Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Just an atmospheric hydrogen/helium (potentially) ice blast from the build-up on the dome.
Go to 2:12:05 and you can see the white line AKA EDGE of TRANSPARENT FLYING LAND in the cloud. The earth's land looks clearer after getting free from such transparent body.
Wife got COVID, the kids and I still in the clear. She's in self imposed exile in the bedroom. So I got the sofa which is impossible to sleep on. So I have gone a day, a night, the next day and am working tonight. NO SLEEP
Would be the worst time to get covid with my immune system whacked. Who knows. Maybe I'll evade it. I was vaccinated afterall
Two words: atmospheric diffraction.
Try doing the same with a torch/flashlight through 10,000 km of atmosphere, rather than a few km.
You can make up any excuse you want, nothing could ever cause stars to all move and appear differently from other stars, by any external cause you dream up, including this one!
How would atmospheric diffraction cause each star to move and look differently, or 'appear' to?
I can't wait for you to make up an excuse for that one, so go ahead....
Calen misunderstood my thought.
To summary :
Everyone work as usual, EXCEPT no money needed to make the production process keep going.
Everyone is a volunteer and they got "salary" by getting the access to free goods and services.
If you have a house with agriculture surrounding like in the village, you'll need no money for meal. Just go to the field and you got potatoes, fishes etc.
"The world is a global village".
Equation of Time
That is exactly how space flight works. A craft travelling on one trajectory fires its thrusters and begins travelling on a different trajectory. Basic physics.No, when you start from Earth, it is always the gravity force between Earth and your space craft that governs your trajectory a per Newton and Gallileo. Pushing a button cannot enable the gravity of the Sun to take over. But who cares? Space is a mystery that nobody can explain in spite of Einstein, NASA and other clowns.
Propulsion System
The Propulsion System contains the fuel tanks and the rockets that, when directed by the Attitude Control System, are fired to maintain the orbit.
Rocket Thrusters and Propellant
Webb has two types of rocket thrusters. One kind is called "Secondary Combustion Augmented Thrusters" (SCAT), and they are used for orbit correction (like applied changes in velocity for each maneuver the spacecraft makes and also for orbit station-keeping). Webb has two pairs of them (paired for redundancy). They use hydrazine and dinitrogen tetroxide, as fuel and oxidizer respectively, which makes SCAT what engineers call a "bi-propellant" thruster. The other kind of thruster on Webb is called a MRE-1, or mono-propellant rocket engine, since it only uses hydrazine. There are eight MRE-1s on Webb, and they are used for attitude control and momentum unloading of the reaction wheels.
Why do you get so upset? I just copy/publish what NASA publish since 1958, i.e. fake scientific (LOL) news about space. NASA just publish lies since 1958! Let's face it.JWST orbits L2 according NASA, but it is also impossible, i.e. fake news.
https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/about/orbit.htmlQuoteThe James Webb Space Telescope will not be in orbit around the Earth, like the Hubble Space Telescope is - it will actually orbit the Sun, 1.5 million kilometers (1 million miles) away from the Earth at what is called the second Lagrange point or L2.
You are lying, yet again. NASA says no such thing.
You keep saying this, so show me one quote from an official NASA source that says JWST will orbit the Earth or L2.
JWST orbits L2 according NASA, but it is also impossible, i.e. fake news.
The James Webb Space Telescope will not be in orbit around the Earth, like the Hubble Space Telescope is - it will actually orbit the Sun, 1.5 million kilometers (1 million miles) away from the Earth at what is called the second Lagrange point or L2.
The vast majority of knowledge concerning blackholes is entirely mathematical and requires no resources to know. All that is needed is study. Something many of us have no difficulty with.
Now that is interesting. While some of the great minds of recent years like Hawkings have indeed probed the mysteries of black holes using mathematics few in reality have the capabilities and advanced knowledge to do this.
You say you have studied black holes, a very easy thing to say on a forum like this, so what has been the nature of your ‘study’ and what have you been able to discover?
Let remember reading an article in a scientific journal is a far cry from actual study.
Perhaps you could point out in my post where I stated I have studied black holes, or where I claim to have made discoveries concerning them.
While the equations concerning black holes are indeed difficult, they are not beyond the understandings of someone with a decent grasp of geometry and Relativity, especially non-rotating Schwarzchild black holes. Kerr blackholes are more complex, having multiple horizons and an ergoshpere that does not coincide with any horizon, but are still within understanding of any reasonably intelligent person willing to invest time and effort in studying the underlying mathematics.
I note that, as often seems to be the case (at least in my limited interaction with you, and in your interactions here with other people), you failed to counter the substance of my argument, resorting to the construction of another strawman for your army. They may be legion, but they are weak.
I quote again:To know something about black holes requires resources far away removed from what 'YOU', yes 'YOU' have at your disposal.
This is substantially incorrect.
As most of the knowledge available regarding black holes is purely mathematical, no resources far removed from the reach of any intelligent person are required.
Resources far removed from the reach of ordinary folk are required to gather data and evidence of the validity of current theories concerning black holes. Such resources, however, are unnecessary for the understanding of those theories. A decent education and effort are sufficient.
For the record, I do not consider "reading an article in a scientific journal" to be actual study. Taking the time to understand the mathematics behind such a paper, and then applying that understanding to other papers and scientific literature, does.
Care to enlightenment me as to what you consider study to be?
You implied.
Regardless of whether you do study black holes or don’t does not change the reality or facts of the matter.
I’m not sure if you are from the USA but as a nation they are way down the international league table of mathematical attainment. That’s a fact . I doubt the overwhelming majority of people in the USA for example would not be able to follow the mathematics used to describe the structure of a black hole or understand the concept of black hole evaporation through Hawking radiation as developed by the late prof Stephen Hawking.
There is one being able to follow a mathematical concept and quite another in actually developing one.
I think what you say ignores reality. No one on this forum could develop a new mathematical concept or any other concept for Black holes that could stand up to peer reviewed scrutiny or be supported by observation. The OP who said he had an idea! was talking utter bollocks. You or any other poster on this forum could of course prove me wrong by writing a paper and having it published in Nature. If it’s so easy and straight forward as you are implying give it a go and see how you get on. What’s stopping you?
To know something about black holes requires resources far away removed from what 'YOU', yes 'YOU' have at your disposal.
Sorry. JWST took off from Earth >5 months ago heading for L2 and, arriving at L2, we are told JWST started to orbit L2 after some mysterious actions!?!? . it was complete nonsense then as today. You really have to understand what an orbit is. No object in space can change "orbits" by itself from eg around Earth to around the Sun.I think you have misunderstood what an orbit is. Any spacecraft starting from and leaving Earth by definition orbits only Earth and cannot start orbiting anything else.
Hm, JWST is not parked anywhere but magically orbiting L2 at high speeds/directions taking pictures. Myself I just look out of my window.
As you have been told numerous times, the JWST orbits the Sun at L2.
Repeating the same lies ad nauseam convinces no-one.
No, it is planet Earth and you and me that orbits the Sun. JWST orbits L2 according to NASA one way or other nobody understands. L2 is just a point that you cannot orbit around. See http://heiwaco.com/moontravelb.htm
https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/about/orbit.htmlQuoteThe James Webb Space Telescope will not be in orbit around the Earth, like the Hubble Space Telescope is - it will actually orbit the Sun, 1.5 million kilometers (1 million miles) away from the Earth at what is called the second Lagrange point or L2.
Stop lying and making up shit, Heiwa.
No, Heiwa. I fully understand an orbit; it is you who does not.
That is not a definition of an orbit, rather your own asserted rubbish.
I think you have misunderstood what an orbit is. Any spacecraft starting from and leaving Earth by definition orbits only Earth and cannot start orbiting anything else.
Hm, JWST is not parked anywhere but magically orbiting L2 at high speeds/directions taking pictures. Myself I just look out of my window.
As you have been told numerous times, the JWST orbits the Sun at L2.
Repeating the same lies ad nauseam convinces no-one.
No, it is planet Earth and you and me that orbits the Sun. JWST orbits L2 according to NASA one way or other nobody understands. L2 is just a point that you cannot orbit around. See http://heiwaco.com/moontravelb.htm
https://jwst.nasa.gov/content/about/orbit.htmlQuoteThe James Webb Space Telescope will not be in orbit around the Earth, like the Hubble Space Telescope is - it will actually orbit the Sun, 1.5 million kilometers (1 million miles) away from the Earth at what is called the second Lagrange point or L2.
Stop lying and making up shit, Heiwa.
I can personally guarantee God did not give the Jews permission to lend on interest.
Hm, JWST is not parked anywhere but magically orbiting L2 at high speeds/directions taking pictures. Myself I just look out of my window.
As you have been told numerous times, the JWST orbits the Sun at L2.
Repeating the same lies ad nauseam convinces no-one.
No, it is planet Earth and you and me that orbits the Sun. JWST orbits L2 according to NASA one way or other nobody understands. L2 is just a point that you cannot orbit around. See http://heiwaco.com/moontravelb.htm
The James Webb Space Telescope will not be in orbit around the Earth, like the Hubble Space Telescope is - it will actually orbit the Sun, 1.5 million kilometers (1 million miles) away from the Earth at what is called the second Lagrange point or L2.
Hm, JWST is not parked anywhere but magically orbiting L2 at high speeds/directions taking pictures. Myself I just look out of my window.
Level means flat, and straight, and is parallel, to any other flat, straight lines, paths, or surfaces.
There's nothing level or parallel to a sphere, objects have to CIRCLE a sphere, which is round, not flat or level to anything else. A ball is not flat, or straight, to BE level to anything else.
