I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge

  • 12250 Replies
  • 648193 Views
?

BJ1234

  • 1931
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1080 on: March 27, 2015, 10:07:30 AM »
It is obvious that Heiwa has been captured by the Obomas and is being held in a secret mountain lair.  Unfortunatly, he did not have time to type out a plea for help while his captors left him alone with an unlocked computer and full internet access.

*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1081 on: March 27, 2015, 10:11:13 AM »
Heiwa, where did you disappear to?

Let's not ask LOL.  With a bit of luck, we may have seen the last of him.  Hopefully he's departed to poison the intellectual well at some other as yet unsuspecting forum.

     ::)

Sorry to make you worry. My web site is more popular than ever and I was informing some people about life in East Germany 1949-1989. Did you know that East Germany sold 34 000 political prisoners in that time and collected about €50 000:- for each of them - totally € 1 700 million! That is 1 700 times more than what you can win at Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge (topic).

Re gravity assist math it does not exist! If a space craft approaches a planet at high speed, the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft so it crashes on the planet or burns up in the atmosphere. Only silly gravity assist sect members believe otherwise = it is religion.

?

BJ1234

  • 1931
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1082 on: March 27, 2015, 10:14:27 AM »
Amazing!!!!

So how did East Germany collect euros for their prisoners?  The Euro wasn't around yet.

ALso, glad you escaped from the Obomas!!!!

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1083 on: March 27, 2015, 11:17:08 AM »
Heiwa, where did you disappear to?

Let's not ask LOL.  With a bit of luck, we may have seen the last of him.  Hopefully he's departed to poison the intellectual well at some other as yet unsuspecting forum.

     ::)

Sorry to make you worry. My web site is more popular than ever and I was informing some people about life in East Germany 1949-1989. Did you know that East Germany sold 34 000 political prisoners in that time and collected about €50 000:- for each of them - totally € 1 700 million! That is 1 700 times more than what you can win at Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge (topic).

Re gravity assist math it does not exist! If a space craft approaches a planet at high speed, the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft so it crashes on the planet or burns up in the atmosphere. Only silly gravity assist sect members believe otherwise = it is religion.

A spacecraft will be accelerated towards the centre of gravity of the planet in question. Thi does not mean it is travelling directly towards it. This can be demonstrated using a simple excel model.
Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by ignorance or stupidity.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39385
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1084 on: March 27, 2015, 11:28:02 AM »
Re gravity assist math it does not exist!
Yes it does.  Here is a link to a document that shows you how to calculate one.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19920015535.pdf

If a space craft approaches a planet at high speed, the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft so it crashes on the planet or burns up in the atmosphere.
Not if you aim your space craft properly.

Only silly gravity assist sect members believe otherwise = it is religion.
What about engineers who are too lazy to Google "gravity assist algorithm"?
« Last Edit: March 27, 2015, 11:29:55 AM by markjo »
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1085 on: March 27, 2015, 11:44:28 AM »
Amazing!!!!

So how did East Germany collect euros for their prisoners?  The Euro wasn't around yet.

ALso, glad you escaped from the Obomas!!!!

The East German gangsters collected Deutsche Mark, DM - 2DM = 1€. 1989 the same East German gangsters sold their archive to CIA/NSA I assume for $$$$?

*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1086 on: March 27, 2015, 11:49:26 AM »
Heiwa, where did you disappear to?

Let's not ask LOL.  With a bit of luck, we may have seen the last of him.  Hopefully he's departed to poison the intellectual well at some other as yet unsuspecting forum.

     ::)

Sorry to make you worry. My web site is more popular than ever and I was informing some people about life in East Germany 1949-1989. Did you know that East Germany sold 34 000 political prisoners in that time and collected about €50 000:- for each of them - totally € 1 700 million! That is 1 700 times more than what you can win at Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge (topic).

Re gravity assist math it does not exist! If a space craft approaches a planet at high speed, the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft so it crashes on the planet or burns up in the atmosphere. Only silly gravity assist sect members believe otherwise = it is religion.

A spacecraft will be accelerated towards the centre of gravity of the planet in question. Thi does not mean it is travelling directly towards it. This can be demonstrated using a simple excel model.

As a spacecraft is accelerated toward the centre of gravity of the planet in question means that it is travelling towards it at the approach, i.e. it changes direction prior crossover/passing. All models assume otherwise.


*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1087 on: March 27, 2015, 11:52:28 AM »
Re gravity assist math it does not exist! If a space craft approaches a planet at high speed, the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft so it crashes on the planet or burns up in the atmosphere. Only silly gravity assist sect members believe otherwise = it is religion.

Yeah, the space craft would accelerate towards the planet but it also has lateral velocity.  The space craft would miss the surface and be fling in some other direction when such velocity is present, and there is nothing that would cause it to slow down.  I can name many games and simulators woich simulate gravity assists, including Orbiter.  Do you by change have any proof (mathematical or otherwise) that gravity assists are impossible?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1088 on: March 27, 2015, 11:55:18 AM »
As a spacecraft is accelerated toward the centre of gravity of the planet in question means that it is travelling towards it at the approach, i.e. it changes direction prior crossover/passing. All models assume otherwise.

Velocity and acceleration are not the same thing.  The ship is accelerating towards the planet but it also has lateral velocity.  If you don't believe me then throwa ball, it will hit the Earth because it is not going at escape velocity but it's lateral velocity will be the same when it lands then it was when you threw it.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39385
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1089 on: March 27, 2015, 12:01:11 PM »
As a spacecraft is accelerated toward the centre of gravity of the planet in question means that it is travelling towards it at the approach, i.e. it changes direction prior crossover/passing. All models assume otherwise.
You you understand that when you're aiming your spacecraft at a planet, your target isn't actually the planet, but a spot in space a certain distance ahead of or behind (depending on the nature of the encounter) where the planet will be when you get there, don't you?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1090 on: March 27, 2015, 12:38:05 PM »
As a spacecraft is accelerated toward the centre of gravity of the planet in question means that it is travelling towards it at the approach, i.e. it changes direction prior crossover/passing. All models assume otherwise.

Velocity and acceleration are not the same thing.  The ship is accelerating towards the planet but it also has lateral velocity.  If you don't believe me then throwa ball, it will hit the Earth because it is not going at escape velocity but it's lateral velocity will be the same when it lands then it was when you threw it.

Acceleration is change of velocity and if you accelerate in one direction in space, e.g. towards the centre of gravity of a fast moving planet, while you yourself are moving in another direction, e.g. to miss the planet, I can assure you that your direction of velocity, e.g. missing the planet will change. 
It is basic gravity assist math.
But it OT. Topic is I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge, which nobody has.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1091 on: March 27, 2015, 12:49:46 PM »
As a spacecraft is accelerated toward the centre of gravity of the planet in question means that it is travelling towards it at the approach, i.e. it changes direction prior crossover/passing. All models assume otherwise.

Velocity and acceleration are not the same thing.  The ship is accelerating towards the planet but it also has lateral velocity.  If you don't believe me then throwa ball, it will hit the Earth because it is not going at escape velocity but it's lateral velocity will be the same when it lands then it was when you threw it.

Acceleration is change of velocity and if you accelerate in one direction in space, e.g. towards the centre of gravity of a fast moving planet, while you yourself are moving in another direction, e.g. to miss the planet, I can assure you that your direction of velocity, e.g. missing the planet will change. 
It is basic gravity assist math.
But it OT. Topic is I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge, which nobody has.

It is not off-topic, it goes to your inability to properly adjudicate your own contest due to an intellectual deficiency.
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1092 on: March 27, 2015, 01:27:14 PM »
Heiwa, where did you disappear to?

Let's not ask LOL.  With a bit of luck, we may have seen the last of him.  Hopefully he's departed to poison the intellectual well at some other as yet unsuspecting forum.
   

Sorry to make you worry.

Damn... I spoke too soon.  Once again the collective IQ of this forum has dropped by 95 IQ points.

Please go away Bjφrkman—for good—and let us keep the forum's IQ in triple digits.  Please?

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1093 on: March 27, 2015, 04:03:20 PM »
Re gravity assist math it does not exist! If a space craft approaches a planet at high speed, the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft so it crashes on the planet or burns up in the atmosphere. Only silly gravity assist sect members believe otherwise = it is religion.

You sound like a broken record, and I already showed you how this is false. Tangential velocity and centripetal acceleration.
Next.

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2107
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1094 on: March 27, 2015, 04:08:59 PM »
Welcome to Heiwa. It makes these threads so much cleaner to block him.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1095 on: March 27, 2015, 05:29:32 PM »
Acceleration is change of velocity and if you accelerate in one direction in space, e.g. towards the centre of gravity of a fast moving planet, while you yourself are moving in another direction, e.g. to miss the planet, I can assure you that your direction of velocity, e.g. missing the planet will change.

Go to this online simulator, select the slingshot preset, and press start.  That simulator seems to think that slingshots are possible, as does every other orbital physics simulator in existence.  Why is that?  Do you think that all of these people are in on a conspiracy?  it would probably be easier to ask who is not in on the conspiracy ::)

It is basic gravity assist math.

Please point out where you posted any actual math, I can't find it.  The number pad on your keyboarded must be gathering a lot of dust.

But it OT. Topic is I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge, which nobody has.

I have recorded myself doing most of the Orbiter Apollo mission from launch to just before lunar liftoff.  I plan on recording the return trip today.  What more do you want?

You also haven't answered my question: assuming that space travel is real is it possible to win your challenge?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1096 on: March 27, 2015, 09:19:24 PM »


It is basic gravity assist math.

Please point out where you posted any actual math, I can't find it.  The number pad on your keyboarded must be gathering a lot of dust.



I have recorded myself doing most of the Orbiter Apollo mission from launch to just before lunar liftoff.  I plan on recording the return trip today.  What more do you want?

You also haven't answered my question: assuming that space travel is real is it possible to win your challenge?

My math is from http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath114/kmath114.htm .

If a space craft X with speed v approaches a planet and the planet has speed U in the opposite direction in space, the planet will kick the space craft in the opposite direction with new speed  2U + v.

If the planet is stationary in space - U = 0 - the space craft will apparently just turn 180° around the planet at constant speed v.

I doubt it very much. I think the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft.

I suggest you check the math behind any simulations before you use them. It seems most space simulations assume space is 2-D, etc.

It seems all 2-D space simulations also ignore that the Sun rotates around a BLACK HOLE in the centre of the Milky Way.

As human space travel is not possible under any circumstances, you cannot win my Challenge. Do you really believe Juri Gagarin flew once around the Earth 1961 and then landed without a heat shield? Please, wake up.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2015, 09:21:59 PM by Heiwa »

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 39385
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1097 on: March 27, 2015, 09:47:23 PM »
If a space craft X with speed v approaches a planet and the planet has speed U in the opposite direction in space, the planet will kick the space craft in the opposite direction with new speed  2U + v.

If the planet is stationary in space - U = 0 - the space craft will apparently just turn 180° around the planet at constant speed v.

I doubt it very much. I think the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft.
Of course the planet will attract the spacecraft.  That's why it's called gravity assist. 

As human space travel is not possible under any circumstances, you cannot win my Challenge. Do you really believe Juri Gagarin flew once around the Earth 1961 and then landed without a heat shield? Please, wake up.
Who said Gagarin didn't have a heat shield?  ???
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1098 on: March 27, 2015, 09:49:32 PM »
As human space travel is not possible under any circumstances...

This from a glorified boat mechanic.  I can't stop laughing.....

      ;D    ;D    ;D

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1099 on: March 27, 2015, 10:50:20 PM »
My math is from http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath114/kmath114.htm .

That website does not accurately depict the shape of the trajectory, it actually looks more like this:

Yep, that's a hyperbolic trajectory and the black lines represent asymptotes.  Sorry, those words are probably too mathematical for you to understand.

If a space craft X with speed v approaches a planet and the planet has speed U in the opposite direction in space, the planet will kick the space craft in the opposite direction with new speed  2U + v.

It will only do that if it does a 180 degree gravity assist, but depending on how close you get to the planet you can get different angles.

If the planet is stationary in space - U = 0 - the space craft will apparently just turn 180° around the planet at constant speed v.



No, ships go faster as they get closer to the planet they are orbiting.  Please take some time and study Kepler's laws of planetary motion.

I doubt it very much. I think the gravity of the planet will attract the space craft.

Yeah, I doubt it too.  In fact I doubt it so much that I don't see how any reasonable person would come to the conclusion that other people think that without even doing research.

I suggest you check the math behind any simulations before you use them. It seems most space simulations assume space is 2-D, etc.

Orbits are always along a 2D plane and as long as gravity follows the inverse square law (which assumes 3D space) then it would perfectly simulate orbits as they exist in 3D space except for plane changes, which is not a major thing.  Also, there are literally hundreds (probably more) of programs that all seem to agree that gravity assists are possible, including many 3D ones.  Does this mean that everyone ever involved in the development of an orbital physics simulator is in on some conspiracy?

It seems all 2-D space simulations also ignore that the Sun rotates around a BLACK HOLE in the centre of the Milky Way.

You don't know how gravity works, do you...  The black hole in the center of the galaxy poles the entire solar system more or less the same (the tidal forces involved are many orders of magnitude too small to make a measurable effect), and so the solar system behaves just as it would if it weren't orbiting a black hole just like how the Moon doesn't seem to care that the Earth is orbiting the Sun.  Also, the gravity we feel from that black hole at this distance is 10,000 times weaker then the gravity you feel from a person standing 30 feet away from you.

As human space travel is not possible under any circumstances,

Human space travel is possible only when the people designing and flying the rockets are smarter then you, but not everybody has you allergies of math and research, and those who take the time to learn what they are disputing against (unlike you) are called "smart people".

you cannot win my Challenge.

Yeah, not if you keep moving the goal posts.  Now could you please answer my question: assuming space travel is real is it possible to win your challenge?  A simple yes or no would suffice.

Do you really believe Juri Gagarin flew once around the Earth 1961 and then landed without a heat shield? Please, wake up.

Who said it didn't have a heat shield?  Also, his name is spelled "Yuri Gagarin".
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1100 on: March 27, 2015, 11:58:01 PM »
My math is from http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath114/kmath114.htm .

That website does not accurately depict the shape of the trajectory, it actually looks more like this:

Yep, that's a hyperbolic trajectory and the black lines represent asymptotes.  Sorry, those words are probably too mathematical for you to understand.


LOL. The blue planet is stationary and the space craft trajectory only bends a little ... in 2-D. It is not math. It is a cartoon. LOL.

This Yuri Gagarin clown landed without capsule/heat shield using a parachute 1961. One way or another he got out of his space capsule high above the cosmodrome at Kazahkstan, dived down to earth, released the chute and landed safe and sound. The Soviet propaganda made the rest. A new Hero of the Soviet Union was born! 

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1101 on: March 28, 2015, 12:24:09 AM »
LOL. The blue planet is stationary

So?  The same math applies to a moving planet, it's all about your frame of reference.

and the space craft trajectory only bends a little

It would bend more if it passed closer to the planet.

... in 2-D.

Yeah, orbits always follow a 2D plane.  Why can't they be represented in 2D?

It is not math. It is a cartoon. LOL.

Are you saying that it's impossible for a "cartoon" (or illustration) to depict a real thing?  That ilustration did accurately illustrate that gravity assist trajectories are hyperbolic, which debunks many of your points.

This Yuri Gagarin clown landed without capsule/heat shield using a parachute 1961. One way or another he got out of his space capsule high above the cosmodrome at Kazahkstan, dived down to earth, released the chute and landed safe and sound. The Soviet propaganda made the rest. A new Hero of the Soviet Union was born!

Yeah, that was aftet reentry when he jumped out of the capsule.  Seriously, do research.

You have hardly addressed any of my points and you still havn't answered my question: asuming space travel is real, is it possible to win your challenge?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1102 on: March 28, 2015, 01:55:07 AM »

... in 2-D.

Yeah, orbits always follow a 2D plane.  Why can't they be represented in 2D?


We are discussing an alleged gravity assist kick of a small space craft at a certain speed/direction that encounters at small distance a big planet at another speed/direction.

It is suggested that, if the encounter is almost head on (missing at a certain distance) in the same plane (a 2-D encounter - speed vectors are in same plane), the space craft with speed original v is kicked around 180° by the planet that comes in the opposite direction with speed U. The space craft then has speed 2U+v in the opposite direction, i.e. it has turned 180° while remaining of course in the 2-D plane.

However, space is 3-D and it is very difficult to arrange an encounter between a space craft travelling at a certain speed/direction(orbit) in one plane and a planet travelling at another speed/direction (orbit) in another plane.

But if it is possible (which I doubt) it is suggested that the big planet will kick the small space craft in another direction at, I assume, an increased speed.

I have only tested the proposed math solution in 2-D with planet speed U = 0. Then the kick is a 180° turn of the space craft at constant speed v and constant altitude above the planet. No increase of speed. The kick is just a 180° turn around the planet.

Evidently it is not possible. The gravity force of the planet will attract the space craft, so the altitude cannot be constant.

NASA has suggested that it is easy to demonstrate above by sending a space craft towards the Moon and that the space craft with a certain arrival speed v at the Moon will do a 180° turn around the Moon and then return with a departure speed v in the opposite direction. It is evidently nonsense.

Reason is that there is no arrival speed v. As soon as the space craft is in the vicinity of the Moon it goes faster and faster attracted by the gravity of the Moon and will crash (unless it misses altogether - no gravity attraction).

Part of the Heiwa Challenge 2 (the Moon trip) (topic) is to explain how you brake your space craft approaching the Moon to avoid a crash. You can e.g. try to first fly into a Moon orbit (Apollo 1960's) and later land with a another module, or do it Tintin Belgian style 1953, i.e. brake all the time until you arrive at Moon surface at speed 0 - touch down.

Both possibilites are impossible ... like any gravity assist kick in space. Only silly, religious fools believe in Father Christmas, Moses getting stone tablets from the sky, Jesus walking on water, Muhammed hearing voices in a cave, people flying in space, etc, etc.

They do not understand the God made such things impossible.




*

crocodile

  • 60
  • Only love
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1103 on: March 28, 2015, 03:08:48 AM »
Both possibilites are impossible ... like any gravity assist kick in space. Only silly, religious fools believe in Father Christmas, Moses getting stone tablets from the sky, Jesus walking on water, Muhammed hearing voices in a cave, people flying in space, etc, etc.
;D You're good Anders!!!!
But, don't you know modern science is a new religion? After Jesus walking on the water and else, we will have Astronuts walking on the moon, and then on Mars.
Ah ah ah
Only love

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1104 on: March 28, 2015, 03:11:34 AM »
Only silly, religious fools believe in Father Christmas, Moses getting stone tablets from the sky, Jesus walking on water, Muhammed hearing voices in a cave, people flying in space, etc, etc.

They do not understand the God made such things impossible.

Uhhhhhhh...

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1105 on: March 28, 2015, 04:55:45 AM »
My math is from http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath114/kmath114.htm .

That website does not accurately depict the shape of the trajectory, it actually looks more like this:

Yep, that's a hyperbolic trajectory and the black lines represent asymptotes.  Sorry, those words are probably too mathematical for you to understand.


LOL. The blue planet is stationary and the space craft trajectory only bends a little ... in 2-D. It is not math. It is a cartoon. LOL.

You seem to think that all gravity kicks require a near 180 degree turn. Why do you cling to that delusion?  You also seem t struggle with a diagram meant to simplify a principle. I imagine in practice that trajectories would be chosen to make it as close to a 2D problem as possible.

Quote
This Yuri Gagarin clown landed without capsule/heat shield using a parachute 1961. One way or another he got out of his space capsule high above the cosmodrome at Kazahkstan, dived down to earth, released the chute and landed safe and sound. The Soviet propaganda made the rest. A new Hero of the Soviet Union was born!

Jealous?
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1106 on: March 28, 2015, 09:09:53 AM »
Getting back to the topic subject of Heiwa's challenge.:

How long is the queue for those who claim they have won the challenge ?
Stick close , very close , to your P.C.and never go to sea
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Look out your window , see what you shall see
And you all may be Rulers of The Flat Earth Society

Chorus:
Yes ! Never, never, never,  ever go to sea !

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1107 on: March 28, 2015, 09:50:56 AM »
We are discussing an alleged gravity assist kick of a small space craft at a certain speed/direction that encounters at small distance a big planet at another speed/direction.

It is suggested that, if the encounter is almost head on (missing at a certain distance) in the same plane (a 2-D encounter - speed vectors are in same plane), the space craft with speed original v is kicked around 180° by the planet that comes in the opposite direction with speed U. The space craft then has speed 2U+v in the opposite direction, i.e. it has turned 180° while remaining of course in the 2-D plane.

Yeah, but frame of reference stuff meas that it's not going the same velocity relative to, say, the Sun.

However, space is 3-D and it is very difficult to arrange an encounter between a space craft travelling at a certain speed/direction(orbit) in one plane and a planet travelling at another speed/direction (orbit) in another plane.

That's why space crafts have on bored computers and take so much math to navigate.  Nobody said that rocket science was easy.

But if it is possible (which I doubt) it is suggested that the big planet will kick the small space craft in another direction at, I assume, an increased speed.

I have only tested the proposed math solution in 2-D with planet speed U = 0. Then the kick is a 180° turn of the space craft at constant speed v and constant altitude above the planet. No increase of speed. The kick is just a 180° turn around the planet.

Nope, it just changes it's direction and the increase in speed comes from frame of reference stuff.  Let's imagine that you have a bouncy ball and you throw it at a wall, it will come back to you at the same speed you threw it at.  But planets are not stationary, so imagine you threw it at a train going towards you at 100 miles per hour, relative to the train the ball would be going towards it at 100 miles per hour and so after bouncing it will go away from train at 100 miles per hour, but to a stationary observer the bouncy ball went from 0 to 200 miles per hour.  That's sort of how gravity assists work.  Gravity assists also don't have to be 180 degrees, they can be any angle between 180 degrees and 0 degrees.

Evidently it is not possible. The gravity force of the planet will attract the space craft, so the altitude cannot be constant.

Who said that the altitude would be constant?  I already told you that the trajectories depicted in that website are not correct.

NASA has suggested that it is easy to demonstrate above by sending a space craft towards the Moon and that the space craft with a certain arrival speed v at the Moon will do a 180° turn around the Moon and then return with a departure speed v in the opposite direction. It is evidently nonsense.

No, it's not always in the opposite direction and there is a lot of frame of reference stuff involved.

Reason is that there is no arrival speed v. As soon as the space craft is in the vicinity of the Moon it goes faster and faster attracted by the gravity of the Moon and will crash (unless it misses altogether - no gravity attraction).

Literally every orbital physics simulator there is (including one that I made myself) thinks otherwise.

Part of the Heiwa Challenge 2 (the Moon trip) (topic) is to explain how you brake your space craft approaching the Moon to avoid a crash. You can e.g. try to first fly into a Moon orbit (Apollo 1960's) and later land with a another module, or do it Tintin Belgian style 1953, i.e. brake all the time until you arrive at Moon surface at speed 0 - touch down.

I have already made a video of me doing that in Orbiter and posted it on YouTube.  here it is:
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">

I still need to do the return trip, I will record and upload that today.

Both possibilites are impossible ... like any gravity assist kick in space. Only silly, religious fools believe in Father Christmas, Moses getting stone tablets from the sky, Jesus walking on water, Muhammed hearing voices in a cave, people flying in space, etc, etc.

They do not understand the God made such things impossible.

Ummm...  What?
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1108 on: March 28, 2015, 11:55:45 AM »
Evidently it is not possible. The gravity force of the planet will attract the space craft, so the altitude cannot be constant.

Who said that the altitude would be constant?  I already told you that the trajectories depicted in that website are not correct.

NASA has suggested that it is easy to demonstrate above by sending a space craft towards the Moon and that the space craft with a certain arrival speed v at the Moon will do a 180° turn around the Moon and then return with a departure speed v in the opposite direction. It is evidently nonsense.

No, it's not always in the opposite direction and there is a lot of frame of reference stuff involved.

Reason is that there is no arrival speed v. As soon as the space craft is in the vicinity of the Moon it goes faster and faster attracted by the gravity of the Moon and will crash (unless it misses altogether - no gravity attraction).

Literally every orbital physics simulator there is (including one that I made myself) thinks otherwise.

Part of the Heiwa Challenge 2 (the Moon trip) (topic) is to explain how you brake your space craft approaching the Moon to avoid a crash. You can e.g. try to first fly into a Moon orbit (Apollo 1960's) and later land with a another module, or do it Tintin Belgian style 1953, i.e. brake all the time until you arrive at Moon surface at speed 0 - touch down.

I have already made a video of me doing that in Orbiter and posted it on YouTube.  here it is:
" class="bbc_link" target="_blank">


If you study the NASA reports of the Apollo 11 Moon trip you will find that the velocity of the space craft Apollo 11 changed all the time during trip Earth/Moon.

It was maximum when leaving Earth. Then it slowed down all the the way to the Moon until Moon gravity became stronger than Earth gravity, when the velocity started to increase again in direction to the Moon.

Apollo 11 was always subject to strong gravity forces of Earth and Moon all the time. Obviously the velocity of Apollo 11 cannot be constant during the trip.

In the meantime Earth orbits the Sun and the Moon orbits the Earth.
 
It seems your video does not reflect this. Suggest your Earth, Moon and space ship velocity vectors are relative the Sun (assumed stationary).

It seems you do not believe in Tintin landing straight on the Moon 1953 but that it is a good idea to enter Moon orbit first and calm down and have a look Apollo 11 1969 style. Why not? But how to do it? Does your simulator assume the Moon is stationary?

In order to win my Challenge 2 I need a record of the space ship velocity vector during Moon orbit insert, when velocity is reduced from arrival speed to constant Moon orbit velocity and direction changes from away from Earth to into Moon orbit and fuel consumed. I am also curious to know in what direction your brake force is applied during this complex manoeuvre.

You know, if you apply the brake force in the wrong direction at any time, you will not enter Moon orbit but miss the target.

Good luck.

PS The video is really bad. 100% CGI with no math. Looks like the 911 WTC 1/2 top down global collapses (the Heiwa 1 challenge). 




*

Heiwa

  • 8043
Re: I won Heiwa's €1,000,000 challenge
« Reply #1109 on: March 28, 2015, 12:02:13 PM »
My math is from http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath114/kmath114.htm .

That website does not accurately depict the shape of the trajectory, it actually looks more like this:

Yep, that's a hyperbolic trajectory and the black lines represent asymptotes.  Sorry, those words are probably too mathematical for you to understand.


LOL. The blue planet is stationary and the space craft trajectory only bends a little ... in 2-D. It is not math. It is a cartoon. LOL.

You seem to think that all gravity kicks require a near 180 degree turn. Why do you cling to that delusion?  You also seem t struggle with a diagram meant to simplify a principle. I imagine in practice that trajectories would be chosen to make it as close to a 2D problem as possible.

?? In above figure I just see a green moving point passing a stationary blue point. If the blue point moves left the green point will collide with the blue point.  Suggest you improve the presentation with two moving points, etc, etc.

I think all gravity kicks are religious illusions.