Meteors

No Tom, I am assuming they are 3000 miles up and the earth accelerates up to them.  Hence the 0 initial velocity.  In your theory they would be going even faster than the final velocity I came up with.

The question remains what is making them accelerate at all, in any direction contrary to the UA motion that every thing in the universe is effected by in one unilateral direction.

The fact that they are composed of materials that aren't suspended by the UA.  I think I already explained this.

In your theory they would be going even faster than the final velocity I came up with.

Why?

The question remains what is making them accelerate at all, in any direction contrary to the UA motion that every thing in the universe is effected by in one unilateral direction.

Everything in the universe is not affected in one unilateral direction. We know this because of meteors and redshift/blueshift.

The fact that they are composed of materials that aren't suspended by the UA.  I think I already explained this.

So for that reason meteors and comets(and nothing else) defy all FET UA logic?  Interesting.  They must feel really special.

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on July 02, 2008, 08:54:41 PM

In your theory they would be going even faster than the final velocity I came up with.

Why?

Quote from: WardoggKC130FE on July 02, 2008, 08:54:41 PM

The question remains what is making them accelerate at all, in any direction contrary to the UA motion that every thing in the universe is effected by in one unilateral direction.

Everything in the universe is not affected in one unilateral direction. We know this because of meteors and redshift/blueshift.

Why? Becuase the inital velocity would be higher than 0.


Now we are back to the list of things not effected by UA.  So far we got meteors and comets due to their composition.  Anything else?

I don't agree about comets.  They are clearly in suspended orbits above us, albeit very long and complicated orbits.  They're probably composed of the same sort of material as the planets.

So we are down to just meteors and meteors alone that are not effected by UA.  Or possibly they are, they just lose their electromagnetic properties and decided today was a good day to die.

I don't agree about comets.  They are clearly in suspended orbits above us, albeit very long and complicated orbits.  They're probably composed of the same sort of material as the planets.

BTW orbits around what?

And what ever the answer is to that question I am going to ask why.

My guess is that they orbit the central point above the hub that everything else seems to orbit.  But I believe that their paths are affected by the paths of everything else above us that are suspended by the UA.  Everything just sort of moves in its own geodesic.

Everything just sort of moves in its own geodesic.

FakeEarth's fairy godmother just had to wave her fairy wand.

LOL.  You don't like me, huh?

LOL.  You don't like me, huh?

I like you. I just don't like that you pretend to support a pretend theory.

The theory itself is not pretend.  IE this forum exists to debate RET and FET.  If the theory itself was pretend then we would all be pretending to debate it.

You're right that this forum exists, and even correct about it's purpose.

FakeEarthists have failed to define an actual theory, rather a loose collection of ideas that are not unified or accurately defined. And don't think I'll accept you as anything more than a troll. You're contributions to FakeEarth theory are null, provide data, predict something, but do not contribute volumes of vacuous argument in hopes it makes you look serious.

So I'm guessing Narc -- what do I win?

So I'm guessing Narc -- what do I win?

Are you saying that Narcberry is an RE troll now?  Sounds about right.

So I'm guessing Narc -- what do I win?

My boot up your arse