Distances in the universe

  • 614 Replies
  • 82068 Views
*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #210 on: May 01, 2017, 01:50:21 AM »
They accelerate towards each other. That is what an orbit is.

You still don't get it.

Just like in the two boats pulling on a rope example, both the Earth and the Moon SHOULD START MOVING TOWARDS EACH OTHER, VISIBLY.
Please explain why
the Earth and the Moon SHOULD START MOVING TOWARDS EACH OTHER, VISIBLY.
When all the force does is provide the centripetal force to keep the moon in orbit.

Easy.

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #211 on: May 01, 2017, 02:22:42 AM »
Just like in the two boats pulling on a rope example, both the Earth and the Moon SHOULD START MOVING TOWARDS EACH OTHER, VISIBLY.
Lets get your ignorance of the boats and ropes out of the way before going into something more complex.

It doesn't get any simpler than this (your alphabet soup is useless).
It isn't soup, it is simply explaining what is happening in a nice simple way. It can't get much simpler than that.

Here is how the two pairs work out.
Do it like I asked, don't just repeat the same crap.
If you can't put it in the format I asked for it shows you do not understand what you are saying, or what I am saying, so can't actually object to it.

If you like, you can be more explicit, e.g. rahter than X, say boat X. Rather than S say the string.

e.g.:
Boat X pulls on the string with force A.
The string pulls back on boat X with force -A.

Can you express your action/reaction pairs in a form like that?
If you can't it shows you have no idea what you are talking about.

Separate them clearly into their pairs, don't try adding a bunch together.
For each pair, clearly indicate what the entities are and what the force is.

Boat x is pulling on the string with force A. Reaction: the rope is pulling back with force A. AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING WITH FORCE B. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force B.
This is not a pair.
You also don't make it clear what is happening in one key part.
What is BOAT Y pulling on here with force B? Is it pulling on boat X or the string?

Boat y is pulling on the string with force B. Reaction: the rope is pulling back with force B. AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT X IS PULLING WITH FORCE A. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat x with force A.
That is basically the same as what you said before. Why repeat it?

TOTAL, PERFECT BALANCE.
Yes, perfect balance when A=-B, resulting in no net force on the string, with each boat only applying a force to the string and the string being all that applies the force to the boats.

A FULFILLMENT OF THE DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX: TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED.
No, just the force needed, no doubling at all.

You still don't seem to understand that all the forces balance out completely and perfectly in the correct model, WHICH DOES FEATURE TWICE THE FORCES OF YOUR MODEL, JUST AS IT SHOULD.
No, the correct model features the same forces of my model, as my model is the correct one.
Your completely unbalanced model does not work, and instead completely violates the laws of motion.

Perhaps now you will understand.
I already understood, long before you started spouting your nonsense to me.

A total debunking of your comments.
Repeating the same refuted bullshit, especially when you are completely unable to clearly indicate what each pair is, does not debunk me at all.

Boat X will move towards boat Y based on the application of these TWO FORCES.
But if it is balanced, only one force is acting on boat X, that of the string.

Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.
But the only force between boat X and the string is the reaction force of boat X pulling on the string. So no, there aren't those 2 forces, just one, the reaction force.

Extremely simple to understand.
Yes, your mistake is quite easy to understand and point out. Why can't you understand it?

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #212 on: May 01, 2017, 02:36:17 AM »
Please explain why
the Earth and the Moon SHOULD START MOVING TOWARDS EACH OTHER, VISIBLY.


Sure.

The analogy between the two boats on a lake pulled by a rope and the Earth-Moon system is perfect.

In fact, here is modern science explaning this system:

Gravity is a force.

Gravity is directed towards the center of the orbit i.e. the sun.

That makes gravity the centripetal force.

Imagine a ball attached to a string and you are holding the other end of the string and moving your hand in such a way that the ball is in circular motion. Then tension in the string is centripetal force.

Now, ball = earth

you = sun

tension in the string = gravity


Gravity is the reason one object orbits another. An analogy is swinging a ball on a string over your head. The string is like gravity, and it keeps the ball in orbit. If you let go of the string, the ball flies away from you. (Dr. Eric Christian, April 2011)


http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4569 (UCSB Science Line)

Centrifugal force acts on a rotating object in a direction opposite the axis of rotation. Imagine that you have a tennis ball tied to a string. If you swing the tennis ball on the string around in a circle, you would feel the ball tugging on the string. That is the centrifugal force on the ball. It is counteracted by tension in the string that you are holding. In this example, the tension force in the string is like the gravitational force between the earth and the sun. The ball doesn't get closer or farther from your hand. If you suddenly cut the string, the ball would go flying away, but that wont happen to the earth because of the sun's gravity.

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4583

Forces can make something move or stop something from moving. For a planet in orbit around the sun, the string is invisible. That invisible string is the gravitational force between the Earth and the sun.



Then, just like in the example with the two boats, we should see VISIBLY the Earth and the Moon move toward each other.

It is that simple.

Precise calculations here:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1723400#msg1723400

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #213 on: May 01, 2017, 02:47:06 AM »
You have already used half of the letters of the English alphabet.

Totally useless.

You are unable to explain a very simple situation.

Two boats on a lake, connected by a rope, which is being pulled.


Boat x will move toward boat y based on TWO FORCES.


What is BOAT Y pulling on here with force B? Is it pulling on boat X or the string?

A very deep question.

It is pulling both.


No, just the force needed, no doubling at all.

BUT THERE ARE TWO FORCES INVOLVED.

DOUBLE THE FORCES OF THE WRONG APPLICATION OF THE THIRD LAW.


Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.

Extremely simple to understand.


But if it is balanced, only one force is acting on boat X, that of the string.

See how deviously you are trying to deceive your readers?

Here is how the two pairs work out.

Boat x is pulling on the string with force A. Reaction: the rope is pulling back with force A. AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING WITH FORCE B. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force B.

Boat y is pulling on the string with force B. Reaction: the rope is pulling back with force B. AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT X IS PULLING WITH FORCE A. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat x with force A.



Extremely simple to understand.

TOTAL, PERFECT BALANCE.


A FULFILLMENT OF THE DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX: TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED.


Boat X will move toward boat Y exactly due to these two forces, exactly what we would see in real life situation.

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #214 on: May 01, 2017, 03:07:20 AM »
You have already used half of the letters of the English alphabet.

Totally useless.


Your equation = Totally useless.

A lot of letters

Totally useless = RHS   QED

“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #215 on: May 01, 2017, 04:33:00 AM »

Boat x is pulling on the string with force A. Reaction: the rope is pulling back with force A. AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING WITH FORCE B. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force B.
If "Boat x is pulling on the string with force A" the tension in the rope is "force A". It can't be anything else.

Quote from: sandokhan
Boat y is pulling on the string with force B.
But the tension on the rope must be the same along the whole length of the rope, so the tension on the rope is "force A".
So "force B" must be the same as "force B".

Quote from: sandokhan
Reaction: the rope is pulling back with force B. AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT X IS PULLING WITH FORCE A. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat x with force A.[/size]
No, they are all the same force. It is so simple to understand.

Quote from: sandokhan

Extremely simple to understand.

TOTAL, PERFECT BALANCE.

A FULFILLMENT OF THE DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX: TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED.

Boat X will move toward boat Y exactly due to these two forces, exactly what we would see in real life situation.
Both boats will move toward each other, pulled by the one force, "force A",

They are all the same force and equal to "force A". End of story.

There is no "DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX".

Sometimes I think that there is a conceptual problem in understanding Newton''s Third Law.
This leads some people to think the the action force and reaction force are separate forces.

Every force can be looked on as "having two ends".
You can call the ends action and reaction but they are just the two ends of the same force.

Gravitational attraction is always between a pair of masses.
The force the earth exerts on the moon is just one "end" of the gravitational attraction of the earth-moon pair of masse's and
the force the moon exerts on the earth is the other one "end" of the same force.

There is another way of looking at (Newtonisn) gravitation and that is in terms of gravitational fields.
This can be convenient if one object is so large that its gravitation dominates over others in its neighbourhood.
The earth-moon pair do not quite fulfil this with the earth being about 81 times more massive than the moon, but it's still a useful approximation.

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #216 on: May 01, 2017, 04:49:03 AM »
The analogy between the two boats on a lake pulled by a rope and the Earth-Moon system is perfect.
No it isn't, because you start with the boats stationary. In the Earth-moon system, they are moving sideways as well.
But like I said, lets wait until you understand the boats and string.

You are unable to explain a very simple situation.
No. I explained it quite simply, stating what forces are involved.
You repeatedly assert that there are more, but are unable to explain it in any simple honest way.


Boat x will move toward boat y based on TWO FORCES.
Then state what all the action/reaction pairs are. You seem to be completely incapable of doing that in any way that backs up your insane claims.

What is BOAT Y pulling on here with force B? Is it pulling on boat X or the string?
A very deep question.

It is pulling both.
No it isn't.
Not in reality and not in any action/reaction pair.
Either boat Y is directly pulling on boat X, or boat Y is pulling on the string and the string is pulling on boat X.

You can't have it both ways, and that is the cause of your problem. You try to have it both ways, which results in your double counting.

Like I said, list all the action/reaction pairs, or admit you can't.

Here is how the two pairs work out.
And yet again, you fail to provide it in any meaningful way which clearly identifies each action/reaction pair, the entities the pair acts upon and the force involved.

Why is that? Are you incapable of doing so, or do you realise that doing so would your show your mistakes to the world?

A FULFILLMENT OF THE DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX: TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED.
Yes, because you are counting them twice, not because they exist twice in reality.

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #217 on: May 01, 2017, 04:49:55 AM »
Now then, are you going to provide a list of the action/reaction pairs involved like I have done to accurately and honestly analyse the situation, or are you going to continue your dishonest BS?

Or do you just not understand how I have said it and you want me to spell it out with more words?

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #218 on: May 01, 2017, 04:55:44 AM »
Here is the way with more words, formatted like you have (but with the missing details. I will even highlight them in red for you):
Boat x is pulling on the string rope with force A. Reaction: the rope is pulling back on boat x with force -A.

AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING on the rope WITH FORCE B. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force -B.

These are the 2 action/reaction pairs involved.
Boat x is pulling on the string, and so is boat y.
The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

Thus they can be rewritten as:
Boat x is pulling on the string rope with force A. Reaction: the rope is pulling back on boat x with force -A.

AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING on the rope WITH FORCE -AB. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force AB.

And there we have it, 4 forces, 2 action/reaction pairs, and all perfectly balanced, all without any BS doubling of forces.

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is A.
The net force on the string is A-A=0.

Can you point out anything wrong with that?

*

Gumby

  • 828
  • I don't exist.
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #219 on: May 01, 2017, 10:06:10 AM »
Considering that Sandy is a proud ignorant in physics, why do you try to discuss with him?

It's a waste of time! The poor Sandy is totally loony...
How dumb can you be?
I think MH370 was hijacked and the persons who did the hijacking were indeed out to prove a flat earth.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #220 on: May 01, 2017, 11:13:55 AM »
Can you point out anything wrong with that?

Sure.

You shouldn't have posted it in the first place.


Just take a look at what you had the audacity to write.


These are the 2 action/reaction pairs involved.
Boat x is pulling on the string, and so is boat y.
The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.


A terrible blunder: you have just described HALF OF THE FORCES INVOLVED ON THE TWO BOATS X AND Y.

THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).

THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT Y: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT Y (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT Y) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT X (FORCE A).


How in the world can you make such silly mistakes?

Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.


TWO FORCES ACTING RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.


DOUBLE THE FORCES NEEDED TO DESCRIBE THE SITUATION IN NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.

THAT IS WHY IT IS CALLED THE DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX.

All you have done is to show your utter misunderstanding of the example.

The rest of your poorly written message amounts to nothing really.

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #221 on: May 01, 2017, 01:02:01 PM »
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #222 on: May 01, 2017, 01:54:12 PM »
Can you point out anything wrong with that?

Sure.

You shouldn't have posted it in the first place.
So just insults, no problem at all.

These are the 2 action/reaction pairs involved.
Boat x is pulling on the string, and so is boat y.
The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.


A terrible blunder: you have just described HALF OF THE FORCES INVOLVED ON THE TWO BOATS X AND Y.
If you think that is the case then point out exactly what you think each action/reaction pair is, as from what I can tell, that matches what you are saying.

THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).
But you don't say boat Y is pulling X with force B. You say it is pulling the string.

See, this is why I have told you to list your action/reaction pairs.
It gets rid of this childish nonsense.

Tell me exactly what your action/reaction pairs are, including what entities they are acting between and what force is involved.

Not this vague crap.

How in the world can you make such silly mistakes?
I come to the correct answer by honestly and rationally analysing the situation.
You just throw reason and sanity out the window and can't even honestly respond to a simple request.

Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.
Again, list the action/reaction pairs.

TWO FORCES ACTING RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.
So how many forces in total? 2? 4? 8? 12?

DOUBLE THE FORCES NEEDED TO DESCRIBE THE SITUATION IN NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.
Yes, because you are counting them twice.

THAT IS WHY IT IS CALLED THE DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX.
Except as it is just based upon your ignorance/dishonesty it is only a problem in your mind, not reality.

All you have done is to show your utter misunderstanding of the example.
No. You have repeatedly lied about the example to pretend there is a doubling of forces. You are yet to justify that baseless, bullshit claim.

You can't even simply list the action/reaction pairs.

The rest of your poorly written message amounts to nothing really.
i.e. you can't refute it, even with childish bullshit so you just insult me and pretend that's fine.

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #223 on: May 01, 2017, 02:01:23 PM »
Now, for once in your life can you do what has been asked of you?

Provide the action/reaction pairs in an explicit form where you clearly highlight what the 2 entities are in each case and what force is between each, separating each pair with a line break at lest.

For example (key parts highlighted in red):
Boat x is pulling on the rope with force A.
Reaction: the rope is pulling back on boat x with force -A.

Notice how each time I am specifying the 2 entities and the force?

This is in contrast to your one:
Quote
Boat x is pulling on the string with force A. Reaction: the rope is pulling back with force A. AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING WITH FORCE B. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force B.
You seem to be presenting this as a single action/reaction pair, even though 4 forces are involved.
To make it worse, you have this part:
Quote
BOAT Y IS PULLING WITH FORCE B. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force B.
You don't sate what boat Y is pulling. This is so you can pretend it is x instead of the rope.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2017, 02:04:53 PM by JackBlack »

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #224 on: May 01, 2017, 02:15:35 PM »
Sorry i don't want to derail the topic i started, but i want to chime in.
Globers seem to have accepted that the cosmos as proposed in the current hypothetical model is extremely vast.
The speed of light seems extremely slow for interstellar spacetravel in the current model.

I am curious though, setting all the startrek ''inventions'' to take hypothetical shortcuts aside, is there anyone of you that could possibly beieve aliens from another part of the gallaxy could somehow have develloped hyper technical means to visit earth ?

I ask this, because we can establish beforehand if any claim could ever meet the criteria we have set for the boundaries of ''organic'' spacetravel.
I know they will claim ''life'' elsewhere in the universe at some point in the near future, but is there anything rational that could explain the possibilities of aliens actually visiting us from a far away place ?

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #225 on: May 01, 2017, 02:20:46 PM »
Here, I will even be nice and get you started, so all you need to do is fill in the blank, and again, highlighted (and with the string/rope convention corrected so each time it says rope, and correcting the sign of the forces due to the reaction being equal BUT OPPOSITE), and removing the unneccesary "AT THE SAME TIME" part, and changing things from caps to lower sentence case and removing the "on" and "back" to make it consistent, and to make the action/reaction pair consistent, removing the "Reaction" label, and yes, there is a reason for each, every difference you make is to try and make the action/reaction pairs that you are counting twice look difference.):


Boat x is pulling the rope with force A.
The rope is pulling ____________ with force A.

Boat y is pulling ____________ with force B.
The rope is pulling boat y with force -B.


Boat y is pulling the rope with force B.
The rope is pulling ____________ with force -B.

Boat x is pulling ____________ with force A.
The rope is pulling boat x with force -A.



Do you notice how in 4 of the cases (one for each pair) you have left an entity out? That is so you can pretend these are different forces, be vague about what they are acting upon and thus double them.

A rational person could fill it the blank based upon how action/reaction pairs work. But you object to that.
For example, with your first pair, as the action is boat x pulling on the rope, the reaction will be the rope pulling on boat x.
Similarly, for the last one, as the reaction is the rope pulling on boat x, the action will be boat x pulling on the rope.
But now lets compare the first and last pair:
Boat x is pulling the rope with force A.
The rope is pulling boat x with force A.

Boat x is pulling the rope with force A.
The rope is pulling boat x with force -A.

Notice how they look quite similar?
That is because when you remove all the crap you put in there to make them superficially appear different and you explicitly state what the entities involved are, they are identical.
So yes, you have counted twice.

The same applies to the second and 3rd cases, they are the same pair.

So the 2 pairs you actually have, with the blanks filled in like a rational person would become:
Boat x is pulling the rope with force A.
The rope is pulling boat x with force A.

Boat y is pulling the rope with force B.
The rope is pulling boat y with force -B.

Just like what I said.

But you object to that.

So how about you state exactly what the action reaction pairs are?
All you need to do is fill in the blanks from this:
Code: [Select]
[color=red]Boat x[/color] is pulling [color=red]the rope[/color] with [color=red]force A[/color].
[color=red]The rope[/color] is pulling [color=red]____________[/color] with [color=red]force A[/color].

[color=red]Boat y[/color] is pulling [color=red]____________[/color] with [color=red]force B[/color].
[color=red]The rope[/color] is pulling [color=red]boat y[/color] with [color=red]force -B[/color].


[color=red]Boat y[/color] is pulling [color=red]the rope[/color] with [color=red]force B[/color].
[color=red]The rope[/color] is pulling [color=red]____________[/color] with [color=red]force -B[/color].

[color=red]Boat x[/color] is pulling [color=red]____________[/color] with [color=red]force A[/color].
[color=red]The rope[/color] is pulling [color=red]boat x[/color] with [color=red]force -A[/color].
Think you can manage that?

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #226 on: May 01, 2017, 02:25:44 PM »
Sorry i don't want to derail the topic i started, but i want to chime in.
Globers seem to have accepted that the cosmos as proposed in the current hypothetical model is extremely vast.
The speed of light seems extremely slow for interstellar spacetravel in the current model.

I am curious though, setting all the startrek ''inventions'' to take hypothetical shortcuts aside, is there anyone of you that could possibly beieve aliens from another part of the gallaxy could somehow have develloped hyper technical means to visit earth ?

I ask this, because we can establish beforehand if any claim could ever meet the criteria we have set for the boundaries of ''organic'' spacetravel.
I know they will claim ''life'' elsewhere in the universe at some point in the near future, but is there anything rational that could explain the possibilities of aliens actually visiting us from a far away place ?
There is a quite simple way. A generational ship.
That is where effectively a small colony goes off on the ship and lives on that ship, as it travels vast distances, presumably near the speed of light.

*

Wolvaccine

  • EXTRA SPICY MODE
  • 25833
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #227 on: May 01, 2017, 03:04:45 PM »
Time is relative. If you were travelling at the speed of light for example, point A to point B would be on top of each other. You would 'arrive' at your destination the moment you left. Of course for everyone else not on your ship, the 'light years' would have passed.

Quote from: sokarul
what website did you use to buy your wife? Did you choose Chinese over Russian because she can't open her eyes to see you?

What animal relates to your wife?

Know your place

*

disputeone

  • 24826
  • Or should I?
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #228 on: May 01, 2017, 03:14:19 PM »
Sorry i don't want to derail the topic i started, but i want to chime in.
Globers seem to have accepted that the cosmos as proposed in the current hypothetical model is extremely vast.
The speed of light seems extremely slow for interstellar spacetravel in the current model.

I am curious though, setting all the startrek ''inventions'' to take hypothetical shortcuts aside, is there anyone of you that could possibly beieve aliens from another part of the gallaxy could somehow have develloped hyper technical means to visit earth ?

I ask this, because we can establish beforehand if any claim could ever meet the criteria we have set for the boundaries of ''organic'' spacetravel.
I know they will claim ''life'' elsewhere in the universe at some point in the near future, but is there anything rational that could explain the possibilities of aliens actually visiting us from a far away place ?
There is a quite simple way. A generational ship.
That is where effectively a small colony goes off on the ship and lives on that ship, as it travels vast distances, presumably near the speed of light.

Or just wormholes, we think its possible for an advanced enough civilization.

I totally believe that there are other races with this technology.

Infinite universe means an infinite possibility of other life in the universe.
Quote from: Stash
I'm anti-judaism.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl
Whose narrative is it to not believe the government?

Quote from: Wolvaccine
speech should be a privilege. Not a right.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #229 on: May 01, 2017, 04:27:52 PM »
Sorry i don't want to derail the topic i started, but i want to chime in.
Globers seem to have accepted that the cosmos as proposed in the current hypothetical model is extremely vast.
The speed of light seems extremely slow for interstellar spacetravel in the current model.
Firstly, if the heliocentric model of the solar system is accepted, then the distances to the nearer stars can be measured by parallax to quite good accuracy, and at greatly reduced accuracy (more like an estimate) to about 500 light years.
Quote
ESA's Hipparcos satellite, unrestricted by the Earth's orbit or its atmosphere, spent three and a half years measuring star positions with unprecedented accuracy. Hipparcos allowed astronomers to measure the parallaxes of 120 000 stars, up to 500 light years (about 150 parsecs) from the Sun.
More in ESA, Educational Support, STELLAR DISTANCES, STELLAR PARALLAX
So, it is certainly true to say that the "speed of light seems extremely slow for interstellar spacetravel in the current model".
No argument there!

Quote from: dutchy
I am curious though, setting all the startrek ''inventions'' to take hypothetical shortcuts aside, is there anyone of you that could possibly beieve aliens from another part of the gallaxy could somehow have develloped hyper technical means to visit earth ?
I see no possibility with our current understanding of "space", but I've been wrong so many times in the past with my ideas of what is and is not possible,
that all I can say is: Who knows?

I'm old enough to have been sceptical enough to think that from my  :P vast knowledge of electronics  :P that  :-[ transistors were impossible  :-[! But, that was when I was young enough to know that I knew everything!
Now, I am afraid I have to agree with old Albert, "The more I learn, the more I realise that I don't know".

Quote from: dutchy
I ask this, because we can establish beforehand if any claim could ever meet the criteria we have set for the boundaries of ''organic'' spacetravel.
I am afraid that I do not see how "we can establish beforehand" and most past attempts to predict future advances have been woefully wrong.

Quote from: dutchy
I know they will claim ''life'' elsewhere in the universe at some point in the near future, but is there anything rational that could explain the possibilities of aliens actually visiting us from a far away place ?
How do you "know they will claim 'life' elsewhere"?

I don't know, but asserting things like
"they will claim 'life' elsewhere in the universe at some point in the near future."
is certainly no evidence against current cosmology and less still against the currently accepted heliocentric solar system.

*

disputeone

  • 24826
  • Or should I?
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #230 on: May 01, 2017, 04:36:15 PM »
Quote from: Stash
I'm anti-judaism.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl
Whose narrative is it to not believe the government?

Quote from: Wolvaccine
speech should be a privilege. Not a right.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #231 on: May 01, 2017, 09:22:08 PM »
These are the 2 action/reaction pairs involved.
Boat x is pulling on the string, and so is boat y.
The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

Thus they can be rewritten as:
Boat x is pulling on the string rope with force A. Reaction: the rope is pulling back on boat x with force -A.

AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING on the rope WITH FORCE -AB. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force AB.



You do not know how to count forces.

In a very simple example.

Just take a look at how your RE mind is justifying your mistakes.


First, you do not understand that there ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X.

AND TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT Y.


Very simple to understand, but not for you it seems.


AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING on the rope WITH FORCE -AB. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force AB.

What an unbelievable dexterity with which you pull of out the hat a -A and then proceed to REPLACE B WITH -A.

UNBELIEVABLE.


You have already exhausted each and every possibility here.

You have used half of the letters of the alphabet creating every combination/permutation possible of the rope, string, boat x, boat y.

To no avail.


You cannot explain a very simple fact.


THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).

THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT Y: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT Y (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT Y) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT X (FORCE A).


Make sure your read these words carefully, because the people are tired of you.

And your useless messages.


Clue: learn how to read and properly count the forces on boat X.


THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).

Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.


TWO FORCES ACTING RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.


DOUBLE THE FORCES NEEDED TO DESCRIBE THE SITUATION IN NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.


Again.


Boat X is pulling with force A the rope/boat Y.

The rope will react with force A.

Boat X will actually thrust forward from this force (and also force B).

At the same time boat Y IS ALSO PULLING WITH FORCE B on the rope/boat X.

TWO FORCES RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.

The rope will react with force B, which means boat Y will also thrust forward from this force B, (and also force A).

TWO FORCES RIGHT THERE ON BOAT Y.


You can deny all you want, but your equations do not add up to anything: just take a look at how easy it is for me to debunk your each message.


A TOTAL PERFECT BALANCE.

ALL THE FORCES BALANCE OUT PERFECTLY.

BUT THEY ARE TWICE THE NUMBER NEEDED IN NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.


THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).

THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT Y: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT Y (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT Y) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT X (FORCE A).


Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.


TWO FORCES ACTING RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.

Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #232 on: May 01, 2017, 09:38:41 PM »
These are the 2 action/reaction pairs involved.
Boat x is pulling on the string, and so is boat y.
The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

Thus they can be rewritten as:
Boat x is pulling on the string rope with force A. Reaction: the rope is pulling back on boat x with force -A.

AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING on the rope WITH FORCE -AB. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force AB.



You do not know how to count forces.

In a very simple example.

Just take a look at how your RE mind is justifying your mistakes.


First, you do not understand that there ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X.

AND TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT Y.


Very simple to understand, but not for you it seems.


AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING on the rope WITH FORCE -AB. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force AB.

What an unbelievable dexterity with which you pull of out the hat a -A and then proceed to REPLACE B WITH -A.

UNBELIEVABLE.


You have already exhausted each and every possibility here.

You have used half of the letters of the alphabet creating every combination/permutation possible of the rope, string, boat x, boat y.

To no avail.


You cannot explain a very simple fact.


THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).

THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT Y: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT Y (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT Y) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT X (FORCE A).


Make sure your read these words carefully, because the people are tired of you.

And your useless messages.


Clue: learn how to read and properly count the forces on boat X.


THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).

Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.


TWO FORCES ACTING RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.


DOUBLE THE FORCES NEEDED TO DESCRIBE THE SITUATION IN NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.


Again.


Boat X is pulling with force A the rope/boat Y.

The rope will react with force A.

Boat X will actually thrust forward from this force (and also force B).

At the same time boat Y IS ALSO PULLING WITH FORCE B on the rope/boat X.

TWO FORCES RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.

The rope will react with force B, which means boat Y will also thrust forward from this force B, (and also force A).

TWO FORCES RIGHT THERE ON BOAT Y.


You can deny all you want, but your equations do not add up to anything: just take a look at how easy it is for me to debunk your each message.


A TOTAL PERFECT BALANCE.

ALL THE FORCES BALANCE OUT PERFECTLY.

BUT THEY ARE TWICE THE NUMBER NEEDED IN NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.


THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).

THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT Y: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT Y (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT Y) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT X (FORCE A).


Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.


TWO FORCES ACTING RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.

Have you got a sticky keyboard? I think your having problems with your caps lock key again.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #233 on: May 02, 2017, 12:57:51 AM »
DOUBLE THE FORCES NEEDED TO DESCRIBE THE SITUATION IN NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.

Have you got a sticky keyboard? I think you're having problems with your caps lock key again.
No, it's his ctrl-V that's stuck. It's been that way for years.

« Last Edit: May 02, 2017, 05:15:56 AM by rabinoz »

Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #234 on: May 02, 2017, 01:04:09 AM »
By the amount of sense it all makes I think the real problem is his cat randomly walking all over the keys.

*

JackBlack

  • 21560
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #235 on: May 02, 2017, 04:45:31 AM »
AT THE SAME TIME, BOAT Y IS PULLING on the rope WITH FORCE -AB. Reaction: the rope is pulling boat y with force AB.[/i]
Copying and pasting like that removes the key formatting, such as where I have crossed out B.

You do not know how to count forces.
No, that would be you, that seems to continually double them rather than just counting them once.

In a very simple example.
Yet even with it being so simple, you still get it wrong.
You can't even do something as simple as clearly identify the action/reaction pairs.


First, you do not understand that there ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X.
That is because there isn't.
There is a single force, that of the rope pulling on boat x.

What an unbelievable dexterity with which you pull of out the hat a -A and then proceed to REPLACE B WITH -A.

UNBELIEVABLE.
You mean how I explain quite clearly that B must equal -A, where you are unable to refute it at all?

It is quite believable, at least if you which to believe reality instead your delusional bullshit.

You have already exhausted each and every possibility here.
And with each one, I completely refuted you, pointing out how your analysis was wrong.
And all you can do in response is spout crap.

You cannot explain a very simple fact.
No, I can explain the facts.
I can also explain why you are full of shit, as I have done so repeatedly. You are yet to refute anything or be able to justify your nonsense in any rational way.

THERE ARE TWO FORCES ACTING ON BOAT X: BOTH THE MAN PULLING IN BOAT X (THE ANCHORED FORCE IN BOAT X) AND THE PULLING FROM BOAT Y (FORCE B).
No. There is not.
There is a single force.
The man pulling in boat x is not acting on boat x. It is acting on the rope. This force, along with the person in boat y creates tension on the rope.
The only force acting on boat x is that from the rope. Yes, the person in boat y is pulling on the rope creating tension in it, but the only force pulling on boat x is the rope.

If you think there are 2 forces then do what I have asked repeatedly. Clearly state what each action/reaction pair is, including the force involved and the entities involved.
You continually not doing this indicates you likely know you are full of shit and just don't give a damn, or that you truly have no idea what you are talking about.
Which is it?

Make sure your read these words carefully, because the people are tired of you.
No. I'm sure we are all getting tired of your useless childish bullshit.

Yes, boat Y is pulling on boat X (through the rope/string), BUT ALSO BOAT X ITSELF (THE MAN DOING THE PULLING) IS APPLYING A PULLING FORCE ON THE ROPE AT THE SAME TIME.
Yes, which is the person pulling back on the string. Notice how it is applying a force to the string/rope, not to the boat?

Perhaps you should learn to identify things before trying to count them?

Again.
Like I said, clearly state the action/reaction pairs. Not this vauge crap.


Boat X is pulling with force A the rope/boat Y.

The rope will react with force A.

Boat X will actually thrust forward from this force (and also force B).

At the same time boat Y IS ALSO PULLING WITH FORCE B on the rope/boat X.

TWO FORCES RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.
No. Not 2 forces on boat x. You are counting the same force twice.
You have the force of the rope pulling on X, which you say is A.
And you have the force of the rope pulling on X which you say is B.
It is the same force.

You can't even decide if it is pulling the rope or the other boat.

You can deny all you want, but your equations do not add up to anything: just take a look at how easy it is for me to debunk your each message.
But you are yet to debunk a thing.
So far all you have done is say I am wrong and repeat the same refuted bullshit.
Yet each time you do so, I debunk it.

You can't even do something as simple as provide the action/reaction pairs in a entirely unambiguous way.

A TOTAL PERFECT BALANCE.

ALL THE FORCES BALANCE OUT PERFECTLY.
But they don't. You can't even decide what is pulling what.

BUT THEY ARE TWICE THE NUMBER NEEDED IN NEWTONIAN MECHANICS.
Because you are counting them twice, or counting the wrong force.


Now then, can you do like I asked?
Provide the action/reaction pairs in a way which clearly identifies the entities the pair is acting between and the associated force and its direction.
I will continue to ask for this until you provide it or until you grow tired of being refuted and flee.

*

rabinoz

  • 26528
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #236 on: May 02, 2017, 05:26:58 AM »
By the amount of sense it all makes I think the real problem is his cat randomly walking all over the keys.
No, it's more than that.
The cross-correlation coefficient between selected posts is 1 - δ, where δ approaches 0.
And the probability of this happening from his cat walking on the keys is roughly δn, where n+1 is the number of his posts examined.
I've no idea what all that means, but I hope it sounds impressive.
But talking of cats and random keys, what about:

Kitten on the Keys by Zez Confrey (newer version) | Cory Hall, pianist-composer

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #237 on: May 02, 2017, 06:09:38 AM »
In a real life situation, both boats, X and Y, will start to move toward each other.

Based on two simple forces.

It is not just boat Y that is pulling on the rope, and implicitly on boat X, BUT ALSO the man in boat X that is doing the pulling.

What we would see is boat X moving toward boat Y (and reciprocally, of course), VISIBLY, as a result of the application of those two forces (we are talking here about boat X).


Action-reaction pairs


Boat X is pulling with force A the rope/boat Y.

The rope will react with force A.

Boat X will actually thrust forward from this force (and also force B).

At the same time boat Y IS ALSO PULLING WITH FORCE B on the rope/boat X.

TWO FORCES RIGHT THERE ON BOAT X.

The rope will react with force B, which means boat Y will also thrust forward from this force B, (and also force A).

TWO FORCES RIGHT THERE ON BOAT Y.

These are the action-reaction pairs, clearly described, on the two boats/rope.

Very simple.


The rope/string will transmit two simultaneous forces: for boat X, as an example, while the man is pulling with force A (and thus the rope will react with force A as well), boat Y will also apply A SEPARATE FORCE, force B.

Two different forces.

They cannot be mixed with one another.

This is the double forces of attractive gravitation paradox.

Boat X will receive two forces through that rope.

Two forces which do balance out perfectly.


Then, we have a huge problem regarding the Earth-Moon system.

Just like in the example with the two boats, we should see VISIBLY the Earth and the Moon move toward each other.

It is that simple.


Alphabet soups, endless permutations/combinations of letters will not change one basic fact: there are two forces acting on boat X (and respectively, on boat Y).

Boat X will thrust forward as a result of these two forces.

Exactly what we see in a real life situation.

In a real life situation boat X WILL NOT MOVE forward JUST because boat Y is pulling (force B); not at all.

Boat X will also thrust forward based on a second force, the man doing the pulling on the rope with force A.

Forces A and B, are DIFFERENT, of different magnitude, they cannot be mixed with one another as the RE are obviously trying to do in order to escape the dramatic consequences: a simple two boat, one rope example will create double the forces required by Newtonian mechanics.

*

sandokhan

  • Flat Earth Sultan
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 7049
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #238 on: May 02, 2017, 06:18:20 AM »
What do the other FE think of this very simple way to debunk Newtonian mechanics, the doubles forces of attractive gravitation paradox?

What is your opinion, your take, on the two boat/one rope, example?

Now, it is very easy for you to claim victory, based on a very simple situation, because the RE cannot deny that boat X will be acted upon by two separate/different forces.


*

disputeone

  • 24826
  • Or should I?
Re: Distances in the universe
« Reply #239 on: May 02, 2017, 06:23:11 AM »
Now, it is very easy for you to claim victory, based on a very simple situation, because the RE cannot deny that boat X will be acted upon by two separate/different forces.

Through one rope.
Quote from: Stash
I'm anti-judaism.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl
Whose narrative is it to not believe the government?

Quote from: Wolvaccine
speech should be a privilege. Not a right.