Height of the Dome Calculated by Meteor Velocity

First off, this isn't going to apply to all models. Obviously we're sticking to dome models, though a variation of the principle might be usable to determine the height of the dark energy exclusion zone or equivalent in UA models. The assumptions I make are:

1. Meteors are rocks falling from any part of the dome.
2. The majority of the dome is vacuum or close to vacuum.
3. Whatever causes gravity, whether UA or some basic rule, is approximately uniform throughout the dome.

If this is the case then we have all we need to get a decent estimate for the height of the highest part of the dome. We use observations of the speeds of meteors; the fastest observed meteors (specifically, the Leonids) travel at 72,00m/s
Source: https://www.amsmeteors.org/meteor-showers/meteor-faq/#3
You might disbelieve some of the RE explanations there, but in terms of the raw observation there would be no reason to lie. The Leonid showers are fairly regular and the speed could theoretically be verified.

We then use the suvat equations

s stands for displacement, the distance a particle has travelled. u is the initial velocity of the particle, v the final velocity, a the acceleration, t the time taken.
We are approximating heavily, but nonetheless, we seek to find a value for s.
a=9.8m/s/s, the force of gravity/UA/some equivalent. u is zero, the rock is stationary before it falls from the dome. v is taken to be the highest known speed of 72000m/s.

We then substitute into the fourth suvat equation above to calculate. just plug the values in to find:
s=264,489km

As I said this is approximate. This may not be the absolute highest part of the dome, but if these are the fastest falling rocks then they must come from a particularly high location, and if it is even in the ballpark then the dome's height (assuming it takes the most natural shape) is unlikely to vary too much in the area of it directly above the Earth. Equally there might be other factors in the meteor's speed, but presumably the acceleration from the fall is dominant.
Other meteors are far slower, but working under the principle it is easier to lose speed than to gain it this still seems approximately close.

This value is big, but compared to RE cosmic numbers it's positively miniscule.

So, how do any FEers feel about this value? Do you agree with my calculations, think there's a major flaw, like the ballpark estimate, dislike it...
Discuss, I guess.

164,346 miles is quite high, I wouldn't end up assuming that they fell from a stationary point, I would presume the celestial gears would have a lot to do with it, giving a relatively high initial velocity. Though the size of the cosmos would be mostly unknown in the numerous models.

164,346 miles is quite high, I wouldn't end up assuming that they fell from a stationary point, I would presume the celestial gears would have a lot to do with it, giving a relatively high initial velocity. Though the size of the cosmos would be mostly unknown in the numerous models.

Celestial gears (or whichever equivalent is used) do tend to impart horizontal velocity I imagine but theoretically the amount would depend on which part of the gears a meteor goes through. Plus if anything I can see them slowing a meteor, given that they do have the ability to hold stars and the like aloft in the sky. They'll impart horizontal velocity, but equally the more horizontal velocity is imparted the more I'd expect the meteor to slow vertically.

264000km as the height of the dome is big, but not on cosmic scales. If you want to compare it to RET it's orders of magnitude smaller than the distance from the Earth to Mercury, and the dome could fit into the Sun something like thirty five times over. No one's ever claimed the dome was small, so this value wouldn't be the weirdest.

Like I said I do make plenty of assumptions, it's just nice to have a vague ballpark figure.

First off, this isn't going to apply to all models. Obviously we're sticking to dome models, though a variation of the principle might be usable to determine the height of the dark energy exclusion zone or equivalent in UA models. The assumptions I make are:

1. Meteors are rocks falling from any part of the dome.
2. The majority of the dome is vacuum or close to vacuum.
3. Whatever causes gravity, whether UA or some basic rule, is approximately uniform throughout the dome.

If this is the case then we have all we need to get a decent estimate for the height of the highest part of the dome. We use observations of the speeds of meteors; the fastest observed meteors (specifically, the Leonids) travel at 72,00m/s
Source: https://www.amsmeteors.org/meteor-showers/meteor-faq/#3
You might disbelieve some of the RE explanations there, but in terms of the raw observation there would be no reason to lie. The Leonid showers are fairly regular and the speed could theoretically be verified.

We then use the suvat equations

s stands for displacement, the distance a particle has travelled. u is the initial velocity of the particle, v the final velocity, a the acceleration, t the time taken.
We are approximating heavily, but nonetheless, we seek to find a value for s.
a=9.8m/s/s, the force of gravity/UA/some equivalent. u is zero, the rock is stationary before it falls from the dome. v is taken to be the highest known speed of 72000m/s.

We then substitute into the fourth suvat equation above to calculate. just plug the values in to find:
s=264,489km

As I said this is approximate. This may not be the absolute highest part of the dome, but if these are the fastest falling rocks then they must come from a particularly high location, and if it is even in the ballpark then the dome's height (assuming it takes the most natural shape) is unlikely to vary too much in the area of it directly above the Earth. Equally there might be other factors in the meteor's speed, but presumably the acceleration from the fall is dominant.
Other meteors are far slower, but working under the principle it is easier to lose speed than to gain it this still seems approximately close.

This value is big, but compared to RE cosmic numbers it's positively miniscule.

So, how do any FEers feel about this value? Do you agree with my calculations, think there's a major flaw, like the ballpark estimate, dislike it...
Discuss, I guess.

72000 m/s is impossible speed for objects. Because there is air friction and it doesn't let a speed more than a spesific value. In free falling, after a while the substance concentration increases when meteor comes close to the ground. So its speed doesn't increase so much.

72 m/s is meaningfull and you started with it. After a while you turned to 72000 m/s. 72000 m/s is impossible. Completely impossible. Impossible in this world. Nothing (as object) can reach this speed without a great power support it.

Quote from: AltSpace on November 20, 2017, 06:31:10 PM

164,346 miles is quite high, I wouldn't end up assuming that they fell from a stationary point, I would presume the celestial gears would have a lot to do with it, giving a relatively high initial velocity. Though the size of the cosmos would be mostly unknown in the numerous models.

Celestial gears (or whichever equivalent is used) do tend to impart horizontal velocity I imagine but theoretically the amount would depend on which part of the gears a meteor goes through. Plus if anything I can see them slowing a meteor, given that they do have the ability to hold stars and the like aloft in the sky. They'll impart horizontal velocity, but equally the more horizontal velocity is imparted the more I'd expect the meteor to slow vertically.

264000km as the height of the dome is big, but not on cosmic scales. If you want to compare it to RET it's orders of magnitude smaller than the distance from the Earth to Mercury, and the dome could fit into the Sun something like thirty five times over. No one's ever claimed the dome was small, so this value wouldn't be the weirdest.

Like I said I do make plenty of assumptions, it's just nice to have a vague ballpark figure.

But since the stars seem to move over the equator at 1662 km/hr I would assume the this is about the limit of the horizontal component of the velocity of there celestial gears.

And it is not valid to compare these distances to RET because flatularists think of any distance further that home to the corner store as a vast distance.

Some even say the the sun is just a few kilometers distant from earth. Proof:

Venus/Mercury/Iss-Atlantis Sun Transit - True distance Earth - Sun « on: February 10, 2008, 12:28:26 AM »
There are no 149.000.000 million kilometers between the Sun and the Earth; as these photographs clearly show, right behind the ISS/Atlantis is the Sun, at just a few kilometers (or even less) in the background.

72000 m/s is impossible speed for objects. Because there is air friction and it doesn't let a speed more than a spesific value. In free falling, after a while the substance concentration increases when meteor comes close to the ground. So its speed doesn't increase so much.

There is very virtually no air above 100 km so try again.

Small meteors usually burn up at altitudes of 70 - 100 km and may travel at around 20 to 70 km/sec.

Oh, Jane on her dishonest 'pretend to' trip again.

Seriously, are you unemployed? Your bullshitting reaches whole new levels.

Thank you for adding nothing to the actual topic at hand.
And thank you more for insulting someone, showing what a person you really are.

Have a good day, but don't waste our time.

Dens

But since the stars seem to move over the equator at 1662 km/hr I would assume the this is about the limit of the horizontal component of the velocity of there celestial gears.

And it is not valid to compare these distances to RET because flatularists think of any distance further that home to the corner store as a vast distance.

That's more for the benefit of comparison. Everyone's bad with big numbers, after a certain point the zeroes don't do the orders of magnitude justice.
What's your source for that value? I ought to be able to use Pythagoras if that's the horizontal component in order to find the strictly downwards one. It isn't all that many m/s though.

72000 m/s is impossible speed for objects. Because there is air friction and it doesn't let a speed more than a spesific value. In free falling, after a while the substance concentration increases when meteor comes close to the ground. So its speed doesn't increase so much.

72 m/s is meaningfull and you started with it. After a while you turned to 72000 m/s. 72000 m/s is impossible. Completely impossible. Impossible in this world. Nothing (as object) can reach this speed without a great power support it.

I started with 72km/s, not m/s. But thanks for your input, though I will add this is only relevant to models with predominantly no air in the dome so air friction isn't a factor. The rocks woud be accelerating with basically nothing to slow them.

Oh, Jane on her dishonest 'pretend to' trip again.

Seriously, are you unemployed? Your bullshitting reaches whole new levels.

I'm deducing things about FET using maths. it's fun. if you were smart you ought to be able to use facts in order to make arguments.

First off, this isn't going to apply to all models. Obviously we're sticking to dome models, though a variation of the principle might be usable to determine the height of the dark energy exclusion zone or equivalent in UA models. The assumptions I make are:

1. Meteors are rocks falling from any part of the dome.
2. The majority of the dome is vacuum or close to vacuum.
3. Whatever causes gravity, whether UA or some basic rule, is approximately uniform throughout the dome.

If this is the case then we have all we need to get a decent estimate for the height of the highest part of the dome. We use observations of the speeds of meteors; the fastest observed meteors (specifically, the Leonids) travel at 72,00m/s
Source: https://www.amsmeteors.org/meteor-showers/meteor-faq/#3
You might disbelieve some of the RE explanations there, but in terms of the raw observation there would be no reason to lie. The Leonid showers are fairly regular and the speed could theoretically be verified.

We then use the suvat equations

s stands for displacement, the distance a particle has travelled. u is the initial velocity of the particle, v the final velocity, a the acceleration, t the time taken.
We are approximating heavily, but nonetheless, we seek to find a value for s.
a=9.8m/s/s, the force of gravity/UA/some equivalent. u is zero, the rock is stationary before it falls from the dome. v is taken to be the highest known speed of 72000m/s.

We then substitute into the fourth suvat equation above to calculate. just plug the values in to find:
s=264,489km

As I said this is approximate. This may not be the absolute highest part of the dome, but if these are the fastest falling rocks then they must come from a particularly high location, and if it is even in the ballpark then the dome's height (assuming it takes the most natural shape) is unlikely to vary too much in the area of it directly above the Earth. Equally there might be other factors in the meteor's speed, but presumably the acceleration from the fall is dominant.
Other meteors are far slower, but working under the principle it is easier to lose speed than to gain it this still seems approximately close.

This value is big, but compared to RE cosmic numbers it's positively miniscule.

So, how do any FEers feel about this value? Do you agree with my calculations, think there's a major flaw, like the ballpark estimate, dislike it...
Discuss, I guess.

Wouldn't this also imply that the calculated height would need to be nearly uniform over most if not all the earth?

Quote from: AltSpace on November 20, 2017, 06:31:10 PM

164,346 miles is quite high, I wouldn't end up assuming that they fell from a stationary point, I would presume the celestial gears would have a lot to do with it, giving a relatively high initial velocity. Though the size of the cosmos would be mostly unknown in the numerous models.

Celestial gears (or whichever equivalent is used) do tend to impart horizontal velocity I imagine but theoretically the amount would depend on which part of the gears a meteor goes through. Plus if anything I can see them slowing a meteor, given that they do have the ability to hold stars and the like aloft in the sky. They'll impart horizontal velocity, but equally the more horizontal velocity is imparted the more I'd expect the meteor to slow vertically.

264000km as the height of the dome is big, but not on cosmic scales. If you want to compare it to RET it's orders of magnitude smaller than the distance from the Earth to Mercury, and the dome could fit into the Sun something like thirty five times over. No one's ever claimed the dome was small, so this value wouldn't be the weirdest.

Like I said I do make plenty of assumptions, it's just nice to have a vague ballpark figure.

Hm, maybe. My logic was that the meteors would be affected by the pull of the stars, accelerating them, so they wouldn't have a 0 initial velocity or one without extra forces involved.

Quote from: Denspressure on November 21, 2017, 01:58:00 PM

Quote from: User324 on November 21, 2017, 01:47:25 PM

Oh, Jane on her dishonest 'pretend to' trip again.

Seriously, are you unemployed? Your bullshitting reaches whole new levels.

Thank you for adding nothing to the actual topic at hand.
And thank you more for insulting someone, showing what a person you really are.

Have a good day, but don't waste our time.

Dens

Aren't you the guy thinking gravity doesn't exist and downwards accelersrion is due to how porous stuff is?
Lol

No, he's the guy named after the theory created by the guy who thinks gravity doesn't exist and downward acceleration is due to how porous stuff is (Sceptimatic)

People must realise that this line of reasoning bears no relationship with reality....why you may ask, because meteors or shooting stars don’t fall down vertically they come in at varying angles with respect to the ground. For this statement there is a lot of evidence...go out on a dark night lie down and look up, see for yourself, meteors dont drop out the sky like rain.  They are not falling or in a free fall as is suggested they are rather on a collision course with us, the planet earth at all sorts of angles. Sometimes the simplistic approach people take on this site is jaw dropping. They magine if an object, in this case a meteor strikes the ground, then it must have been in a vertical freefall akin to dropping something. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Meteors attain  their velocity not by falling to the ground, they already have this velocity which can be up to 160,000 mph long before the encounter planet earth. The problem for flat earth believers is where do these lumps of stuff get their energy from to reach such velocities?.....not by falling off a Dome, that’s for sure.
I think the op has more time on their hands than is good for them.
The problem for FE believers is the existance of meteors opens a can of worms for them for which they have no sensible or rational arguments.
The existance of meteors particularly the periodic ones like the Leonids or the Perseids which come regular as clockwork as the earth passes through debris left by comets like Swift Tuttle. In fact the Leonids just peaked last weekend. Comets and other celestial things like supernova make a mockery of the view that FEers have of the universe.
Haley’s comet and the Crab Nebula both witness hundreds of years before NASA, modern science and any alledged conspiracy......falling from a Dome...lol.....

People must realise that this line of reasoning bears no relationship with reality....why you may ask, because meteors or shooting stars don’t fall down vertically they come in at varying angles with respect to the ground. For this statement there is a lot of evidence...go out on a dark night lie down and look up, see for yourself, meteors dont drop out the sky like rain.  They are not falling or in a free fall as is suggested they are rather on a collision course with us, the planet earth at all sorts of angles. Sometimes the simplistic approach people take on this site is jaw dropping. They magine if an object, in this case a meteor strikes the ground, then it must have been in a vertical freefall akin to dropping something. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
Meteors attain  their velocity not by falling to the ground, they already have this velocity which can be up to 160,000 mph long before the encounter planet earth. The problem for flat earth believers is where do these lumps of stuff get their energy from to reach such velocities?.....not by falling off a Dome, that’s for sure.
I think the op has more time on their hands than is good for them.
The problem for FE believers is the existance of meteors opens a can of worms for them for which they have no sensible or rational arguments.
The existance of meteors particularly the periodic ones like the Leonids or the Perseids which come regular as clockwork as the earth passes through debris left by comets like Swift Tuttle. In fact the Leonids just peaked last weekend. Comets and other celestial things like supernova make a mockery of the view that FEers have of the universe.
Haley’s comet and the Crab Nebula both witness hundreds of years before NASA, modern science and any alledged conspiracy......falling from a Dome...lol.....

I have to say from reading the various posts, some of the very dubious, I have to agree with the lonegranger. The excuses that some posters are putting up, especially the Jane individual have no sense in them whatsoever.

Wouldn't this also imply that the calculated height would need to be nearly uniform over most if not all the earth?

Yep, unless it's a very unusual shape or we're right out by the edge, both of which seem unlikely.

Hm, maybe. My logic was that the meteors would be affected by the pull of the stars, accelerating them, so they wouldn't have a 0 initial velocity or one without extra forces involved.

It wouldn't affect initial velocity regardless. That's basically the instant the rock falls from the dome, for models where that's the explanation, or analogous. It was fixed when it was attached, and it hasn't had time to gain any speed.

It is theoretically possible to calculate the vertical component only of the meteor, assuming celestial gears have a primarily horizontal effect, but the rough guesses I've made for the horizontal motion imparted (going by the speed at which the Sun etc move) is pretty small by comparison and shouldn't have a huge effect. Happy to incorporate it with a guess for, say, the length of the equator. Could work on an upper bound by finding a circle with the same area as the surface area of the RE globe; no FE needs to accept it but it seems to be a clear example of the largest the Earth could be. Then use one revolution of that per day as the speed of a celestial gear and, yep. All approximate but still.

I have to say from reading the various posts, some of the very dubious, I have to agree with the lonegranger. The excuses that some posters are putting up, especially the Jane individual have no sense in them whatsoever.

Excuses for what? No one's making an argument and no one's asking you to believe it, I just have fun applying maths to abstract concepts.

It wouldn't affect initial velocity regardless. That's basically the instant the rock falls from the dome, for models where that's the explanation, or analogous. It was fixed when it was attached, and it hasn't had time to gain any speed.

It is theoretically possible to calculate the vertical component only of the meteor, assuming celestial gears have a primarily horizontal effect, but the rough guesses I've made for the horizontal motion imparted (going by the speed at which the Sun etc move) is pretty small by comparison and shouldn't have a huge effect. Happy to incorporate it with a guess for, say, the length of the equator. Could work on an upper bound by finding a circle with the same area as the surface area of the RE globe; no FE needs to accept it but it seems to be a clear example of the largest the Earth could be. Then use one revolution of that per day as the speed of a celestial gear and, yep. All approximate but still.

I would say that it could be rocks from an unknown area that came to the Earth at already high speeds, but meteor showers are predicted by determining the position of them in the solar system and them reaching Earth, which would imply that they would be travelling at some velocity in the celestial gears or whatever star system model accepted.

Has me thinking of the gravitational infinite plane, and the same gravity is at all altitudes. Maybe they fall from some celestial system up there. Yes, that is small compared to the modern mainstream accepted conceptions of the universe, but huge compared to many FE models, most don't have it higher than 5,000-10,000 miles up, our observable universe.

Quote from: İntikam on November 21, 2017, 12:01:03 PM

72000 m/s is impossible speed for objects. Because there is air friction and it doesn't let a speed more than a spesific value. In free falling, after a while the substance concentration increases when meteor comes close to the ground. So its speed doesn't increase so much.

There is very virtually no air above 100 km so try again.

Small meteors usually burn up at altitudes of 70 - 100 km and may travel at around 20 to 70 km/sec.

Wrong. Neither theorically, nor practically those speeds are not possible.

Theorically impossible: Because every object has a density and this density causes to friction to moving objects on it. this tightness causes collision and the speed suddenly decreases.

Consider a man jump to sea from a high distance. When he jumps, he arrives the maximum speed at the nearest point to the sea. While it crashes the water; water makes effect as a wall and suddenly the speed downs. To overcome the wall effect must be in the form of an object rocket. The meteor shape is not enough to reduce this effect. suddenly slows down when a meteor hits the water. whereas the speed should increase due to gravity. If you throw a stone into the water, it will not increase in speed, but will decrease, even though the stone is heavier than the water and should speed up but the speed downs.

the air has the same effect as water. the air is lighter at upside but heavier in the down.

each substance has a permeability limit. As the speed increases, the number of substances multiplying the to the moving object increases at the moment. this is a speed reducing effect. Whatever the speed increases, the friction increases caused by the amount of crashed substances. in short, you can not exceed a certain speed in the atmosphere.

practically If the meteors really moved that fast, thousands of meters of holes would be opened around the world. There is no such hole. If you look at the holes that appear after meteorites, they are normal holes, not deep holes.

So this event is impossible and a hoax.

practically If the meteors really moved that fast, thousands of meters of holes would be opened around the world. There is no such hole. If you look at the holes that appear after meteorites, they are normal holes, not deep holes.

To clarify, these are I believe the speeds when they enter the atmosphere, they'd immediately start slowing down dramatically and more than likely burn up.
But if this isn't in line with your model, fair enough.

You are right on the money. It’s estimated between 11km/sec and 72km/sec.  That is pretty darn fast. But compared to the light traveling at 124,000km/sec it’s a slow poke! Hope I didn’t sidetrack the topic. I don’t think there is an absolute maximum speed in air. But in theory if you travel fast enough you could cause a fusion reaction between the object and the surrounding air. That assumes the object wouldn’t burn up first!

I was lucky enough to see this meteor live with naked eyes...  It took about 40 seconds between appearing over the eastern horizon and disappearing over the west.
There is no way this could have come from any kind of dome.

https://sattrackcam.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/more-on-21-september-2012-fireball-why.html

Quote from: İntikam on November 22, 2017, 02:24:11 PM

practically If the meteors really moved that fast, thousands of meters of holes would be opened around the world. There is no such hole. If you look at the holes that appear after meteorites, they are normal holes, not deep holes.

To clarify, these are I believe the speeds when they enter the atmosphere, they'd immediately start slowing down dramatically and more than likely burn up.
But if this isn't in line with your model, fair enough.

this is also related to the fact that the values ​​you calculate are not compatible with our other studies. many flat earthen domes here are closer to this value as 100 kms some. I'm on that too. I think the average is 100 kilometers and no more than 150 kilometers highness.

Lets determine where you did mistake. You have theorically right, but practice is different.

observations made (you can see this in the videos) show that free-falling objects do not accelerate more than a certain speed. this speed is around 200km / h for general objects, but can be taken up to more for special objects have special shape like rockets.

this means that the free-falling objects reach a maximum speed in the first 20 seconds and no longer accelerate after that time.

Anyways. I want to use the values taken from popular science, because they know their lies better.

You've told that 72km/s as maximum speed. And quora web answer shows 1,4 secs as an average falling time.

https://www.quora.com/How-much-time-is-taken-by-a-meteor-to-reach-Earth

It is quite simple to calculate:

X= V.T = 72000 m/S * 1,4 = 100.800 m =~ 100 kms.

Verified one more time.

We see that the dome is at 100kms altitude.

You may have wasted your time. The listed speeds of meteors are based on hypothetical RE BS.

See: https://www.mathscinotes.com/2011/07/speed-of-a-meteor/

When English is weak it takes more time to find the right source. 

You may have wasted your time. The listed speeds of meteors are based on hypothetical RE BS.

You can call it BS if it suits you but the speeds of meteors have been carefully measured using a combination of both radar and radio scatter. Nothing hypothetical about that.  As for all the religious ideas being batted around here...well BS is perhaps an more apt description but if that's the way you FEers want to think of it then that's up to you.

nothing was measured carefully about meteors. you can't measure the distance of what you don't know the velocity, you can't calculate the velocity of something you don't know the distance. all the distance and speed claims made about meteorites are estimates. it is no different other than claiming otherwise to basing this claim on religious evidence. at least we know that God is more truthful than your so-called observers. at least that's what I get compared to you.

You may have wasted your time. The listed speeds of meteors are based on hypothetical RE BS.

See: https://www.mathscinotes.com/2011/07/speed-of-a-meteor/

Since you've posted no contrary evidence I'll choose to believe this: American Meteor Society:

American Meteor Society, which is consistent with you reference.: FIREBALL FAQS
12. How fast are meteorites traveling when they reach the ground?
Meteoroids enter the earth’s atmosphere at very high speeds, ranging from 11 km/sec to 72 km/sec (25,000 mph to 160,000 mph). However, similar to firing a bullet into water, the meteoroid will rapidly decelerate as it penetrates into increasingly denser portions of the atmosphere. This is especially true in the lower layers, since 90 % of the earth’s atmospheric mass lies below 12 km (7 miles / 39,000 ft) of height.

At the same time, the meteoroid will also rapidly lose mass due to ablation. In this process, the outer layer of the meteoroid is continuously vaporized and stripped away due to high speed collision with air molecules. Particles from dust size to a few kilograms mass are usually completely consumed in the atmosphere.

Due to atmospheric drag, most meteorites, ranging from a few kilograms up to about 8 tons (7,000 kg), will lose all of their cosmic velocity while still several miles up. At that point, called the retardation point, the meteorite begins to accelerate again, under the influence of the Earth’s gravity, at the familiar 9.8 meters per second squared. The meteorite then quickly reaches its terminal velocity of 200 to 400 miles per hour (90 to 180 meters per second). The terminal velocity occurs at the point where the acceleration due to gravity is exactly offset by the deceleration due to atmospheric drag.

This is about your biased signature:



Also, see this:

http://www.miracles-of-quran.com/earth.htm

Quote

You may have wasted your time. The listed speeds of meteors are based on hypothetical RE BS.

You can call it BS if it suits you but the speeds of meteors have been carefully measured using a combination of both radar and radio scatter. Nothing hypothetical about that.  As for all the religious ideas being batted around here...well BS is perhaps an more apt description but if that's the way you FEers want to think of it then that's up to you.

Really? Prove that radar is computing the speed directly, rather than on indirect characteristics and "models" and "profiles".

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/425/2/1473/1196596

Meteor shower velocity estimates from single-station meteor radar: accuracy and precision

It should be noted that speed is not known a priori. Instead, the transform is performed with different values of speed and the best candidate is selected based on the properties of the resultant scattering profile. The successful candidate speed is that which produces the sharpest rise in the scattering profile, preceded by a flat foot, which corresponds to the sudden presence of ionized material at the head of the meteor

...During the survey process, the geocentric velocity, vg, of each shower was estimated by considering the candidate meteors in a 4°-wide acceptance band perpendicular to the active radiant. The detected speed in the atmosphere was corrected for the acceleration due to gravity during the infall process using the equation 



where G is the gravitational constant, M⊕ is the mass of the Earth and ra is the radius of the Earth added to the altitude of detection. Fig. 1 shows the speed distribution for candidate Geminids meteors detected by the Darwin radar. It is a cumulative display of all meteor speeds, each of which represents the detection of a single meteoroid at a single speed and height. Taken together, the detections constitute the collective deceleration profiles of ablating meteoroids with different initial sizes, smaller meteoroids ablating at higher altitudes than large bodies, but all retaining a similar shaped trajectory on the height–velocity plot.

And what it is actually detecting is indirect:

Bodies entering the atmosphere are heated by collisions with air molecules, resulting in evaporation and ionization of meteoric material. The ionized trails provide targets for radar that can be used to determine wind speed and direction from radial drift measurements, as well as estimates of the local ambipolar diffusion coefficient from the lifetime of trail echoes.

Semantics.

Radar would measure (and compute) the asteroid itself, not some other comparable body.

Quote from: Nucleosynthesis on November 29, 2019, 02:37:25 AM

Quote

You may have wasted your time. The listed speeds of meteors are based on hypothetical RE BS.

You can call it BS if it suits you but the speeds of meteors have been carefully measured using a combination of both radar and radio scatter. Nothing hypothetical about that.  As for all the religious ideas being batted around here...well BS is perhaps an more apt description but if that's the way you FEers want to think of it then that's up to you.

Really? Prove that radar is computing the speed directly, rather than on indirect characteristics and "models" and "profiles".

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/425/2/1473/1196596

Meteor shower velocity estimates from single-station meteor radar: accuracy and precision

Quote

It should be noted that speed is not known a priori. Instead, the transform is performed with different values of speed and the best candidate is selected based on the properties of the resultant scattering profile. The successful candidate speed is that which produces the sharpest rise in the scattering profile, preceded by a flat foot, which corresponds to the sudden presence of ionized material at the head of the meteor

...During the survey process, the geocentric velocity, vg, of each shower was estimated by considering the candidate meteors in a 4°-wide acceptance band perpendicular to the active radiant. The detected speed in the atmosphere was corrected for the acceleration due to gravity during the infall process using the equation 



where G is the gravitational constant, M⊕ is the mass of the Earth and ra is the radius of the Earth added to the altitude of detection. Fig. 1 shows the speed distribution for candidate Geminids meteors detected by the Darwin radar. It is a cumulative display of all meteor speeds, each of which represents the detection of a single meteoroid at a single speed and height. Taken together, the detections constitute the collective deceleration profiles of ablating meteoroids with different initial sizes, smaller meteoroids ablating at higher altitudes than large bodies, but all retaining a similar shaped trajectory on the height–velocity plot.

And what it is actually detecting is indirect:

Quote

Bodies entering the atmosphere are heated by collisions with air molecules, resulting in evaporation and ionization of meteoric material. The ionized trails provide targets for radar that can be used to determine wind speed and direction from radial drift measurements, as well as estimates of the local ambipolar diffusion coefficient from the lifetime of trail echoes.

erm that sounds like a pretty sound approach to measuring the speed of a meteor shower, multiple targets, multiple sizes, multiple materials.

Its quite hard to get a meteorite to pass in front of your radar gun.

This is about your biased signature:



Also, see this:

http://www.miracles-of-quran.com/earth.htm

Why did not tell anything about hamzah's signature? Reported because unrelated the issue.