts is not great. They would then have a slightly different orbit around the Earth.Okay, what about Earth's gravitation? If it's holding the ISS in place why does it not hold the astronauts in place? And why would they push away? And if they did shouldn't the gravity pull them back to it? So it's strong enough to hold a massive structure in place but not an astronaut? And how does gravity decide exactly where to hold the ISS, the moon or satellites? Gravity seems to behave like an intelligent tractor beam.the gravitational attraction of the ISS to the astronauts is very small compared to the force they could push themselves away with. Gravity does not behave differently.Okay then what about when they are on space walks, they have to be tethered or they will just float out into space? Wouldn't the gravity hold them to the ISS? So gravity behaves differently in space? It seems gravity behaves like a selective tractor beam.Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?There is gravity in space. The reason things float inside say the ISS is that the ISS is orbiting the earth, and thus is in a constant state of free fall. Essentially the ISS is constantly falling. Everything inside it is falling at the same rate, so there is no relative acceleration, and the impression that there is no gravity is given.
I mean according to the inverse square law the Earths gravity increases in strength the further out it goes
And how does gravity decide exactly where to hold the ISS, the moon or satellites? Gravity seems to behave like an intelligent tractor beam.
"There is no "up" in space. Earth has nowhere to fall to." this comment was made by "RocksEverywhere" on my post "I thought perpetual motion didn't exist"if there is no direction in spaceSorry, I'm new here, but who has claimed there is "no direction in space?"
But weight is a force and the Earth is very heavy.There is no "up" in space. Earth has nowhere to fall to.
Okay then what about when they are on space walks, they have to be tethered or they will just float out into space? Wouldn't the gravity hold them to the ISS? So gravity behaves differently in space? It seems gravity behaves like a selective tractor beam.The gravitational attraction of the ISS is pretty much nothing.
Well apparently there IS gravity in space so you could take a level with you, but then again from what I've heard so far gravity doesn't seem to behave in any kind of predictable manner so just take a wild guess.No. It behaves in a predictable manner, it can just be difficult to understand if you don't spend time to think about it and take note of all factors.
I mean according to the inverse square law the Earths gravity increases in strength the further out it goes but they don't mention if that is a constant or if it ever decreases,It decreases the further out you go. If you double your distance then the force/acceleration due to gravity will be 1/4 of what it was.
not to mention the sun's gravity which is holding all the planets in it's orbit, so apparently space is awash in gravity but it seems very selective in nature, it just holds everything perfectly in place except for astronauts on space walks, they have to be tethered.No. Nothing is held perfectly in place. This is what allows us to launch rockets and satellites.
And why do meteors hit the Earth? Wouldn't Earth's gravity grab a hold of them and hold them in orbit?No. It won't. Some meteors can be "put" in "orbits" (or exist in them) such as at L4 and L5. But there are infinite possible orbits that exist (especially if you include hyperbolic and parabolic ones). Everything near Earth, which is just being affected by gravity (so no standing on things or air resistance or rockets) is in an orbit. It is just lots of these orbits intersect with Earth, at which point other forces act to bring it out of orbit.
If it's because they have their own propulsion then what is propelling them?Not quite. It is more we specifically put the ISS into a specific orbit and made its velocity match that required for that particular orbit. For any particular altitude, there is only 1 velocity for a circular orbit. Any slower, and it is in an elliptical orbit which reaches a lower point, potentially crashing into Earth (such as whenever you throw a ball, ignoring the wind or release something in a vacuum chamber). If it is faster, it could be an elliptical orbit or a parabolic or hyperbolic one (and this is assuming your velocity is perpendicular to "down")
And apparently we are constantly falling toward the sun which means there is an up and down in space but nevertheless wherever you are on the "globe" everything is upright. And a if we are falling toward the sun eventually we have to slingshot around it, and again gravity seems to display selective, intelligent properties, instead of slinging us out into space it adjusts and holds us perfectly in place etc. etc.Again, up and down is relative. Relative to the solar system, the sun can be considered down.
Okay, what about Earth's gravitation? If it's holding the ISS in place why does it not hold the astronauts in place? And why would they push away? And if they did shouldn't the gravity pull them back to it? So it's strong enough to hold a massive structure in place but not an astronaut? And how does gravity decide exactly where to hold the ISS, the moon or satellites? Gravity seems to behave like an intelligent tractor beam.It isn't holding it in place.
If you could go out into space, far away from earth, which direction would be up?
Okay then what about when they are on space walks, they have to be tethered or they will just float out into space? Wouldn't the gravity hold them to the ISS? So gravity behaves differently in space? It seems gravity behaves like a selective tractor beam.Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?There is gravity in space. The reason things float inside say the ISS is that the ISS is orbiting the earth, and thus is in a constant state of free fall. Essentially the ISS is constantly falling. Everything inside it is falling at the same rate, so there is no relative acceleration, and the impression that there is no gravity is given.
Okay, what about Earth's gravitation? If it's holding the ISS in place why does it not hold the astronauts in place? And why would they push away? And if they did shouldn't the gravity pull them back to it? So it's strong enough to hold a massive structure in place but not an astronaut? And how does gravity decide exactly where to hold the ISS, the moon or satellites? Gravity seems to behave like an intelligent tractor beam.the gravitational attraction of the ISS to the astronauts is very small compared to the force they could push themselves away with. Gravity does not behave differently.Okay then what about when they are on space walks, they have to be tethered or they will just float out into space? Wouldn't the gravity hold them to the ISS? So gravity behaves differently in space? It seems gravity behaves like a selective tractor beam.Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?There is gravity in space. The reason things float inside say the ISS is that the ISS is orbiting the earth, and thus is in a constant state of free fall. Essentially the ISS is constantly falling. Everything inside it is falling at the same rate, so there is no relative acceleration, and the impression that there is no gravity is given.
So if there is no direction in space then here's a simple way to prove it, the next time they go to space, if that's really even possible, take a carpenters level up there with them and when they go on a space walk they could take the level out with them and document what the bubble does, on film of course. With no gravity present it shouldn't react the same way it would normally, actually it shouldn't react at all, and they couldn't fake this in a pool.
And what way would be down?If you could go out into space, far away from earth, which direction would be up?
The opposite direction to down.
they would put up a nice CGI and nobody would care anywayAnd that's the other issue.
People like you don't care about the truth. You just want to be right.
Any evidence provided that goes against your view, you will just dismiss.
People like you don't care about the truth.
People like you don't care about the truth. You just want to be right.
Any evidence provided that goes against your view, you will just dismiss.
So, you wonder into a forum called The FLAT EARTH SOCIETY, of your own volition, and set forth to conquer that with which you disagree. Furthermore you expect FES to roll over and worship your ideas and opinions above their own.People like you don't care about the truth.
People like you - I feel sorry for.
Some people may not be completely indoctrinated into the flat Earth cult. It is these people I am here for. To point out all the bullshit "supporting" a flat Earth so they dont' get indoctrinated.
And what way would be down?If you could go out into space, far away from earth, which direction would be up?
The opposite direction to down.
No. One person alone is not enough to deal with all the bullshit that is said.
Some people may not be completely indoctrinated into the flat Earth cult. It is these people I am here for. To point out all the bullshit "supporting" a flat Earth so they dont' get indoctrinated.
So, you view yourself as the Savior?
But isn't that up as well?And what way would be down?If you could go out into space, far away from earth, which direction would be up?
The opposite direction to down.
The direction perpendicular to left.
But isn't that up as well?And what way would be down?If you could go out into space, far away from earth, which direction would be up?
The opposite direction to down.
The direction perpendicular to left.
But isn't that up as well?
But isn't that up as well?
(http://i.imgur.com/E7pFSuP.gif)
Okay can you please explain this further? So is everything in freefall, including the sun? Or are we freefalling towards the sun and the sun is stationary? Because if we are freefalling towards the sun then when we slingshot around it and head in the opposite direction that would be the opposite of freefalling, we would be travelling upwards, and against the sun's gravity at that. Actually that would be true even if we were travelling towards the sun horizontally when we slingshot around it and travel in the opposite direction we would be resisting the sun's gravity.Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?Who says there's no gravity in space? There's plenty of gravity in space.
Astronauts, the ISS and satellites in general are 'weightless' because they are free-falling, that is they are yielding to gravity completely. An object only has weight when it resists gravity, not when it yields to it.
Okay can you please explain this further? So is everything in freefall, including the sun? Or are we freefalling towards the sun and the sun is stationary? Because if we are freefalling towards the sun then when we slingshot around it and head in the opposite direction that would be the opposite of freefalling, we would be travelling upwards, and against the sun's gravity at that. Actually that would be true even if we were travelling towards the sun horizontally when we slingshot around it and travel in the opposite direction we would be resisting the sun's gravity.It gets more and more complicated as you consider more and more of reality.
Okay can you please explain this further? So is everything in freefall, including the sun? Or are we freefalling towards the sun and the sun is stationary? Because if we are freefalling towards the sun then when we slingshot around it and head in the opposite direction that would be the opposite of freefalling, we would be travelling upwards, and against the sun's gravity at that. Actually that would be true even if we were travelling towards the sun horizontally when we slingshot around it and travel in the opposite direction we would be resisting the sun's gravity.Which brings up a new question, if there is no gravity in space then how is the Earth's gravity holding the moon? It holds the moon in place but astronauts just float around up there? I hear that there is no gravity in space but then I hear that the Earth's gravity holds the moon, satellites, the ISS etc. in place, and the sun holds all the planets in orbit etc. etc. So which one is it? Is there gravity in space or isn't there? Or are astronauts just immune to gravity in space?Who says there's no gravity in space? There's plenty of gravity in space.
Astronauts, the ISS and satellites in general are 'weightless' because they are free-falling, that is they are yielding to gravity completely. An object only has weight when it resists gravity, not when it yields to it.
Honestly I got it wrong before, I revisited it and understand it now, I think I was pretty tired when I looked at it the first time.I mean according to the inverse square law the Earths gravity increases in strength the further out it goes
Actually the opposite is true. Earth's gravity becomes exponentially LESS strong the further away you travel.
Do you know how an inverse square works?
So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.
So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Or ssomething like this:So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Earth is currently travelling around the sun at a rate of roughly 30 km/s.
We can determine the acceleration in 2 ways.
One is by using our orbit, the other is by using calculations for gravity.
Using our orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and our radius of 150 000 000 km, this gives an acceleration of 0.006 m/s^2.
Using more precise values, it gives 0.00593 m/s^2.
Using gravity, we get a value of 0.00593 m/s^2.
Does that answer your question?
Or ssomething like this:So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Earth is currently travelling around the sun at a rate of roughly 30 km/s.
We can determine the acceleration in 2 ways.
One is by using our orbit, the other is by using calculations for gravity.
Using our orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and our radius of 150 000 000 km, this gives an acceleration of 0.006 m/s^2.
Using more precise values, it gives 0.00593 m/s^2.
Using gravity, we get a value of 0.00593 m/s^2.
Does that answer your question?
(http://)
Or ssomething like this:So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Earth is currently travelling around the sun at a rate of roughly 30 km/s.
We can determine the acceleration in 2 ways.
One is by using our orbit, the other is by using calculations for gravity.
Using our orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and our radius of 150 000 000 km, this gives an acceleration of 0.006 m/s^2.
Using more precise values, it gives 0.00593 m/s^2.
Using gravity, we get a value of 0.00593 m/s^2.
Does that answer your question?
(http://)
Anybody who believes that bullshit video is actually taking place needs their _ _ _ _ _ _ _ head examined.
Those columns look a lot like elephant legs!
Yes, that and the video gives me a much better understanding of what you are trying to convey, thanks.So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Earth is currently travelling around the sun at a rate of roughly 30 km/s.
We can determine the acceleration in 2 ways.
One is by using our orbit, the other is by using calculations for gravity.
Using our orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and our radius of 150 000 000 km, this gives an acceleration of 0.006 m/s^2.
Using more precise values, it gives 0.00593 m/s^2.
Using gravity, we get a value of 0.00593 m/s^2.
Does that answer your question?
Thanks, that makes it a lot more clear.Or ssomething like this:So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Earth is currently travelling around the sun at a rate of roughly 30 km/s.
We can determine the acceleration in 2 ways.
One is by using our orbit, the other is by using calculations for gravity.
Using our orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and our radius of 150 000 000 km, this gives an acceleration of 0.006 m/s^2.
Using more precise values, it gives 0.00593 m/s^2.
Using gravity, we get a value of 0.00593 m/s^2.
Does that answer your question?
(http://)
Those columns look a lot like elephant legs!Here this better?
I think JackBlack likes to confuse things. Showing things relative to right frame of reference can simplify things a lot.Thanks, that makes it a lot more clear.Or something like this:So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Earth is currently travelling around the sun at a rate of roughly 30 km/s.
We can determine the acceleration in 2 ways.
One is by using our orbit, the other is by using calculations for gravity.
Using our orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and our radius of 150 000 000 km, this gives an acceleration of 0.006 m/s^2.
Using more precise values, it gives 0.00593 m/s^2.
Using gravity, we get a value of 0.00593 m/s^2.
Does that answer your question?
]The true actual motion of planets and sun through space (http://)
It's an artistic rendering, just like NASA's pictures of the Globe. Amazing how they have differed so much over the years except for one thing...it retains it's absolutely perfect globe shape.Those columns look a lot like elephant legs!Here this better?
The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
Those columns look a lot like elephant legs!Here this better?
The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
It's an artistic rendering, just like NASA's pictures of the Globe. Amazing how they have differed so much over the years except for one thing...it retains it's absolutely perfect globe shape.
It's an artistic rendering, just like NASA's pictures of the Globe. Amazing how they have differed so much over the years except for one thing...it retains it's absolutely perfect globe shape.Ever think what you are saying? Obviously not. You mean this sort of thing?
This month NASA released a new photo of the Earth from space (http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-satellite-camera-provides-epic-view-of-earth), taken from the DSCOVER satellite, 930,000 miles above the Earth. Some people have claimed that this new image shows an increasingly hazy Earth, and that this is evidence of an increase in pollution, or a secret geoengineering program (using "chemtrails"). Some more extreme theorist have suggested that the image is fake because the continents (particularly North America) appear to be a different size to earlier photos.Yes, the continents that are visible depends on which part of the globe is facing the camera and their relative size depends on the distance from Earth that the photo was taken. To get most of the globe in the photograph the distance needs to be at least 20,000 miles, and even there almost 8° is missing, usually near the poles. See this simulation using a desktop globe:
The misconception comes from a misunderstanding about how the photos are taken. This new 2015 image is noteworthy because it's the first time since 1972 that a good quality single image photograph has been taken of the Earth. The previous last image (in 1972) was taken by an astronaut from on board the Apollo 17 spacecraft during the last manned mission to the Moon. This was the first image called the "Blue Marble", although there had been similar images taken before (such as the 1967 images taken by the ATS3 satellite), the 1972 Blue Marble image became iconic, and remains the last such image taken by an actual person.
From Debunked: "Blue Marble" Photos show a Changing Earth (https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-blue-marble-photos-show-a-changing-earth.t6616/)
I don't see any more turtles, and by my Zetetic reasoning that means that there can't be any more! That proves that it :P probably is dark energy :P!The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
It's turtles all the way down, silly.
I don't see any more turtles, and by my Zetetic reasoning that means that there can't be any more! That proves that it :P probably is dark energy :P!The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
It's turtles all the way down, silly.
I don't see any more turtles, and by my Zetetic reasoning that means that there can't be any more! That proves that it :P probably is dark energy :P!The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
It's turtles all the way down, silly.
I don't see any more turtles, and by my Zetetic reasoning that means that there can't be any more! That proves that it :P probably is dark energy :P!The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
It's turtles all the way down, silly.
I loved Discworld, but you do know that he didn't come up with the idea that the world rests on the back of a turtle?
Or ssomething like this:So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Earth is currently travelling around the sun at a rate of roughly 30 km/s.
We can determine the acceleration in 2 ways.
One is by using our orbit, the other is by using calculations for gravity.
Using our orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and our radius of 150 000 000 km, this gives an acceleration of 0.006 m/s^2.
Using more precise values, it gives 0.00593 m/s^2.
Using gravity, we get a value of 0.00593 m/s^2.
Does that answer your question?
(http://)
Anybody who believes that bullshit video is actually taking place needs their _ _ _ _ _ _ _ head examined.
Hello totallackey (i like the irony of your nickname anyway... :P),
So...are you telling me that we're living in something like this?
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_o9BLyKHDLd8/TGD_1389nEI/AAAAAAAACI0/GmkpmzVxaRY/s1600/3313wic4.jpg)
Oh my... ::)
No.I am telling you the animated bullshit in that video is not taking place. The Earth is not hurtling through space chasing around the Sun.
I don't see any more turtles, and by my Zetetic reasoning that means that there can't be any more! That proves that it :P probably is dark energy :P!The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
It's turtles all the way down, silly.
I loved Discworld, but you do know that he didn't come up with the idea that the world rests on the back of a turtle?
No, I used to debate with a Jehovas Witness who insisted there were turtles all the way down. I believe this story has religious roots.
No.I am telling you the animated bullshit in that video is not taking place. The Earth is not hurtling through space chasing around the Sun.
You are telling us! ;D What wonderful evidence ;D !
Your trying to convince me that the sky was blue, would be enough to send me racing outside to double check!
Simply you saying somethings means nothing at all. Your not believing something is no evidence that is not true.
No.I am telling you the animated bullshit in that video is not taking place. The Earth is not hurtling through space chasing around the Sun.
You are telling us! ;D What wonderful evidence ;D !
Your trying to convince me that the sky was blue, would be enough to send me racing outside to double check!
Simply you saying somethings means nothing at all. Your not believing something is no evidence that is not true.
Well, you are somewhat right.Or ssomething like this:So how fast is the freefall? The speed of revolution and orbit notwithstanding.Do you mean how fast is Earth travelling, or do you mean what is the free fall itself?
Earth is currently travelling around the sun at a rate of roughly 30 km/s.
We can determine the acceleration in 2 ways.
One is by using our orbit, the other is by using calculations for gravity.
Using our orbital velocity of 30 km/s, and our radius of 150 000 000 km, this gives an acceleration of 0.006 m/s^2.
Using more precise values, it gives 0.00593 m/s^2.
Using gravity, we get a value of 0.00593 m/s^2.
Does that answer your question?
(http://)
Anybody who believes that bullshit video is actually taking place needs their _ _ _ _ _ _ _ head examined.
Hello totallackey (i like the irony of your nickname anyway... :P),
So...are you telling me that we're living in something like this?
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_o9BLyKHDLd8/TGD_1389nEI/AAAAAAAACI0/GmkpmzVxaRY/s1600/3313wic4.jpg)
Oh my... ::)
No.I am telling you the animated bullshit in that video is not taking place. The Earth is not hurtling through space chasing around the Sun.
Well it wasn't a complaint it was a statement, but yeah I've got one...How can the size of the continents change but the size of the globe doesn't? This was obviously staged, just like the NASA "photos", they are probably still laughing about it.It's an artistic rendering, just like NASA's pictures of the Globe. Amazing how they have differed so much over the years except for one thing...it retains it's absolutely perfect globe shape.Ever think what you are saying? Obviously not. You mean this sort of thing?(https://www.metabunk.org/sk/NASA_Blue_Marbles_Comparison_-_1600.jpg)Quote from: Mick West, MetabunkThis month NASA released a new photo of the Earth from space (http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-satellite-camera-provides-epic-view-of-earth), taken from the DSCOVER satellite, 930,000 miles above the Earth. Some people have claimed that this new image shows an increasingly hazy Earth, and that this is evidence of an increase in pollution, or a secret geoengineering program (using "chemtrails"). Some more extreme theorist have suggested that the image is fake because the continents (particularly North America) appear to be a different size to earlier photos.Yes, the continents that are visible depends on which part of the globe is facing the camera and their relative size depends on the distance from Earth that the photo was taken. To get most of the globe in the photograph the distance needs to be at least 20,000 miles, and even there almost 8° is missing, usually near the poles. See this simulation using a desktop globe:
The misconception comes from a misunderstanding about how the photos are taken. This new 2015 image is noteworthy because it's the first time since 1972 that a good quality single image photograph has been taken of the Earth. The previous last image (in 1972) was taken by an astronaut from on board the Apollo 17 spacecraft during the last manned mission to the Moon. This was the first image called the "Blue Marble", although there had been similar images taken before (such as the 1967 images taken by the ATS3 satellite), the 1972 Blue Marble image became iconic, and remains the last such image taken by an actual person.
From Debunked: "Blue Marble" Photos show a Changing Earth (https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-blue-marble-photos-show-a-changing-earth.t6616/)(https://www.metabunk.org/sk/globe_comparison_with_distance.jpg)
From Debunked: "Blue Marble" Photos show a Changing Earth (https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-blue-marble-photos-show-a-changing-earth.t6616/)
Any more complaints?
There now Your Royal Highness, Totally Crappy I fixed that offending post. Always happy to oblige the local Royalty!No.I am telling you the animated bullshit in that video is not taking place. The Earth is not hurtling through space chasing around the Sun.
You are tellingusme! ;D What wonderful evidence ;D !
Your trying to convince me that the sky was blue, would be enough to send me racing outside to double check!
Simply you saying somethings means nothing at all. Your not believing something is no evidence that is not true.
Was the post written to you Geoff?
Was it?
Did I write, "I am telling you and Geoff and everyone else here the animated bullshit in that video is not taking place."?
The answer to that question is, "no."
Once more with clarity. Despite your assertions to the contrary, I do not accept the idea you are writing for each and every member here. When you write and use the word, "we," you are communicating that impression; that, or perhaps signifying you are royalty. Either way, it is poor form to claim the ability to answer for every member here or brag about your current order of precedence.
I don't see any more turtles, and by my Zetetic reasoning that means that there can't be any more! That proves that it :P probably is dark energy :P!The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
It's turtles all the way down, silly.
I loved Discworld, but you do know that he didn't come up with the idea that the world rests on the back of a turtle?
No, I used to debate with a Jehovas Witness who insisted there were turtles all the way down. I believe this story has religious roots.
Even the Jehovah's didn't come up with that saying. The World Turtle is a more ancient belief, Terry Pratchett just borrowed it.
Yes, the continents that are visible depends on which part of the globe is facing the camera and their relative size depends on the distance from Earth that the photo was taken. To get most of the globe in the photograph the distance needs to be at least 20,000 miles, and even there almost 8° is missing, usually near the poles. See this simulation using a desktop globe:Well it wasn't a complaint it was a statement, but yeah I've got one...How can the size of the continents change but the size of the globe doesn't? This was obviously staged, just like the NASA "photos", they are probably still laughing about it.(https://www.metabunk.org/sk/globe_comparison_with_distance.jpg)
From Debunked: "Blue Marble" Photos show a Changing Earth (https://www.metabunk.org/debunked-blue-marble-photos-show-a-changing-earth.t6616/)
Any more complaints?
(http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w433/RabDownunder/Perspective/Tennis%20Ball%20-%20near_zpsx7ec6f9f.jpg) Tennis Ball - 35 mm equiv focal length = 24 mm | (http://i1075.photobucket.com/albums/w433/RabDownunder/Perspective/Tennis%20Ball%20-%20far_zpsvvllncjk.jpg) Tennis Ball - 35 mm equiv focal length = 500 mm |
The late Terry Pratchett's "Discworld" shows why they look like elephant's legs.(http://geeklyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Great-ATuin.jpg)Don't ask me what supports the turtle, :P probably dark energy :P!
Well it wasn't a complaint it was a statement, but yeah I've got one...How can the size of the continents change but the size of the globe doesn't? This was obviously staged, just like the NASA "photos", they are probably still laughing about it.It is called scaling.