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.

 

Gravity on the Moon...

page: 9
48
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
Question:
Does the Moon only have a magnetic gravity force keeping dust and matter intact?
Or is there a atmosphere of gasses as well on the surface of the Moon keeping matter on the ground?

If there is a atmosphere of gasses on the Moon where does it come from?




posted on Jun, 2 2009 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Nope. It's just the mass of the moon blocking out gravity from Earth. This is sorta Newton's sphere theorem. If you had a very dense sphere, then inside you would have no gravity at all. Well imagine this principal between the moon and Earth, but on the far side, the moon's solidness blocks gravity from the Earth.

This also disproves both hollow Earth and hollow moon conspiracies.



posted on Jun, 2 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


I may not be the best person to answer your post, but I will try it anyway, with my limited knowledge about gravity.

All objects with mass create a force on the surrounding objects, a force that gets weaker with the square of the distance between objects (two objects with the same mass are attracted to each other with a force that is a fourth of the force between two other objects with the same mass but at half the distance of the first two objects) and that gets stronger with the mass, so the more massive objects have a bigger influence over less massive objects.

A satellite orbiting Earth is not attracted to Earth because of the atmosphere (if it was in the atmosphere it could not move at such high speeds and it would need much more fuel to keep it fighting against the drag of the atmosphere) but because it has mass and the Earth has mass.

Using the old equations I learnt at school in the previous millennium, a satellite with a 1,000kg mass, orbiting at 1,000km from Earth, is attracted to Earth by a force of some 7,338 newtons, equivalent to some 738kg.

The same force also affects the Earth, but as Earth has a much bigger inertia it's the satellite that falls to Earth (unless some force is applied to negate the above force) and not the Earth that falls to the satellite (or both, if they had the same mass they would meet at half distance between them).

If you replace your enigmatic "energy field" by gravity then your explanation is more or less the same, you do not need to create something new.

And atmosphere does not have any role on objects outside itself, but if makes objects inside itself heavier because of the weight of the air above them and pushing them down, but that force is relatively small when compared with gravity.

Gravity has been measured between objects with no magnetic influence between themselves and at the same atmospheric pressure, so, from your theory, the only remaining possible explanation is the "energy field", that we usually call gravity.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
John Lear used to say that the gravity on the moon was greater than we have been told, and that the gravity was different on farside than it was on nearside...

Well, India's Chan 1 just had to increase orbit from 100km to 200km to 'stay afloat'


After the successful completion of all the major mission objectives, the orbit of Chandrayaan-1 spacecraft, which was at a height of 100 km from the lunar surface since November 2008, has now been raised to 200 km.


A bit off, Zorg. The reason for the orbital change is clearly given. Continuing from your snip...

"has now been raised to 200 km. The orbit raising manoeuvres were carried out between 0900 and 1000 hrs IST on May 19, 2009. The spacecraft in this higher altitude will enable further studies on orbit perturbations, gravitational field variation of the Moon and also enable imaging lunar surface with a wider swath."

Nothing about "staying afloat."

As to that nearside/farside stuff, read your own links more. It's all about concentrations of mass in various parts of the moon's surface, which come with a corresponding increase in local gravity. Nothing bizarre here, just basic science coming into play.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nightflyer28

Nothing about "staying afloat."


Well sure... in the 'official' version.

Its not like I would expect them to say "Hey guys, the gravity on the Moon is messed up, we need to pull back for safety"

Point is they still don't know what the situation is... because NASA is spending millions more to send GRAIL, to check out the gravity on the Moon BEFORE they send any new missions (which may already be canceled anyway
)

I'm getting a headache... time to fix my roof vents



new topics

 
48
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join