It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

Donald Trump expected to slash Nasa's climate change budget in favour of sending humans back to the

page: 11
54
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 02:13 PM
a reply to: InachMarbank

Forward momentum is absolutely a force in this sense. Why do you think otherwise?

No, downward acceleration is NOT increased because there is no "downward" movement...you are confusing yourself in that you think "free fall" means it is moving downward and should be gaining speed, that isn't what is happening.

Neither vectors are changing. Gravity is constant as the centripetal force and forward momentum is almost constant at 17k mph.

posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 11:01 PM

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: InachMarbank

Forward momentum is absolutely a force in this sense. Why do you think otherwise?

No, downward acceleration is NOT increased because there is no "downward" movement...you are confusing yourself in that you think "free fall" means it is moving downward and should be gaining speed, that isn't what is happening.

Neither vectors are changing. Gravity is constant as the centripetal force and forward momentum is almost constant at 17k mph.

If you say momentum is a force, is that like saying light bulbs are the force for electricity instead of the power plant?

As I understand it, momentum comes after force, acceleration, is applied, but momentum is absolutely not the force, just an effect of it.

You know... The effect... Not the cause...

www.physlink.com...

I don't see how I'm confused because I think "free falling" means downward moving. I think it is very confusing to suggest "free falling" does not mean downward moving.

It seems to make sense, theoretically, to say, the ISS forward momentum can't be slowed because there's no air resistance, and because the only force it runs into is gravity, pushing it down at a 90 degree angle, and since, at 90 degrees, there is no oppositional push back on the forward momentum, but only a complimentary push down on the forward momentum, this forward momentum isn't slowed.

It does not seem to make sense, theoretically, to say a forward momentum, running into the force of gravity at a 90 degree angle, can cancel the downward force of gravity. This seems to be what you are saying.
edit on 6-12-2016 by InachMarbank because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 10:15 AM
a reply to: InachMarbank

I didn't say momentum was a force. Read again slowly. I said it is "in this sense".

If a train kills it's engine but continues to move forward what will happen if you reach out and grab it? In that sense the forward momentum of the train is a force acting against your arm and rips your arm off and continues on.

Since nothing is there to slow the forward momentum of the projectile (in this case the space station for example), the forward momentum acts AGAINST the centripetal force caused by gravity. It will act against that force nearly indefinitely as long as nothing impedes it's forward momentum.

It does not seem to make sense, theoretically, to say a forward momentum, running into the force of gravity at a 90 degree angle, can cancel the downward force of gravity.

Yet it does...

Also, satellites are not "running into the force of gravity". They are moving straight and running into nothing, hence nothing to slow them. Gravity is just keeping them from continuing away from the planet in a straight line.

posted on Dec, 6 2016 @ 09:50 PM

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: InachMarbank

I didn't say momentum was a force. Read again slowly. I said it is "in this sense".

If a train kills it's engine but continues to move forward what will happen if you reach out and grab it? In that sense the forward momentum of the train is a force acting against your arm and rips your arm off and continues on.

Since nothing is there to slow the forward momentum of the projectile (in this case the space station for example), the forward momentum acts AGAINST the centripetal force caused by gravity. It will act against that force nearly indefinitely as long as nothing impedes it's forward momentum.

It does not seem to make sense, theoretically, to say a forward momentum, running into the force of gravity at a 90 degree angle, can cancel the downward force of gravity.

Yet it does...

Also, satellites are not "running into the force of gravity". They are moving straight and running into nothing, hence nothing to slow them. Gravity is just keeping them from continuing away from the planet in a straight line.

This is what it seems you're saying to me...

Gravity is turning a straight moving ISS into an object moving at an arc (ellipse).

But during this process there is no downward force, because it has been canceled by the momentum of the ISS.

Is this what you're saying?
edit on 6-12-2016 by InachMarbank because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 12:01 AM
a reply to: InachMarbank

Nothing cancels the centripetal force on the ISS which is gravity. It overcomes the effects of it in that it doesn't move downward towards the earth. It doesn't overcome it so much that it escapes, just enough to orbit.
edit on 7-12-2016 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 12:42 AM

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: InachMarbank

Nothing cancels the centripetal force on the ISS which is gravity. It overcomes the effects of it in that it doesn't move downward towards the earth. It doesn't overcome it so much that it escapes, just enough to orbit.

The standard explanation is the ISS is in constant free fall, and I have never heard the explanation that the ISS is overcoming the down force of gravity, before you said so.

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

This sure sounds inconsistent. Like doing the same thing and getting different results.

Can you quantify, the forward force of the ISS, in this sense, and the new centripetal force of gravity, in this sense? In your winch example you said the forward force and centripetal force were equal. Can you share a formula proving how forward momentum and centripetal gravity are made equal by the ISS?

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 01:02 AM

originally posted by: InachMarbank

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

gravity wont change forward momentum.. gravity and forward momentum are generally always at right angles to maintain orbit.

the only way gravity can change forward momentum is if forward momentum was not perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

however in orbit forward momentum is more of less always parallel to the earths surface therefore always perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 02:21 AM

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

gravity wont change forward momentum.. gravity and forward momentum are generally always at right angles to maintain orbit.

the only way gravity can change forward momentum is if forward momentum was not perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

however in orbit forward momentum is more of less always parallel to the earths surface therefore always perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

And can the forward momentum change the down force of gravity, as raymundoko seems to be suggesting?

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 03:38 AM

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

gravity wont change forward momentum.. gravity and forward momentum are generally always at right angles to maintain orbit.

the only way gravity can change forward momentum is if forward momentum was not perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

however in orbit forward momentum is more of less always parallel to the earths surface therefore always perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

And can the forward momentum change the down force of gravity, as raymundoko seems to be suggesting?

no it cant he never suggested that, that is your own misinterpretation.

anyway this is offtopic. if you have genuine questions about this there is a thread that was made to answer any physics questions just like this:
Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics
edit on 7-12-2016 by choos because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 04:46 AM

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

gravity wont change forward momentum.. gravity and forward momentum are generally always at right angles to maintain orbit.

the only way gravity can change forward momentum is if forward momentum was not perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

however in orbit forward momentum is more of less always parallel to the earths surface therefore always perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

And can the forward momentum change the down force of gravity, as raymundoko seems to be suggesting?

no it cant he never suggested that, that is your own misinterpretation.

anyway this is offtopic. if you have genuine questions about this there is a thread that was made to answer any physics questions just like this:
Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics

This is a thread about NASA plans, and I am curious about how genuine NASA claims are. I view my questions as fitting, tackling one of NASA's earliest claims, man made satellites in orbit.

It was said forward momentum could overcome downward force.

Are you saying the ISS is not falling, as gravity would cause an above ground object without upward force to do?
edit on 7-12-2016 by InachMarbank because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 04:58 AM

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

gravity wont change forward momentum.. gravity and forward momentum are generally always at right angles to maintain orbit.

the only way gravity can change forward momentum is if forward momentum was not perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

however in orbit forward momentum is more of less always parallel to the earths surface therefore always perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

And can the forward momentum change the down force of gravity, as raymundoko seems to be suggesting?

no it cant he never suggested that, that is your own misinterpretation.

anyway this is offtopic. if you have genuine questions about this there is a thread that was made to answer any physics questions just like this:
Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics

This is a thread about NASA plans, and I am curious about NASA claims. I view my questions as fitting.

It was said forward momentum could overcome downward force.

Are you saying the ISS is not falling, as gravity would cause an object without upward force to do?

your questions are not fitting, you are querying the ISS and orbital mechanics.. nothing to do with NASA's plans..

forward momentum doesnt literally "overcome" gravity, that is just your misinterpretation.. what forward momentum does do is that it moves the craft far enough forward that whatever gravity has done to pull the craft to earth the craft has moved sufficiently far enough forward to maintain its height due to the curvature of the earth.

increase the forward momentum and the craft gains a higher altitude, lower the forward momentum and it will begin to fall.

if you have any other issues ask in the appropriate thread which is not this one ill link it again, they have smart people in there that explain things better than i can.. if you are genuinely curious go ask there.

Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics
edit on 7-12-2016 by choos because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 05:07 AM

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

gravity wont change forward momentum.. gravity and forward momentum are generally always at right angles to maintain orbit.

the only way gravity can change forward momentum is if forward momentum was not perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

however in orbit forward momentum is more of less always parallel to the earths surface therefore always perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

And can the forward momentum change the down force of gravity, as raymundoko seems to be suggesting?

no it cant he never suggested that, that is your own misinterpretation.

anyway this is offtopic. if you have genuine questions about this there is a thread that was made to answer any physics questions just like this:
Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics

This is a thread about NASA plans, and I am curious about NASA claims. I view my questions as fitting.

It was said forward momentum could overcome downward force.

Are you saying the ISS is not falling, as gravity would cause an object without upward force to do?

your questions are not fitting, you are querying the ISS and orbital mechanics.. nothing to do with NASA's plans..

forward momentum doesnt "overcome" gravity, that is just your misinterpretation.. what forward momentum does do is that it moves the craft far enough forward that whatever gravity has done to pull the craft to earth the craft has moved sufficiently far enough forward to maintain its height due to the curvature of the earth.

increase the forward momentum and the craft gains a higher altitude, lower the forward momentum and it will begin to fall.

if you have any other issues ask in the appropriate thread which is not this one ill link it again, they have smart people in there that explain things better than i can.. if you are genuinely curious go ask there.

Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics

That thread was started like 2 years ago.

Does NASA plan to keep the ISS in orbit? If so, then my questions are about a NASA plan, right?

So it sounds like you are saying gravity is causing the ISS to fall. Is that correct?

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 05:52 AM

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

gravity wont change forward momentum.. gravity and forward momentum are generally always at right angles to maintain orbit.

the only way gravity can change forward momentum is if forward momentum was not perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

however in orbit forward momentum is more of less always parallel to the earths surface therefore always perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

And can the forward momentum change the down force of gravity, as raymundoko seems to be suggesting?

no it cant he never suggested that, that is your own misinterpretation.

anyway this is offtopic. if you have genuine questions about this there is a thread that was made to answer any physics questions just like this:
Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics

This is a thread about NASA plans, and I am curious about NASA claims. I view my questions as fitting.

It was said forward momentum could overcome downward force.

Are you saying the ISS is not falling, as gravity would cause an object without upward force to do?

your questions are not fitting, you are querying the ISS and orbital mechanics.. nothing to do with NASA's plans..

forward momentum doesnt "overcome" gravity, that is just your misinterpretation.. what forward momentum does do is that it moves the craft far enough forward that whatever gravity has done to pull the craft to earth the craft has moved sufficiently far enough forward to maintain its height due to the curvature of the earth.

increase the forward momentum and the craft gains a higher altitude, lower the forward momentum and it will begin to fall.

if you have any other issues ask in the appropriate thread which is not this one ill link it again, they have smart people in there that explain things better than i can.. if you are genuinely curious go ask there.

Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics

That thread was started like 2 years ago.

Does NASA plan to keep the ISS in orbit? If so, then my questions are about a NASA plan, right?

So it sounds like you are saying gravity is causing the ISS to fall. Is that correct?

no i have told you already your question is about ORBITAL MECHANICS... you are using the ISS as an example, you could use any other satellite in existance and your questions are still valid.

the thread may have been started two years ago, but it is still active.. you have wasted enough pages in this thread alone, i wont reply to you here anymore, like i said if you have genuine questions about orbital mechanics go ask in the physics thread, there is enough very smart people there to get all your answers without people like me giving you grief about being off topic.

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 09:26 AM
a reply to: InachMarbank

When did I ever say it would change the force of gravity? You are the one who said that. However I have to agree with Choos. This is no longer about NASA and instead about orbital mechanics and your personal view on physics. You should start a separate thread or join an existing thread to discuss these things.

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 03:33 PM

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: InachMarbank

When did I ever say it would change the force of gravity? You are the one who said that. However I have to agree with Choos. This is no longer about NASA and instead about orbital mechanics and your personal view on physics. You should start a separate thread or join an existing thread to discuss these things.

You said it overcomes the down force of gravity.
How does it overcome the down force of gravity, without any up force against gravity?
Oh, so this is a thread about NASA, but its ok to dismiss technical/scientific questions about NASA's technologies, when these questions about NASA's technologies clearly appear to be unresolved, is it?

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 03:38 PM

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

originally posted by: choos

originally posted by: InachMarbank

So... when the ISS moves at a forward momentum, traveling 17000 mph, gravity, which would normally force downward at a 90 degree angle, is changed; but when gravity forces downward, at 8.84 meters per second squared, at a 90 degree angle, it does not change forward momentum?

gravity wont change forward momentum.. gravity and forward momentum are generally always at right angles to maintain orbit.

the only way gravity can change forward momentum is if forward momentum was not perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

however in orbit forward momentum is more of less always parallel to the earths surface therefore always perpendicular to the pull of gravity.

And can the forward momentum change the down force of gravity, as raymundoko seems to be suggesting?

no it cant he never suggested that, that is your own misinterpretation.

anyway this is offtopic. if you have genuine questions about this there is a thread that was made to answer any physics questions just like this:
Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics

This is a thread about NASA plans, and I am curious about NASA claims. I view my questions as fitting.

It was said forward momentum could overcome downward force.

Are you saying the ISS is not falling, as gravity would cause an object without upward force to do?

your questions are not fitting, you are querying the ISS and orbital mechanics.. nothing to do with NASA's plans..

forward momentum doesnt "overcome" gravity, that is just your misinterpretation.. what forward momentum does do is that it moves the craft far enough forward that whatever gravity has done to pull the craft to earth the craft has moved sufficiently far enough forward to maintain its height due to the curvature of the earth.

increase the forward momentum and the craft gains a higher altitude, lower the forward momentum and it will begin to fall.

if you have any other issues ask in the appropriate thread which is not this one ill link it again, they have smart people in there that explain things better than i can.. if you are genuinely curious go ask there.

Thread: Ask any question you want about Physics

That thread was started like 2 years ago.

Does NASA plan to keep the ISS in orbit? If so, then my questions are about a NASA plan, right?

So it sounds like you are saying gravity is causing the ISS to fall. Is that correct?

no i have told you already your question is about ORBITAL MECHANICS... you are using the ISS as an example, you could use any other satellite in existance and your questions are still valid.

the thread may have been started two years ago, but it is still active.. you have wasted enough pages in this thread alone, i wont reply to you here anymore, like i said if you have genuine questions about orbital mechanics go ask in the physics thread, there is enough very smart people there to get all your answers without people like me giving you grief about being off topic.

Thanks for answering me to say you won't answer me.

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 04:03 PM
a reply to: InachMarbank

It's only unresolved in your own head. You have your own idea about physics that is at odds with what we observe. you have gone out of your way to not understand the basics of orbital mechanics.

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 04:28 PM
a reply to: raymundoko

What exactly do you observe?

You didn't answer my question:

How does it overcome the down force of gravity, without any up force against gravity?

You also didn't respond to these questions:

Can you quantify, the forward force of the ISS, in this sense, and the new centripetal force of gravity, in this sense? In your winch example you said the forward force and centripetal force were equal. Can you share a formula proving how forward momentum and centripetal gravity are made equal by the ISS?

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 04:54 PM
a reply to: InachMarbank

I didn't quantify those because those aren't valid questions...why would there be a "new force of gravity"??? The forward momentum is the "up " force in this sense but you don't seem to understand no matter how simply I try to explain. Vertical free fall + correct horizontal speed = orbit.

Your questions imply you lack basic knowledge of physics yet you are trying to introduce new physics.
edit on 7-12-2016 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 7 2016 @ 05:18 PM

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: InachMarbank

I didn't quantify those because those aren't valid questions...why would there be a "new force of gravity"??? The forward momentum is the "up " force in this sense but you don't seem to understand no matter how simply I try to explain. Vertical free fall + correct horizontal speed = orbit.

Your questions imply you lack basic knowledge of physics yet you are trying to introduce new physics.

Did you just say forward is up? That sounds new...

Are you now saying the ISS is falling?

54