Earths Atmosphere

  • 12 Replies
  • 2950 Views
Earths Atmosphere
« on: August 16, 2007, 01:01:17 AM »
Now i was just thinking that the earth move up at a rate of 10N instead of having gravity. Now does the earth have an atmosphere. If it does does it move up with the earth and if it does why dont object in the sky like an aeroplanes move up at the same speed as the earth making it seem like they are always floating.

im just putting it out there so plz reply

?

Gulliver

  • 3804
  • +0/-0
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #1 on: August 16, 2007, 01:04:23 AM »
Now i was just thinking that the earth move up at a rate of 10N instead of having gravity. Now does the earth have an atmosphere. If it does does it move up with the earth and if it does why dont object in the sky like an aeroplanes move up at the same speed as the earth making it seem like they are always floating.

im just putting it out there so plz reply
I have no idea from where you got the "10N" figure.
I suggest that you read the RE Primer. It has a nice write-up on this subject.

Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2007, 01:13:35 AM »
10N i got from he speed the earth move at and its in m per second and newtons are the same thing so ill rephrase that

the earth moves up at 9.7 or something metres/sec.

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #3 on: August 16, 2007, 02:17:12 AM »
It moves up at 9.8m/s2. And yes, the Earth has an atmosphere. If it didn't move up, we'd be dead if the Earth was flat.

if it does why dont object in the sky like an aeroplanes move up at the same speed as the earth making it seem like they are always floating.

Planes do move up at the same speed. Even when they are flying.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2007, 08:19:00 AM by divito »
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #4 on: August 16, 2007, 02:41:27 AM »
what im trying to get to is that, then we'd have floating objects in the atmosphere as everyting is moving upwards at a onstant speed.

*

skeptical scientist

  • 1285
  • +1/-0
  • -2 Flamebait
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #5 on: August 16, 2007, 03:12:08 AM »
It moves up at 9.8m/s. And yes, the Earth has an atmosphere. If it didn't move up, we'd be dead if the Earth was flat.

if it does why dont object in the sky like an aeroplanes move up at the same speed as the earth making it seem like they are always floating.

Planes do move up at the same speed. Even when they are flying.
Divito, I know you're not a physics type, but this is simply ignorant. 9.8m/s is a velocity. In the FE model, the velocity is changing because the earth is accelerating at a rate of 9.8m/s2. There's a huge difference. Maybe you should go back to following TheEngineer around saying "what he said" and bringing up the same links you found in google over and over.

The short answer to how the atmosphere works in the FE model is that the Earth pushes on the bottom of the atmosphere, and the higher up bits push on each other. What you get is a pressure gradiant, so each bit of air has a bit more air pressure from below than from above, and thus it feels a net force upwards, which causes it to accelerate. Since the atmosphere is at an equilibrium, the air accelerates at the same rate as the Earth does. Planes can therefore use the accelerating air to provide lift which accelerates them upwards at the same rate as the Earth accelerates, neatly explaining flight.
-David
E pur si muove!

Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #6 on: August 16, 2007, 03:32:54 AM »
cheers ow

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #7 on: August 16, 2007, 08:18:46 AM »
I forgot the squared, take it easy. Jesus.

When people argue about something, I look up and read about the subject from several sources. When I locate the information, I take the side that I've verified to be correct. Your ignorant insults are not appreciated, but you're entitled to them.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #8 on: August 16, 2007, 11:09:29 AM »
Divito, I know you're not a physics type, but this is simply ignorant. 9.8m/s is a velocity. In the FE model, the velocity is changing because the earth is accelerating at a rate of 9.8m/s2. There's a huge difference. Maybe you should go back to following TheEngineer around saying "what he said" and bringing up the same links you found in google over and over.
I know you haven't been around in a while, and therefore don't know many of the new people.  Divito is one of the few people that actually does some research on the subjects at hand.  I noticed you have been falling into the Gulliver/sokarul way of thinking, and that is quite disturbing for someone that has been around for some time.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

skeptical scientist

  • 1285
  • +1/-0
  • -2 Flamebait
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #9 on: August 16, 2007, 02:52:26 PM »
Sorry, my comment was a bit over the top. I guess I'm just annoyed at the "My Problem with UA" thread where people are arguing past each other. Nobody is even arguing science any more, they are just arguing about who said what which was wrong when, and trying to score points by misrepresenting the other side's position. And it's not just Sokarul and Gulliver either - you and Divito are doing it to. Especially when someone posted a picture of a solar eclipse showing evidence of gravitational lensing, and you both responded with, "no, it's an eclipse, not lensing, you phail" when the whole point is that it was a picture of both.

Everyone being so obsessed with scoring points that they forget what they are arguing about and have no interest in the idea that they could possibly learn anything from anyone else is why I left the first time.
-David
E pur si muove!

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #10 on: August 16, 2007, 03:51:14 PM »
Nobody is even arguing science any more, they are just arguing about who said what which was wrong when, and trying to score points by misrepresenting the other side's position. And it's not just Sokarul and Gulliver either - you and Divito are doing it to. Especially when someone posted a picture of a solar eclipse showing evidence of gravitational lensing, and you both responded with, "no, it's an eclipse, not lensing, you phail" when the whole point is that it was a picture of both.

Everyone being so obsessed with scoring points that they forget what they are arguing about and have no interest in the idea that they could possibly learn anything from anyone else is why I left the first time.

We are definitely arguing science. The scoring points thing is a little misconstrued. That's not what we're after, but Gulliver talked about the winning and losing thing.

Basically, a thread starts out and as is common, people misunderstand what someone said, usually what TheEngineer says. They often stretch what was said far past what was intended from the general statement. After I read up on what is being argued, I chime in, hopefully with sources and quotes to help ease other people's understandings as well as my own.

I always seem to notice that sokarul and Gulliver in particular are the ones doing the ganging up, and as I often find, TheEngineer is usually correct. I can only speak to one instance that I've ever had a disagreement with him but it had nothing to do with science. It has nothing to do with "OMG WE WIN! POINTS FOR US," it has to do with understanding each other's argument and addressing the concerns with facts and accuracy in communication.

I have no ill-will towards either sokarul or Gulliver in the arguments, but their attitudes make finding and delivering the truth that much more satisfying should they be incorrect.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

*

socrates

  • 42
  • +0/-0
  • Confused and Pissed off
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2007, 04:06:30 PM »
I guess I'm just annoyed at the "My Problem with UA" thread where people are arguing past each other.

...I regret starting that thread...
Quote from: Midnight
The only thing this thread proves to me (which is all I care about in my day), is that none of you will ever really prove anything to anyone, but yourselves.  ::)

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6901
  • +0/-0
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Earths Atmosphere
« Reply #12 on: August 16, 2007, 04:18:30 PM »
I guess I'm just annoyed at the "My Problem with UA" thread where people are arguing past each other.

...I regret starting that thread...

* divito slaps socrates
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good