It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# "Vortex Based Mathematics by Marko Rodin"

page: 276
39
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 04:06 PM

When a planet starts to cross in front of the suns linear path around the galactic center, what stops the sun and planet from colliding like gravity would want them to do? is this why orbits are elliptical, the planet gets slingshot when looping in front of the suns path?

Do artificial satellites have to enter the earths orbit at an angle, or can they be shot straight up, and then have their thrusts turned off and they will be compelled to begin to orbit the earth? Do all satellites travel at different velocities, and if they do, is this dependent on their mass, and the initial velocity they were traveling when they left earths atmosphere?

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 05:42 PM

Originally posted by ImaFungi
When a planet starts to cross in front of the suns linear path around the galactic center, what stops the sun and planet from colliding like gravity would want them to do?
First, planets in our solar system don't do that, and second, how do you know what gravity wants?

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 05:58 PM

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by ImaFungi
When a planet starts to cross in front of the suns linear path around the galactic center, what stops the sun and planet from colliding like gravity would want them to do?
First, planets in our solar system don't do that, and second, how do you know what gravity wants?

Well thats what i was wondering, I always see the diagram of the concentric circle planets around the star, never how they actually move in tandem, so i was wondering if you know. Gravity wants massive bodies (or any bodies in an inverse square lawed vicinity) to coalesce, just like gravity wants a rock thrown into the air to head towards earths center of mass, gravity wants the big rock, the moon, to fall towards the center of the larger earths center of mass. I know because I asked it.

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 06:10 PM

Originally posted by ImaFungi
Gravity wants massive bodies (or any bodies in an inverse square lawed vicinity) to coalesce
I don't know what gravity wants. I try not to personify things that aren't persons.

Why is the moon moving away from the Earth? That seems to contradict your notion that gravity wants them closer. I guess if gravity really wanted what you said, it's not getting what it wants, just like you're not going to get people to re-type thousands of pages of stuff here that you can easily look up, even though that may be what you want. Oh you just want a simple summary instead, like "The universe is electric"? Yes some aspects are electric, but overgeneralizing diminishes understanding, it doesn't increase it. If you really want full understanding, you'll have to read thousands of pages. A few brief replies here won't provide any deep understanding, no matter how much you want that to happen.

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 06:35 PM

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by ImaFungi
Gravity wants massive bodies (or any bodies in an inverse square lawed vicinity) to coalesce
I don't know what gravity wants. I try not to personify things that aren't persons.

Why is the moon moving away from the Earth? That seems to contradict your notion that gravity wants them closer. I guess if gravity really wanted what you said, it's not getting what it wants, just like you're not going to get people to re-type thousands of pages of stuff here that you can easily look up, even though that may be what you want. Oh you just want a simple summary instead, like "The universe is electric"? Yes some aspects are electric, but overgeneralizing diminishes understanding, it doesn't increase it. If you really want full understanding, you'll have to read thousands of pages. A few brief replies here won't provide any deep understanding, no matter how much you want that to happen.

you are silly. The moon is not moving away from earth, it is always moving toward it.

I already am in the post a reply page so cannot retype my questions from before but i know I asked a few you did not answer. So can you click quote on my prior reply, and answer the questions to the best of your ability, im not grading you, just want to chat about the universe with some smart people.

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 06:40 PM

Im not sure if you're joking or not but the moon is indeed moving away from earth. At about an inch and a half a year though, its going to be a long time before it affects earth luckily.

I should add these measurements have been taken and verified through the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment, which also helped cement some earler calculations done on the moon's orbit.
edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: grammar, spelling

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 06:47 PM
“the fundamentals of science are so hopelessly wrong and so contrary to nature that nothing but a major surgical operation upon the present primitive beliefs can ever put them in line for a workable cosmogenic synthesis.” Walter Russell

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing" Socrates

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 06:51 PM

Originally posted by ImaFungi
just want to chat about the universe with some smart people.
And I want you to look this stuff up, and only ask about the stuff that you didn't understand after reading about it, in threads where the questions are relevant, meaning start a new thread if you have to, but I guess you, I and gravity are all not getting what we want.

However you can see my reply here, and then watch the video in the OP, and mentally change 90 degrees to 60 degrees to understand why your question is wrong:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by ImaFungi
you are silly. The moon is not moving away from earth, it is always moving toward it.

Did you even try putting something like "moon moving away from earth" in a search engine? There are not only detailed measurements showing it happens, but also detailed explanations about why, yet you don't even seem to be trying. Is it any wonder people here aren't motivated to help someone who doesn't even seem to want to help himself?
edit on 21-2-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 06:57 PM

Originally posted by topherman420

Im not sure if you're joking or not but the moon is indeed moving away from earth. At about an inch and a half a year though, its going to be a long time before it affects earth luckily.

I should add these measurements have been taken and verified through the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment, which also helped cement some earler calculations done on the moon's orbit.
edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: grammar, spelling

your joking right. If the moon is moving away from earth, why hasnt the moon moved away from earth?

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 07:00 PM

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by ImaFungi
just want to chat about the universe with some smart people.
And I want you to look this stuff up, and only ask about the stuff that you didn't understand after reading about it, in threads where the questions are relevant, meaning start a new thread if you have to, but I guess you, I and gravity are all not getting what we want.

However you can see my reply here, and then watch the video in the OP, and mentally change 90 degrees to 60 degrees to understand why your question is wrong:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by ImaFungi
you are silly. The moon is not moving away from earth, it is always moving toward it.

Did you even try putting something like "moon moving away from earth" in a search engine? There are not only detailed measurements showing it happens, but also detailed explanations about why, yet you don't even seem to be trying. Is it any wonder people here aren't motivated to help someone who doesn't even seem to want to help himself?
edit on 21-2-2013 by Arbitrageur because: clarification

What causes the orbit to be 60 degrees? is that the orbit of all the planets?

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 07:13 PM

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by topherman420

Im not sure if you're joking or not but the moon is indeed moving away from earth. At about an inch and a half a year though, its going to be a long time before it affects earth luckily.

I should add these measurements have been taken and verified through the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment, which also helped cement some earler calculations done on the moon's orbit.
edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: grammar, spelling

your joking right. If the moon is moving away from earth, why hasnt the moon moved away from earth?

I don't think you are digesting this the correct way. Think of it this way instead....the orbit of the moon is getting larger = slowly moving farther away from the earth. The Lunar Laser Ranging experiment can measure the distance of the moon from the earth, and they can see from the measurements the moon is moving 3.8 cm from the earth each year.
Lunar Distance
Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 07:18 PM

Originally posted by topherman420

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by topherman420

Im not sure if you're joking or not but the moon is indeed moving away from earth. At about an inch and a half a year though, its going to be a long time before it affects earth luckily.

I should add these measurements have been taken and verified through the Lunar Laser Ranging experiment, which also helped cement some earler calculations done on the moon's orbit.
edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: grammar, spelling

your joking right. If the moon is moving away from earth, why hasnt the moon moved away from earth?

I don't think you are digesting this the correct way. Think of it this way instead....the orbit of the moon is getting larger = slowly moving farther away from the earth. The Lunar Laser Ranging experiment can measure the distance of the moon from the earth, and they can see from the measurements the moon is moving 3.8 cm from the earth each year.
Lunar Distance
Lunar Laser Ranging Experiment

Ok let me rephrase my stance... The moon is always traveling towards the earth, this is the nature of gravity. You are disagreeing by saying; Nooo the moon is going away from the earth....?

The reason the moon orbits the earth is because it is always heading towards the earth, the reason the orbit could be getting larger, is because if there is an acceleration (some type of sling shot) at any point in the moons orbit, this can cause the moon to shift slightly further from earth as it orbits...

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 07:23 PM

It has to do with the orbital velocity:

So how does this cause the Moon to recede from Earth? The tidal bulges produced on Earth by the Moon are not centered at the point on Earth's surface directly below the Moon, but are shifted ahead of the Moon because of Earth's faster spin rate. The gravitational force of the excess mass in this displaced bulge pulls on the Moon, slightly increasing its orbital velocity. In the 1600s, Johannes Kepler showed that when an object's orbital velocity increases, its orbital radius will expand; thus, the Moon slowly recedes from Earth.

Source

Keep in mind the moon also has gravity, even if it is dwarfed in comparison to the earth or heavier bodies in the solar system.
PS: Phage also put it very concisely below

edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: forgot link

edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 07:26 PM

the reason the orbit could be getting larger, is because if there is an acceleration (some type of sling shot) at any point in the moons orbit,

The Moon is moving to a higher orbit because of the effects of tidal locking. It is "robbing" rotational energy from the Earth and converting it to orbital energy. The Earth's rotation is slowing. The Moon's orbit is getting higher.

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Phage

the reason the orbit could be getting larger, is because if there is an acceleration (some type of sling shot) at any point in the moons orbit,

The Moon is moving to a higher orbit because of the effects of tidal locking. It is "robbing" rotational energy from the Earth and converting it to orbital energy. The Earth's rotation is slowing. The Moon's orbit is getting higher.

How does it rob the rotational energy ( that is explained above in the other posters post, the earth rotates faster so ahead of the moon there is a bulge in mass?) Does tidal locking have to do with the moon causing tides or have to do with the moon becoming non rotational and locked facing the earth a certain way ( or are those similar causes and effects?)? How does the moon cause the tides, is it gravity waves?

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 08:12 PM

Originally posted by ImaFungi

Originally posted by Phage

the reason the orbit could be getting larger, is because if there is an acceleration (some type of sling shot) at any point in the moons orbit,

The Moon is moving to a higher orbit because of the effects of tidal locking. It is "robbing" rotational energy from the Earth and converting it to orbital energy. The Earth's rotation is slowing. The Moon's orbit is getting higher.

How does it rob the rotational energy ( that is explained above in the other posters post, the earth rotates faster so ahead of the moon there is a bulge in mass?) Does tidal locking have to do with the moon causing tides or have to do with the moon becoming non rotational and locked facing the earth a certain way ( or are those similar causes and effects?)? How does the moon cause the tides, is it gravity waves?

If im not mistaken the energy is given in the form of inertial energy. In regards to "tidally locked" don't only focus on the water aspect, its in reference to the "locked" position the moon appears to be in. The tides are caused by the earth pulling towards the moon and causing a bulge in the water. Centrifugal force creates a bulge on the opposite side of the earth (keep in mind that this "bulge includes the plates and the molten core but it doesn't show as much like in water) and this large bulge would be the high tide, the depressions or low spots in the oceans between would be the low tides. This is my basic understanding of it, and it is able to be researched by even non-PhD's like myself.

EDIT: An interesting note....just like the earth's oceans can bulge from the moons influence so is it on the moon. We obviously don't see this tide, but it was formed (and may still be "forming") from the rocky body of the moon. We can see the moon earth relationship in the egg shape of the moon, and our oceans, it's kind of cool.
edit on 21-2-2013 by topherman420 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 08:19 PM
Why can't we just attribute the tides to the number 5 or maybe 32, which is still 5 and call it a day?

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 08:32 PM

Originally posted by ImaFungi

How does it rob the rotational energy ( that is explained above in the other posters post, the earth rotates faster so ahead of the moon there is a bulge in mass?)

Because as the earth drags on the moon to speed it up the "equal and opposite effect" is the moon's gravity draging on the earth to slow it down - it is an exchange of energy.

This wiki article has a fuller explaination - including a history of the discovery of the effect as far back as the late 1600's.

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 08:39 PM

Originally posted by topherman420
EDIT: An interesting note....just like the earth's oceans can bulge from the moons influence so is it on the moon.
where did you find that? I'm not sure where you got that, but this video paints a different picture, talking about the moons lopsided topography with highlands on the far side of the moon, and a hypothesis which might explain it around 21:30:

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 08:44 PM

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Americanist
Perhaps you should explain how dark matter fails to emit EM radiation.

I see, you switched back into the absurd mode... And I had high hopes... But oh well.

Anyhow, if Arb or I could explain that, we'd be boarding the plane right now, for a trip to Europe to pick up our well deserved Nobel Prize. Seeing it as we are still stuck on ATS, you could have easily make the conclusion (and it beats me that you failed to reach it) that we don't know the answer.

I was doing you a favor by staging some opportunity to present a relevant case. You see, I know you don't know. The 84% model mass of debunking things ain't even defined. In layman's terms - you're batting nearly 2 out of 10 regardless of your star tally. Conclusion: You won't have to go far to join the piñata party in your neighbor's back yard.

new topics

top topics

39