It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by kinglizard
We know the sun exerts a massive amount of gravity so ignoring everything else I don't see how it could be anything other than a sphere. Everything is being pulled towards its center including the stuff that makes up the sun. Knowing this a bowl shaped sun would be impossible because it would collapse on itself.
Originally posted by Plumbo
Yea, I see your point, but what exactly is gravity anyway? I've asked this question to 'experts' and they can't give me a technical definition for it. I'm convinced no one can.
[edit on 11-2-2005 by Plumbo]
Basically everything is attracted to each other if you and I were floating around in space relatively close to each other eventually we will be drawn together.
If I was a big fat guy and you were a little girl you would be attracted to me. IE smaller masses are attracted to larger masses. Other forces like friction will slow or stop this action.
The same thing will happen with the atoms of a star like our sun. Atoms are attracted to each other making larger complete masses. As there is no other forces interfering with the gravity here they will form in a shape of a ball.
This is why the sun is round as well as the Earth and the moon.
Originally posted by Umbrax
Plumbo you have a good healthy ability to question things. You are also were good in graphic design. However the pictures you have made prove nothing. Instead of questioning the physics that we have all been learning since grade 6 science, perhaps you can back up your bowl pictures with something more solid?
As for your moon questions the people at NASA that study the moon for a living (and get paid quite well for it) have made this nice video clip for us to see. spaceflight1.nasa.gov.... Just press play on the remote control.
Originally posted by Plumbo
From my vantage point, there seems to be a magical answer in saying the word gravity to explain things are the way they are.
Question #1: We are told the earth spins. Well, if the earth really does spin, then why are not we and every thing else, whipping off of it like a little toddler off a twirling merry-go-round?
Answer: gravity holds us down.
Question #2: Well, if gravity holds us down, then why does the earth bulge at the equator?
Answer: The earth spins.
Question #3: Well if the earth spins, then why are we not whipping off of it like a tooddler.....
Answer: Gravity holds us down.
Question #4: Why does gravity oppose logic of physics?
Originally posted by Esoterica
OK, these are just random questions as I try to comprehend this all-
1. Do you have any sources beyond a single 60-year old theory from a guy who's other work has been pretty much proven wrong?
Newton explained the principle underlying the motion of the planets and the satellites by the example of a stone thrown horizontally from a mountain with such force that gravitation bends its flight so that it revolves around the earth, coming back to exactly the same place, once again to repeat the course of its flight. But he admits “It is not to be conceived that mere mechanical causes could give birth to so many regular motions,” and invokes an act of Providence in providing each satellite with a tangential push of a strength which, together with the pull of the primary, creates an orbit.
2. Speaking of convenience, isn't it convenient that every single object in the universe has it's convex side facing us, instead of it's concave? Isn't it also convenient that the earth is, in fact, spherical?
3. Are you actually aware that you're insane? You've totally ignored hundreds of years of scientific advancement because you think the pcitures you made 'look right.' We have pcitures, too. Real pictures. Pictures that show these objects to be spherical.
4. Ignoring #3, we have pictures of many, many objects in the solar system that are spheres. Are you suggesting only the sun and moon are magically bowls?
5. Wow...I still can't get over this.
Originally posted by orionthehunter
I prefer to think of gravity not as a force but the effect of a mass curving space-time. Since someone here is a graphic artist they may be able to depict this curvature. Take a tarp somewhat outstretched and flat and then throw a heavy mass onto it. This mass will curve the tarp or a two dimensional representation of our space. The curvature of space-time has effects on other objects in space and that's what we have been calling this effect (gravity). In other words, space-time is like the fabric of the universe and objects in space are bending space-time. The bigger or massive the object, the more the object curves space.
Originally posted by orionthehunter
Yes it is 3-dimensional. I was too lazy to go back and correct that so please forgive me. As far as the weird thought of glass in the atmosphere creating a rainbow of colors instead of water, how do you explain the spectrum of colors you see when you shoot the spray from a water hose up towards the sun and see a rainbow of colors? Are you saying the water is turning into glass?
As far as how a mass got into this space-time, you could say it was providence that created all and made all objects explode out from a central point to create all that we see. Of course some things collide with others and form new objects.
I got a question for you, why do you think the sky is blue here on Earth while scientists say it is different colors such as red on other planets?
One optical illusion you can observe here on Earth is the moon. When you see the moon close to the horizon, it will appear bigger than when it is higher up in the sky. I don't believe the moon is actually getting larger and smaller that often. It's an optical illusion.
Originally posted by Whiskey Jack
I think that, at least, it's pretty safe to say that the side of the moon facing us is convex.
Beyond that, to go with your theory of cosmic bowls and glass-covered atmospheres: What does that say about our [physical] universe? We can argue about the philosophical, and metaphysical implications of such a scenario until the cows come home, but what physical properties can we deduce from such a scenario?