Asteroids and Comets

Personally, I'm all in favour of the big-bang theory and its singularity.  I'm just saying, if its acceptable in your physics, why can't I have just one more singularity at the South Pole.

Because it would suck the earth into it.  Very quickly, I might add.

Tom - according to your FE big bang diagramm i have come to the conclusion the earth was "propelled" upwards (or whatever direction you want in space). Wouldn't the velocity of the earth at some point become so little that it would be burnt up by some stars etc. or something similar?

As far as I can see, FEs havn't been able to come up with a natural explanation for any of their theories.

                                                - A.K.

OK, this has gotten off topic.

My question was how comets and asteroids exist in FE hypothesis. No Big Bang and singularities.

ANd after thinking about Tom's model, it doesn't seem possible because some objects would have to be moving faster than others or have a higher rate of acceleration which I don't believe is possible, correct me if I am wrong.

ANd after thinking about Tom's model, it doesn't seem possible because some objects would have to be moving faster than others or have a higher rate of acceleration which I don't believe is possible, correct me if I am wrong.

Tom's model does not take into account acceleration.

Quote from: astronomy101 on March 03, 2007, 09:59:33 AM

ANd after thinking about Tom's model, it doesn't seem possible because some objects would have to be moving faster than others or have a higher rate of acceleration which I don't believe is possible, correct me if I am wrong.

Tom's model does not take into account acceleration.

Pray tell me, what is your model?

The one that has acceleration.

The one that has acceleration.

ANd is there a link for the thread that explains the acceleration model?

Someone may have already said this, but how do comets come from quasars?
A quasar is a quickly rotating neutron star.

So the big bang happens and stars form. How did all the material accumulate together to form the big rocky mass that is Earth? Or did it magically form a flat disk then lose all it's gravity. Too much magic, not enough science. FE fails again.

So the big bang happens and stars form. How did all the material accumulate together to form the big rocky mass that is Earth? Or did it magically form a flat disk then lose all it's gravity. Too much magic, not enough science. FE fails again.

Acceleration = gravity

Ahem, no model has been shown on how comets exist yet by a FEer.

Quote from: kasroa on March 05, 2007, 12:27:09 PM

So the big bang happens and stars form. How did all the material accumulate together to form the big rocky mass that is Earth? Or did it magically form a flat disk then lose all it's gravity. Too much magic, not enough science. FE fails again.

Acceleration = gravity

soooo wrong

acceleration is a constant increase in speed

motion is a causation of gravity but neither ARE gravity

In accordance with the above picture, I will try and prove that Asteroids and Comets probaly can't exist in a FE model.
If you view the first picture, labelled Big Bang, it is a very generalized picture of what the Big Bang would have looked like if somehow you could have seen it.
At the Big Bang, everything exploded outwards from the center of the Big Bang, which, in FE hypothesis is considered down. At this point, everything began accelerating.
Now, if one looks at the second picture, it shows how the universe, from what I believe the FEers say, would look. Since everything began accelerating, everything would be on that line. Nothing would be inside it and nothing would be outside of it. Everything would be on the line of the circle.
So, therefore, I can come to the conclusion that there should be nothing thnat far above us, such as observable comets and asteroids, according to the FE model.
Correct me if I am wrong.

Quote from: astronomy101 on March 05, 2007, 12:28:24 PM

Quote from: kasroa on March 05, 2007, 12:27:09 PM

So the big bang happens and stars form. How did all the material accumulate together to form the big rocky mass that is Earth? Or did it magically form a flat disk then lose all it's gravity. Too much magic, not enough science. FE fails again.

Acceleration = gravity

soooo wrong

acceleration is a constant increase in speed

motion is a causation of gravity but neither ARE gravity

Gravity and acceleration are equal.  Gravity is an acceleration, and every acceleration is gravity.

Quote from: self on March 08, 2007, 10:51:33 AM

Quote from: astronomy101 on March 05, 2007, 12:28:24 PM

Quote from: kasroa on March 05, 2007, 12:27:09 PM

So the big bang happens and stars form. How did all the material accumulate together to form the big rocky mass that is Earth? Or did it magically form a flat disk then lose all it's gravity. Too much magic, not enough science. FE fails again.

Acceleration = gravity

soooo wrong

acceleration is a constant increase in speed

motion is a causation of gravity but neither ARE gravity

Gravity and acceleration are equal.  Gravity is an acceleration, and every acceleration is gravity.

Yes it is.
Good job engineer.

Quote from: TheEngineer on March 08, 2007, 12:09:30 PM

Quote from: self on March 08, 2007, 10:51:33 AM

Quote from: astronomy101 on March 05, 2007, 12:28:24 PM

Quote from: kasroa on March 05, 2007, 12:27:09 PM

So the big bang happens and stars form. How did all the material accumulate together to form the big rocky mass that is Earth? Or did it magically form a flat disk then lose all it's gravity. Too much magic, not enough science. FE fails again.

Acceleration = gravity

soooo wrong

acceleration is a constant increase in speed

motion is a causation of gravity but neither ARE gravity

Gravity and acceleration are equal.  Gravity is an acceleration, and every acceleration is gravity.

Yes it is.
Good job engineer.

in RE, gravity is a constant force, it can be fluctuated but still remains constant unless variable will initiate a large change

acceleration is a variable increase in speed increase is speed. the increase can be constant but it does not remain the same speed at any point else it wouldn't be acceleration

think of a car getting faster, thats acceleration. think of a car on the motorway at a steady 70 miles per hour. this is not acceleration as it has already risen to its desired speed

gravity is a pulling force

it brings object closer to it's core

the faster it gets, the more pulling force it will give

therefore crushing once it accelerates over a constant speed

in RE, gravity is a constant force, it can be fluctuated but still remains constant unless variable will initiate a large change

acceleration is a variable increase in speed increase is speed. the increase can be constant but it does not remain the same speed at any point else it wouldn't be acceleration

think of a car getting faster, thats acceleration. think of a car on the motorway at a steady 70 miles per hour. this is not acceleration as it has already risen to its desired speed

gravity is a pulling force

it brings object closer to it's core

the faster it gets, the more pulling force it will give

therefore crushing once it accelerates over a constant speed

Congratulations, that made no sense.

BTW, gravity as a force does not exist.

and 4 elephants and a turtle surviving with a disk on it's back in space does??

read the FAQ if u think im making it up

and yes it does make sense, u know ur wrong and denial is the first stage

acceleration is speed increasing

gravity (in FE and RE) makes things stick to the ground in basic terms

more acceleration means higher gravity

therefore the strength increases if acceleration does not stop

this force would eventually crush every living thing and eventually compressing it all ready for another big bang

logically, that is what FE leads us to

acceleration is speed increasing

That's one definition.

more acceleration means higher gravity

Yep, that's what I implied when I said that gravity=acceleration.

therefore the strength increases if acceleration does not stop

If the acceleration is constant, why would the force increase?

Quote

acceleration is speed increasing

That's one definition.

Quote

more acceleration means higher gravity

Yep, that's what I implied when I said that gravity=acceleration.

Quote

therefore the strength increases if acceleration does not stop

If the acceleration is constant, why would the force increase?

because its on the notion that more speed will produce more gravity therefore increasing the push/pull/watever into the ground. if the speed rises and never stops rising, it will inevitably crush everything on the ground because I don't know about you but my backbone can only take a certain amount of G's of pressure

We don't feel velocity.  Only acceleration.

We don't feel velocity.  Only acceleration.

im not talking about velocity

we're talking about

world moves "upwards" as it moves upwards so quickly, things are forced to the ground. for this to work, something must push down on them to counteract the move upwards (otherwise we would go same speed as the world therefore negating effect to keep us on it, so we'd float off)

example

get on a bus, sit at the back, let the bus reach 30 miles per hour. then walk to the front

what does this prove??

well if we jumped on a world that pushes us up, there is nothin to make us come back. therefore something must push us back down

now the faster we go into that "thing" keeping us down. the more pressure we'll receive

if we constantly accelerate, this pressure would continue to get more and more

im not talking about velocity

...

get on a bus, sit at the back, let the bus reach 30 miles per hour. then walk to the front

That seems like what you are talking about.

world moves "upwards" as it moves upwards so quickly, things are forced to the ground. for this to work, something must push down on them to counteract the move upwards (otherwise we would go same speed as the world therefore negating effect to keep us on it, so we'd float off)

Again, the earth is ACCELERATING.   We are forced to go the same velocity as the earth.

get on a bus, sit at the back, let the bus reach 30 miles per hour. then walk to the front

what does this prove??

That you can walk on a bus? 

well if we jumped on a world that pushes us up, there is nothin to make us come back.

You are right, we don't come back to the earth, it comes to us.

if we constantly accelerate, this pressure would continue to get more and more

If the acceleration was increasing, then yes, however, the acceleration is constant.

Quote from: self on March 08, 2007, 11:45:46 PM

im not talking about velocity

...

get on a bus, sit at the back, let the bus reach 30 miles per hour. then walk to the front

That seems like what you are talking about.

Quote

world moves "upwards" as it moves upwards so quickly, things are forced to the ground. for this to work, something must push down on them to counteract the move upwards (otherwise we would go same speed as the world therefore negating effect to keep us on it, so we'd float off)

Again, the earth is ACCELERATING.   We are forced to go the same velocity as the earth.

Quote

get on a bus, sit at the back, let the bus reach 30 miles per hour. then walk to the front

what does this prove??

That you can walk on a bus? 

Quote

well if we jumped on a world that pushes us up, there is nothin to make us come back.

You are right, we don't come back to the earth, it comes to us.

Quote

if we constantly accelerate, this pressure would continue to get more and more

If the acceleration was increasing, then yes, however, the acceleration is constant.

idiot answers there

you've proved nowt

and acceleration is the constant increase in speed

did not pass physics at school?

and acceleration is the constant increase in speed

So what?  WE CAN'T FEEL VELOCITY, ONLY ACCELERATION.  If our instantaneous velocity is 20m/s, and we continue to accelerate at 9.81m/s^2, and our instantaneous velocity at some point in the future is 3*10^7m/s, we would still only feel the 9.81m/s^2 acceleration.  The velocity does not matter.

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:01:23 AM

and acceleration is the constant increase in speed

So what?  WE CAN'T FEEL VELOCITY, ONLY ACCELERATION.  If our instantaneous velocity is 20m/s, and we continue to accelerate at 9.81m/s^2, and our instantaneous velocity at some point in the future is 3*10^7m/s, we would still only feel the 9.81m/s^2 acceleration.  The velocity does not matter.

YES i finally get to do it

use search

i've read a few posts that state if we walk off the edge of the earth, we would move at the same rate as the earth because of the "upwards" push

so if everything is being pushed up, it describes that jumping will increase our acceleration. and since there is no friction is nothingness space, would would continue to move faster than the upwards push

using FE "logic" it don't make sense

RE gravity does

i've read a few posts that state if we walk off the edge of the earth, we would move at the same rate as the earth because of the "upwards" push

You would move at the same VELOCITY that the earth had when you walked off. You would not continue to accelerate, and you would see the earth accelerating away from you.

so if everything is being pushed up, it describes that jumping will increase our acceleration. and since there is no friction is nothingness space, would would continue to move faster than the upwards push

When you jump, you increase your velocity relative to the earth.  Once your feet leave the ground, you are no longer accelerating, just moving at that constant velocity.  It will take a small amount of time for the earth to accelerate past your velocity in order to catch up to you.

using FE "logic" it don't make sense

Using your brand of logic, I'm surprised anything makes sense to you.

Quote from: self on March 09, 2007, 12:12:00 AM

i've read a few posts that state if we walk off the edge of the earth, we would move at the same rate as the earth because of the "upwards" push

You would move at the same VELOCITY that the earth had when you walked off. You would not continue to accelerate, and you would see the earth accelerating away from you.

Quote

so if everything is being pushed up, it describes that jumping will increase our acceleration. and since there is no friction is nothingness space, would would continue to move faster than the upwards push

When you jump, you increase your velocity relative to the earth.  Once your feet leave the ground, you are no longer accelerating, just moving at that constant velocity.  It will take a small amount of time for the earth to accelerate past your velocity in order to catch up to you.

Quote

using FE "logic" it don't make sense

Using your brand of logic, I'm surprised anything makes sense to you.

ok basically im gonna get no-where by repeating myself

so think of this

if the big bang caused all the planets (which is part of FE)

what creates the acceleration?

and explosion would cause a constant speed

So you realized you were wrong, then?

In accordance with the above picture, I will try and prove that Asteroids and Comets probaly can't exist in a FE model.
If you view the first picture, labelled Big Bang, it is a very generalized picture of what the Big Bang would have looked like if somehow you could have seen it.
At the Big Bang, everything exploded outwards from the center of the Big Bang, which, in FE hypothesis is considered down. At this point, everything began accelerating.
Now, if one looks at the second picture, it shows how the universe, from what I believe the FEers say, would look. Since everything began accelerating, everything would be on that line. Nothing would be inside it and nothing would be outside of it. Everything would be on the line of the circle.
So, therefore, I can come to the conclusion that there should be nothing thnat far above us, such as observable comets and asteroids, according to the FE model.
Correct me if I am wrong.

Ahem