biffer Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, phart said: Nah there is still plenty of gravity regardless of frame of reference. They're probably within a 100 miles of the surface of the planet. it's weightlessness they experience not zero gravity. It's a point of pedantry anyway. If your frame of reference is freely falling relative to where you're observing from, then there's no difference. You only consider it to have gravity because you're in another frame.
Orraloon Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 3 hours ago, phart said: Nah there is still plenty of gravity regardless of frame of reference. They're probably within a 100 miles of the surface of the planet. it's weightlessness they experience not zero gravity. It's a point of pedantry anyway. It is a very important point of pedantry though. Scientists should always be discouraged from using the wrong terminology. It just confuses folk. Some of whom are already confused more than enough. Certainly on this thread anyway. As far as we are aware there is no place in the universe where there is no gravity. Biffer's Frame of Reference stuff is just irrelevant with respect to this discussion. http://www.yalescientific.org/2010/10/mythbusters-does-zero-gravity-exist-in-space/ 2 hours ago, biffer said: If your frame of reference is freely falling relative to where you're observing from, then there's no difference. You only consider it to have gravity because you're in another frame.
biffer Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 52 minutes ago, Orraloon said: It is a very important point of pedantry though. Scientists should always be discouraged from using the wrong terminology. It just confuses folk. Some of whom are already confused more than enough. Certainly on this thread anyway. As far as we are aware there is no place in the universe where there is no gravity. Biffer's Frame of Reference stuff is just irrelevant with respect to this discussion. http://www.yalescientific.org/2010/10/mythbusters-does-zero-gravity-exist-in-space/ I honestly don't know if you're agreeing with both of us or telling us that we're both talking pish. I don't like this sentence in that link though However, the space shuttle never falls to the earth because it is traveling horizontally at about 18,000 km/hr, opposing the force of gravity. If the spacecraft was not moving quickly enough, it would fall prey to the effects of earth’s gravitational field and fall to the earth. Orbiting is falling. It's just that you're travelling fast enough in a lateral direction to the centre of gravity you're falling towards that you continually miss and keep falling. And given the amount of irrelevant pish there's already been on this thread, I don't feel particularly out of place.
Toepoke Posted March 7, 2017 Author Posted March 7, 2017 2 hours ago, thplinth said: If you found a perfectly round planet as smooth as a snooker ball with a perfect vacuum instead of an atmosphere could you not theoretically put a satellite in orbit one foot off the ground if fired at sufficient velocity? Or even a millimetre off the ground? I'd think not. The moon has no atmosphere but you need to be at an altitude of around 60 miles from the surface to form a stable orbit... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_mechanics
Orraloon Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 2 hours ago, biffer said: I honestly don't know if you're agreeing with both of us or telling us that we're both talking pish. I don't like this sentence in that link though Orbiting is falling. It's just that you're travelling fast enough in a lateral direction to the centre of gravity you're falling towards that you continually miss and keep falling. And given the amount of irrelevant pish there's already been on this thread, I don't feel particularly out of place. Naw it's just you that's talking pish. And, I think you know that. I was agreeing with phart. You know fine well that there is nowhere in the universe (yet discovered anyway) where gravity does not exist. So stop talking about zero gravity and stop confusing folk more than they need to be. Is it any wonder that scientifically uneducated folk like Scotty get confused when scientists tell them that gravity exists everywhere then also try to get them to believe that somewhere, a bawhair from planet Earth, you can have "zero gravity"
Orraloon Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 17 minutes ago, Toepoke said: I'd think not. The moon has no atmosphere but you need to be at an altitude of around 60 miles from the surface to form a stable orbit... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_mechanics It's all relative. Relative to the Earth the moon has almost no atmosphere but it does have some. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LADEE/news/lunar-atmosphere.html
Toepoke Posted March 7, 2017 Author Posted March 7, 2017 23 minutes ago, Orraloon said: It's all relative. Relative to the Earth the moon has almost no atmosphere but it does have some. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LADEE/news/lunar-atmosphere.html Interesting. You're becoming quite the pedant on this thread Mr Loon
biffer Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Orraloon said: Naw it's just you that's talking pish. And, I think you know that. I was agreeing with phart. You know fine well that there is nowhere in the universe (yet discovered anyway) where gravity does not exist. So stop talking about zero gravity and stop confusing folk more than they need to be. Is it any wonder that scientifically uneducated folk like Scotty get confused when scientists tell them that gravity exists everywhere then also try to get them to believe that somewhere, a bawhair from planet Earth, you can have "zero gravity" Aah, right. Hands up, I'd completely missed the point you guys were making about zero g. But the question thplinth asks Free fall in a vacuum would be different to zero g how? Is the point I was trying to make. There is no difference.
Eisegerwind Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 13 minutes ago, Scotty CTA said: What does 'nasa' mean in Hebrew? Just guessing really, but does 'nasa' in Hebrew by an chance mean 'Scotty is a twat'.
biffer Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 20 minutes ago, Scotty CTA said: What does 'nasa' mean in Hebrew? It doesn't mean anything. But you're probably about to twist the truth and say the word pronounced nacwah, which means to decieve, sounds exactly the same as NASA, which it doesn't. A closer foreign word to the pronunciation would be the Spanish nacer, which means to be born.
biffer Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 Or alternatively the name Naser translates as assister or friend, coming from old Arabic.
Toepoke Posted March 7, 2017 Author Posted March 7, 2017 What do JAXA, ISRO or Roscosmos mean in Hebrew?
biffer Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 Or naza is a term used in Urdu referring to early an Christian sect.
biffer Posted March 7, 2017 Posted March 7, 2017 Just now, Toepoke said: What do JAXA, ISRO or Roscosmos mean in Hebrew? Jaisa in hindi means like.
Orraloon Posted March 8, 2017 Posted March 8, 2017 12 hours ago, Toepoke said: Interesting. You're becoming quite the pedant on this thread Mr Loon It's no a nice job but somebody's got to do it.
Orraloon Posted March 8, 2017 Posted March 8, 2017 11 hours ago, Scotty CTA said: What does 'nasa' mean in Hebrew? Supermarket.
Orraloon Posted March 8, 2017 Posted March 8, 2017 11 hours ago, biffer said: Aah, right. Hands up, I'd completely missed the point you guys were making about zero g. Aye, us scientists are not very good at explaining ourselves sometimes.
DonnyTJS Posted March 8, 2017 Posted March 8, 2017 On 3/7/2017 at 6:17 PM, DonnyTJS said: Exactly. It's fascinating trying to work out how they've choreographed it to the phases of the flight trajectory. God knows how you work it out in theory before putting it into practice (and I've no idea how they didn't all chuck up). Those stewardesses are brilliant. I assume there would've been a number of takes, though the clean up between each one must've been murder. Found this which, if you can get over the sloppy use of gravity-related terminology, explains how it was done. As a matter of interest (to me if no one else), the plane was an Ilyushin Il76 - a Soviet-era transporter that used to fly daily over my apartment in Luanda as the Angolan air force had a bunch of 'em. Noisiest thing I've ever heard (and I've seen Motorhead, and Concorde - though from a much greater distance).
phart Posted March 9, 2017 Posted March 9, 2017 6 hours ago, DonnyTJS said: Found this which, if you can get over the sloppy use of gravity-related terminology, explains how it was done. As a matter of interest (to me if no one else), the plane was an Ilyushin Il76 - a Soviet-era transporter that used to fly daily over my apartment in Luanda as the Angolan air force had a bunch of 'em. Noisiest thing I've ever heard (and I've seen Motorhead, and Concorde - though from a much greater distance). Cool, I knew about this method from some old vhs tape at school some science teacher put on in lieu of teaching us. Also seems folk agree with you regarding that particular aircraft
Toepoke Posted March 9, 2017 Author Posted March 9, 2017 7 hours ago, DonnyTJS said: Found this which, if you can get over the sloppy use of gravity-related terminology, explains how it was done. As a matter of interest (to me if no one else), the plane was an Ilyushin Il76 - a Soviet-era transporter that used to fly daily over my apartment in Luanda as the Angolan air force had a bunch of 'em. Noisiest thing I've ever heard (and I've seen Motorhead, and Concorde - though from a much greater distance). That's amazing! Must've cost them a fortune to make it. We've certainly come a long way since Bowie was "floating" in his tin can...
fishcumnock Posted March 16, 2017 Posted March 16, 2017 On 07/03/2017 at 9:28 PM, biffer said: Or alternatively the name Naser translates as assister or friend, coming from old Arabic. from this
Eisegerwind Posted January 6, 2018 Posted January 6, 2018 On 1/17/2017 at 11:28 PM, Toepoke said: RIP Gene Only 6 of them left.... 5 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42592057
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.