Satellite orbital dynamics.

  • 47 Replies
  • 12561 Views
*

AmateurAstronomer

  • 234
  • Rouge Scholar
Satellite orbital dynamics.
« on: August 18, 2008, 06:56:24 AM »
I put together an animation to help me explain this properly. It'll take a sec to load on dialup, if you're unlucky enough to still be on it. If the text that follows is too much for you to read, just move on to another thread now. No tl:dr posts please.

Here we have the flat earth, the round earth, and 3 satellites. The red satellite is an equatorial  geostationary satellite, the yellow is an equatorial non-geostationary satellite, and the blue is a polar orbiting satellite. Various factors and scales are exaggerated and highlighted to make the animation more viewer accessible.

Over on my RE side, I only need one formula to explain the dynamics of all 3. Forward momentum is equal to gravitational pull, so it basically falls in a circle. Each satellite has several decades of sufficient on-board propellant to correct eventual orbital decay caused by upper-atmospheric drag, gravitational flux, minor collisions, solar wind, etc...

Over on the FE side though, you have some quite different paths going on. I'm interested in hearing some thoughts on these very different orbital paths.


Some ground rules though: If you don't agree to these rules, don't bother responding to this topic.


1) Given that this is a satellite dynamics discussion thread, If you don't believe in satellites, don't bother discussing here. Take it to some other thread.

2) Given that with only 3 terrestrial reference points you can triangulate a satellite's distance and location, the satellites locations are considered verified, and cannot be questioned.

3) Given that this is the only map put forward, and confirmed by the owner of this site, any references to any other maps real, or that "you are planning to get around to drawing up" are disavowed until a graphical representation of said map is physically posted in THIS thread.

4) No fellow RE posters piping in to say that the FE posters won't answer. I'm a relatively new poster, but a long term lurker, and I've seen a lot of threads devolve quickly into name calling. Whether you're FE or RE, please don't post unless you can add to this particular discussion.

Other than that, I'd like to hear some opinions.
Reality becomes apparent to the patient observer. Or you can learn a thing or two if you're in a hurry.

Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2008, 07:12:04 AM »
Very good animation... i would like to know from a FE perspective, what keeps the sun accelerating with the earth and what keeps it turning around the earth?
"Bridge boy"

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2008, 07:20:09 AM »
Excellent animation, and an excellent post too. I'll try to come up with reasonable answers to what I can.

The equatorial non-geostationary satellite orbits the north celestial pole, as do the sun, moon and stars. The geostationary satellite is probably a stratellite. Of course, this hypothesis suffers from the drawback of predicting that the geostationary satellite should be closer to the Earth than the non-geostationary one, which is obviously not the case. I don't have an answer for this, but perhaps Tom Bishop or someone will.

The polar orbit path is a very interesting one. I work much better algebraically than graphically, so at some point I will attempt to derive an algebraic representation of its path and see if I can come up with a reasonable hypothesis to represent its motion.

Again, brilliant post, sir.
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

AmateurAstronomer

  • 234
  • Rouge Scholar
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #3 on: August 18, 2008, 07:23:50 AM »
Thanks. I plan to keep adding to this model, so you'll probably see it more in the future.
Reality becomes apparent to the patient observer. Or you can learn a thing or two if you're in a hurry.

*

Sean O'Grady

  • 625
  • Flat Earth Theorist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2008, 07:35:40 AM »
As a side note what program did you use for those models?

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2008, 07:59:18 AM »
This is one of the best threads ever.  Its nice to see people doing more than just arguing. 

Fe is getting owned more and more everyday. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #6 on: August 18, 2008, 08:10:50 AM »
Great animation, it shows the absurdity of FE orbital mechanics. Out of interest, what did you use to make this?

*

WardoggKC130FE

  • 11857
  • What website is that? MadeUpMonkeyShit.com?
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #7 on: August 18, 2008, 08:41:26 AM »
Excellent post.  Bravo. Bravo.

*

AmateurAstronomer

  • 234
  • Rouge Scholar
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #8 on: August 18, 2008, 05:34:16 PM »
I made the animation in 3ds max 8, and optimized for gif in gimp. If anyone with max is interested in the file PM me and i'll send it to you.
Reality becomes apparent to the patient observer. Or you can learn a thing or two if you're in a hurry.

?

spacemanjones

  • 281
  • Magic pushes earth
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #9 on: August 18, 2008, 08:47:43 PM »
This is a really good post, i like the animation. But i thought FE didn't believe in satellites?

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #10 on: August 18, 2008, 09:43:23 PM »
Excellent post. Even if you do not believe in satellites, the same problem of unpredictable routes happens with planets.

While the apparent location of any planet can be predicted with better than 3% error using a simple model assuming circular orbits, on the FE model nobody has been able to make an equation that predicts the apparent location of any planets with any hope of acceptable precision.


*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 18008
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #11 on: August 18, 2008, 10:07:38 PM »
Satellites don't exist.

The planets don't disappear over the Ice Wall and reappear at the other end.

The planets circle and sun, while the sun circles the North Pole. This results in the retrograde motion of the planets.

Quote
While the apparent location of any planet can be predicted with better than 3% error using a simple model assuming circular orbits, on the FE model nobody has been able to make an equation that predicts the apparent location of any planets with any hope of acceptable precision.

The ancients were able to predict the positions and movements of the planets just fine under Flat Earth cosmologies.

Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #12 on: August 18, 2008, 10:26:04 PM »
Satellites don't exist.

The planets don't disappear over the Ice Wall and reappear at the other end.

The planets circle and sun, while the sun circles the North Pole. This results in the retrograde motion of the planets.

Quote
While the apparent location of any planet can be predicted with better than 3% error using a simple model assuming circular orbits, on the FE model nobody has been able to make an equation that predicts the apparent location of any planets with any hope of acceptable precision.


Umm no the ancients were not able to. The ancients were primarily round Earthers.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Eratosthenes+carl+sagan&emb=0&aq=f#

The whole flat Earth thing came about much laterinvented by people who felt the bible described a flat Earth when in fact it doesnt, the bible calls Earth a sphere several times)
The ancients were able to predict the positions and movements of the planets just fine under Flat Earth cosmologies.

And Satellites do exist. Our weapons, naviagation equipment use it.
As a former member of the US Navy who worked in fire control I can tell you that GPS is needed for weapons that have over the horizon targetting capability, such as the DSMAC guidance system used by the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile.
Without GPS satellites the weapons would not function. Satellites do indeed exist, Bishop.
The idea that companies would spend billions building and launching Satellites into space, or that militaries would fire spy satellites into space that aren't real, is ludicrious. Furthermore, both the ISS and Hubble Space telescopes both orbit the Earth.
So, from personal experience and from facts, you are wrong.

*

ﮎingulaЯiτy

  • Arbitrator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9074
  • Resident atheist.
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #13 on: August 18, 2008, 10:29:36 PM »
If you don't believe in satellites, don't bother discussing here.
Satellites don't exist.
LUL Bagels
If I was asked to imagine a perfect deity, I would never invent one that suffers from a multiple personality disorder. Christians get points for originality there.

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #14 on: August 18, 2008, 10:43:51 PM »

The ancients were able to predict the positions and movements of the planets just fine under Flat Earth cosmologies.

The ancients of all the cultures I know assumed the stars, planets, Sun and Moon rested in one or more spheres, and were perfectly able to predict the movements of the stars, and with varying degrees of precision the position of the planets, Sun and Moon.

No ancient culture ever came up with a model where the celestial objects are all on a plane above Earth, hovering without ever passing under the observer. Every astronomer since the Babylonians has done what the Zetetics have not: chart the exact (as far as their technology permits) position of the celestial objects and predict the position of said objects for every hour of the day and every day of the near future.


*

AmateurAstronomer

  • 234
  • Rouge Scholar
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #15 on: August 19, 2008, 06:51:56 AM »
Satellites don't exist.

Does the ISS not exist?


Visible ISS transits of the sun or moon happen dozens of times per year, and as the biggest satellite in orbit, it's VERY clearly visible. You can chart a lunar or solar transit of the ISS for your world location using the utility here, and see one for yourself if you're so inclined. For lunar transits I use my telescope, but binoculars work fine too. (NOTICE: Do not attempt to view a solar transit unless you have the right equipment. You can seriously damage your equipment or you eyes.)

The utility works by setting up a maps file for your area with projected transit paths that can be used in either google maps, or google earth, so I'm betting you and other die hard FE'ers will write it of as the devils handywork. The fact that I've seen 3 ISS transits, and dozens of other satellite transits probably means I'm part of the conspiracy too.

For any other readers who really are interested in seeing an ISS transit, check it out. It really helps a lot. If any readers want to see transits of other visible satellites, PM me, and I'll hook you up with some other good sites. Other than the ISS though, good visible transits are rare.
Reality becomes apparent to the patient observer. Or you can learn a thing or two if you're in a hurry.

Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #16 on: August 19, 2008, 06:53:49 AM »
Cool pictures.

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #17 on: August 19, 2008, 06:58:20 AM »
Does the ISS not exist?

You can view its transits and it exists. Whether or not it is a satellite is a completely different story.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

*

AmateurAstronomer

  • 234
  • Rouge Scholar
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #18 on: August 19, 2008, 07:03:08 AM »
You can view its transits and it exists. Whether or not it is a satellite is a completely different story.

If it's not a satellite what is it?
Reality becomes apparent to the patient observer. Or you can learn a thing or two if you're in a hurry.

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #19 on: August 19, 2008, 07:06:55 AM »
If it's not a satellite what is it?

Depends who you ask. Pseudolite or stratellite perhaps.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #20 on: August 19, 2008, 07:37:26 AM »
If it's not a satellite what is it?

Depends who you ask. Pseudolite or stratellite perhaps.
This is trolling at its dumbest. You are too intelligent to believe that the ISS or any other satellite mentioned here are even remotely aerodynamic in shape. Are you suggesting that the ISS, for example, moves a few degrees in declination in a matter of minutes, from anywhere somebody sees it, but its speed is well under that of a small airplane? Or are you suggesting that it does move at several times the speed of sound but that aerodynamic forces do not apply to it?

*

AmateurAstronomer

  • 234
  • Rouge Scholar
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #21 on: August 19, 2008, 07:38:02 AM »
If it's not a satellite what is it?

Depends who you ask. Pseudolite or stratellite perhaps.

Pseudolite is a contraction of the term "pseudo-satellite," used to refer to something that is not a satellite which performs a function commonly in the domain of satellites. Pseudolites are most often small transceivers that are used to create a local, ground-based GPS alternative.


It's not a pseudolite, duh. Those are on the ground.

Stratellite is a brand name (Stratellite is a trademark of Sanswire Network, LLC, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of GlobeTel Communications Corp.) for a future emissions-free, high-altitude stratospheric airship that provides a stationary communications platform for various types of wireless signals usually carried by communications towers or satellites. The Stratellite is a concept that has undergone several years of research and development, and is not yet commercially available; Sanswire, with its partner TAO Technologies, anticipates its current testing sequence to include the launch of a Stratellite into the stratosphere.

Stratellite is a not yet produced brand name of satellites. Doesn't really help your argument.
Reality becomes apparent to the patient observer. Or you can learn a thing or two if you're in a hurry.

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #22 on: August 19, 2008, 07:52:28 AM »
For the first definition you ignored the key phrase "most often."

In the second, you take public records at face value. Do you believe all governments, agencies and such would disclose top secret experiments and technology?
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #23 on: August 19, 2008, 07:56:56 AM »
Does the ISS not exist?

You can view its transits and it exists. Whether or not it is a satellite is a completely different story.

Show me an underpowered balloon that can travel at 27,000 km/hr. Or for that matter show me anything that can travel at 27,000 km/hr and not be in orbit.   
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Parsifal

  • Official Member
  • 36118
  • Bendy Light specialist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2008, 07:58:56 AM »
Or for that matter show me anything that can travel at 27,000 km/hr and not be in orbit.   

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light
I'm going to side with the white supremacists.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • Extra Racist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #25 on: August 19, 2008, 08:05:25 AM »
Or for that matter show me anything that can travel at 27,000 km/hr and not be in orbit.   

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light

They haven't slowed down light to that speed yet.(I think). 

Edit: Apparently they have. 

Too bad light cannot be mistaken for the ISS. 
« Last Edit: August 19, 2008, 08:15:57 AM by sokarul »
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

AmateurAstronomer

  • 234
  • Rouge Scholar
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #26 on: August 19, 2008, 08:10:08 AM »
For the first definition you ignored the key phrase "most often."

In the second, you take public records at face value. Do you believe all governments, agencies and such would disclose top secret experiments and technology?

1) Show me some reference pics of a non-terrestrial pseudolite that fits the definition of not being a satellite, and that also could feasibly look like the ISS.

2) If the ISS is just a stratellite tooling around up there, where is it getting it's fuel? US launches would be noticed, the Russians damn sure are'nt shipping it up there at the moment, and shape wise it's not designed to land and take off...

Reality becomes apparent to the patient observer. Or you can learn a thing or two if you're in a hurry.

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #27 on: August 19, 2008, 08:16:02 AM »
1) Show me some reference pics of a non-terrestrial pseudolite that fits the definition of not being a satellite, and that also could feasibly look like the ISS.

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/mylr3.jpg
http://www.scienceclarified.com/images/uesc_02_img0059.jpg

2) If the ISS is just a stratellite tooling around up there, where is it getting it's fuel? US launches would be noticed, the Russians damn sure are'nt shipping it up there at the moment, and shape wise it's not designed to land and take off...

Depends on what it needs; either space agencies are utilizing some type of force or phenomena at the heights of the ISS and other "satellites" or, they land and refuel or are refueled in the air.


[/quote]
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good

?

trig

  • 2240
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #28 on: August 19, 2008, 08:46:20 AM »
1) Show me some reference pics of a non-terrestrial pseudolite that fits the definition of not being a satellite, and that also could feasibly look like the ISS.

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/mylr3.jpg
http://www.scienceclarified.com/images/uesc_02_img0059.jpg

2) If the ISS is just a stratellite tooling around up there, where is it getting it's fuel? US launches would be noticed, the Russians damn sure are'nt shipping it up there at the moment, and shape wise it's not designed to land and take off...

Depends on what it needs; either space agencies are utilizing some type of force or phenomena at the heights of the ISS and other "satellites" or, they land and refuel or are refueled in the air.


You see? Trolling at its dumbest. Not even an attempt to explain the hypersonic speeds. No explanation of how the solar panels of the ISS endure hypersonic speeds. No mention about the fact that the balloons shown do not reach hypersonic speeds (or even supersonic speeds). A new conspiracy theory around "some type of force or phenomena" that the government does not want us to know about.

*

divito the truthist

  • The Elder Ones
  • 6903
  • Relativist, Existentialist, Nihilist
Re: Satellite orbital dynamics.
« Reply #29 on: August 19, 2008, 08:57:17 AM »
Perhaps you'd be better off reading what he wrote. Re-read #1 and find where I didn't comply with what he requested. As for #2, he asked a simple question and I gave simple possibilities. Does that bother you?

1. What would you like me to explain about hypersonic speeds?
2. How do you know that this "craft" even has solar panels?
3. I never claimed to showcase balloons that can reach hypersonic speeds.
4. There is no new conspiracy.

Nevermind trolling, this is just plain failure to read.
Our existentialist, relativist, nihilist, determinist, fascist, eugenicist moderator hath returned.
Quote from: Fortuna
objectively good