When will we hit our first object?

Considering the Universal Accelerator has reached Earth, and is now pushing us through space, that means we are getting closer and closer to other celestial bodies every day. I was just wondering when FE predicts we will run into an object that is not currently being affected by the UA? (other planets, stars, galaxies, etc)

Other stars, planets and galaxies are affected by UA. The only objects that aren't are asteroids and comets (since they fall to earth, or earth accelerates into them)

But if the Earth is "accelerating," wouldn't it eventually move so fast that we'd all be crushed?

But if the Earth is "accelerating," wouldn't it eventually move so fast that we'd all be crushed?

No. Any "crushing" force would be exerted due to acceleration, not velocity. Since the acceleration is constant at 1g, we only experience 1g.

But any accelleration at all would mean that the earth is always going faster. Otherwise, why do objects increase in speed as they fall to the ground? You know, the whole 32 ft/s/s thing?

that's called acceleration. Measured in meters/second/second, i.e. change in speed/time.

Wait, so just answer me this: Is the earth accellerating or moving at a constant speed? Because if it is moving at a constant speed, that doesn't explain why objects increase in speed as they fall. If the latter, than please elaborate. If its something else that I haven't though of, then I probably know nothing about it, so, again, please explain.

Accelerating. Read the FAQ.

Wait, so just answer me this: Is the earth accellerating or moving at a constant speed? Because if it is moving at a constant speed, that doesn't explain why objects increase in speed as they fall.

Sure it does.  The earth is increasing in speed as it approaches the object, explaining why it appears that the object increases in speed as it falls.

Quote from: globesphere93 on February 08, 2008, 02:55:27 PM

Wait, so just answer me this: Is the earth accellerating or moving at a constant speed? Because if it is moving at a constant speed, that doesn't explain why objects increase in speed as they fall.

Sure it does.  The earth is increasing in speed as it approaches the object, explaining why it appears that the object increases in speed as it falls.

That's practically an oximoron, isn't it? The whole meaning of constant speed is that an object is not getting any faster or slower. If that the case, than falling objects wouldn't increase in speed.

Roundy's comment does seem to contradict itself, but rest assured, in FET (or some of them) the Earth is accelerating.

That's where my other question comes in. "Accellerating" means constantly moving faster (or slower, but that's not the case), so if the earth is accellerating, well, you can probably see where i'm going (don't say to read the faq, cuz it didn't really make much sense to me)

The earth is accelerating at ~9.81m/s/s, not moving at a constant speed.

Roundy's comment does seem to contradict itself, but rest assured, in FET (or some of them) the Earth is accelerating.

Roundy's comment is perfectly correct.

We're gonna hit it next week. Watch out.

Roundy's comment does seem to contradict itself, but rest assured, in FET (or some of them) the Earth is accelerating.

I was just confused, I didn't catch that his question implied that the earth was moving at constant speed rather than accelerating.

So essentialy, despite travelling at 0.9c or however quick we're at now, we're still successfully avoiding bumping into anything that might be floating around in space

So essentialy, despite travelling at 0.9c or however quick we're at now, we're still successfully avoiding bumping into anything that might be floating around in space

Haven't you ever heard of meteors?

I wonder, how did so many meteors hit the moon if it is essentially shielded by the earth

I wonder, how did so many meteors hit the moon if it is essentially shielded by the earth

The moon was likely rotating billions of years ago, exhibiting its face to the meteors of space. As for why the moon no longer rotates, that's an unknown.

Wait, so in your theory, is the moon flat or round?

Quote from: JimboWizbo on February 08, 2008, 06:16:50 PM

I wonder, how did so many meteors hit the moon if it is essentially shielded by the earth

The moon was likely rotating billions of years ago, exhibiting its face to the meteors of space. As for why the moon no longer rotates, that's an unknown.

Another giant hole in FET

And a new one at that.

Wait, so in your theory, is the moon flat or round?

The moon is a sphere.

And a new one at that.

Nah, this was brought up a while back, the thread got locked 

Quote from: globesphere93 on February 08, 2008, 06:26:22 PM

Wait, so in your theory, is the moon flat or round?

The moon is a sphere.

So, what stopped it spinning?
And come to mention, why aren't meteors (which must start very far above the earth, higher up than the sun) affected by UA, since they're not in the earth's "bow wave" or whatever the zone is called where UA doesn't happen.

You're asking the wrong question. The real question is: what causes the moon to be shaped like a sphere, while the earth is flat?

I'd say "magic" but I'm not allowed to . I don't know, but there might be an explanation.

You're asking the wrong question. The real question is: what causes the moon to be shaped like a sphere, while the earth is flat?

You're forgetting we are special, God doesn't care much for the moon

Quote from: globesphere93 on February 09, 2008, 06:10:31 AM

You're asking the wrong question. The real question is: what causes the moon to be shaped like a sphere, while the earth is flat?

You're forgetting we are special, God doesn't care much for the moon

Are you saying that God is the reason why the earth is flat?

I'd say "magic" but I'm not allowed to . I don't know, but there might be an explanation.

And are you saying that "magic" is an acceptable reason for anything?