Why is sustained space travel impossible?

  • 38 Replies
  • 11045 Views
*

ThinkingMan

  • 1830
  • Oh, Really?
Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #30 on: September 14, 2012, 06:31:59 AM »
I understand that helium floats due to its relative weight to air, but you are corrent in that i did overlook the equivalence principle which I suppose would explain how UA seems to be used to explain gravity time and time again. They are both simple theories that cannot be proven, and in the same sense cannot be disproven for the time being

Simple theories yes but from what Ive read Einsteins principle is base off of the force of gravity, and from what I have read so far flat earth does not have gravity due to the upward acceleration of the earth. So theres still an unanswered question on the table.

The equivalence principle applies here in the respect that the 9.8m/s2 would produce a force indistinguishable on a small scale from a 9.8m/s2 gravitational force. There are discrepancies however.
When Tom farts, the special gasses released open a sort of worm hole into the past. There Tom is able to freely discuss with Rowbotham all of his ideas and thoughts.

Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #31 on: September 16, 2012, 02:09:40 PM »
So whats this boards verdict on Newton? Some of his theories may have been busted on the large scale of things(Damn you Eisenstein! *shakes fist*) but when it comes to basic laws of motion his ideas are correct. I am not sure what FE'rs say about air past a certain altitude but in space there is no air, and gravity gets weaker the farther away you go. You get a brick going fast enough it won't only fly, it will break from it's Earthly bonds and it'll keep going and going until something stops it.


Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #32 on: September 16, 2012, 06:46:41 PM »
so the original question was never answered.
the truth is, space flight is very possible, in planar and spherical earth theory.


*

ThinkingMan

  • 1830
  • Oh, Really?
Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #33 on: September 17, 2012, 05:22:40 AM »
So whats this boards verdict on Newton? Some of his theories may have been busted on the large scale of things(Damn you Eisenstein! *shakes fist*) but when it comes to basic laws of motion his ideas are correct. I am not sure what FE'rs say about air past a certain altitude but in space there is no air, and gravity gets weaker the farther away you go. You get a brick going fast enough it won't only fly, it will break from it's Earthly bonds and it'll keep going and going until something stops it.



With your brick though, there's the problem of it being burned up in the atmosphere. It would need to be going rather appreciable speeds to break orbit from ground level. Those speed should annihilate it in the atmosphere, being the weak material it is.
When Tom farts, the special gasses released open a sort of worm hole into the past. There Tom is able to freely discuss with Rowbotham all of his ideas and thoughts.

Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #34 on: September 17, 2012, 05:44:21 AM »
I'm pretty sure he was simply using a brick as an example of an object with with considerable mass for its size. Replace the brick with any exotic metal or other material able to withstand traveling through the atmosphere and the principle still applies
One should not twist facts to suit theories, but instead twist theories to suit facts. This is the basis of every scientific method

*

ThinkingMan

  • 1830
  • Oh, Really?
Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #35 on: September 17, 2012, 05:45:58 AM »
I'm pretty sure he was simply using a brick as an example of an object with with considerable mass for its size. Replace the brick with any exotic metal or other material able to withstand traveling through the atmosphere and the principle still applies

I'm a very literal person, and I haven't finished my coffee yet. My brain automatically started picking that statement apart. I apologize.
When Tom farts, the special gasses released open a sort of worm hole into the past. There Tom is able to freely discuss with Rowbotham all of his ideas and thoughts.

Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #36 on: September 17, 2012, 05:52:28 AM »
Not a problem, if you hadn't mentioned it I'm sure either Rushy or Tom would have made mention of it and blown everything out of proportion, calling this a win for FET based on that simple fact
One should not twist facts to suit theories, but instead twist theories to suit facts. This is the basis of every scientific method

*

ThinkingMan

  • 1830
  • Oh, Really?
Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #37 on: September 17, 2012, 05:57:26 AM »
Well, back to picking it apart. I'm not sure how fast it would have to be going initially (it really depends on said objects aerodynamics), but this should be an interesting read just in case anyone gets excited.

http://what-if.xkcd.com/1/ Relativistic Baseball!
When Tom farts, the special gasses released open a sort of worm hole into the past. There Tom is able to freely discuss with Rowbotham all of his ideas and thoughts.

Re: Why is sustained space travel impossible?
« Reply #38 on: September 18, 2012, 04:07:32 PM »
So whats this boards verdict on Newton? Some of his theories may have been busted on the large scale of things(Damn you Eisenstein! *shakes fist*) but when it comes to basic laws of motion his ideas are correct. I am not sure what FE'rs say about air past a certain altitude but in space there is no air, and gravity gets weaker the farther away you go. You get a brick going fast enough it won't only fly, it will break from it's Earthly bonds and it'll keep going and going until something stops it.

With your brick though, there's the problem of it being burned up in the atmosphere. It would need to be going rather appreciable speeds to break orbit from ground level. Those speed should annihilate it in the atmosphere, being the weak material it is.

Ah, you are correct, my brick is not tough enough.

But you understand the idea.