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.

 

Earth must have another Moon, say Astronomers

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   

EARTH MUST HAVE ANOTHER MOON, SAY ASTRONOMERS


news.discovery.com

"At any given time, there should be at least one natural Earth satellite of one-meter diameter orbiting the Earth," Granvik, Jeremie Vaubaillon and Robert Jedicke wrote in "The Population of Natural Earth Satellites," a paper published in online physics journal ArXiv.org.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.theoryofgravity.com
edit on 22-12-2011 by Maxmars because: PLEASE - NO ALL CAPS THREAD TITLES




posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
It seems that the Earth must have some strange balance requirement that such tiny satellites fulfill. To me, this suggests an electrical explanation for gravity.

From what I know of science current theory on gravity, this situation with these tiny satellites does not fit the model. How would warping of time and space cause a continuous stream of small satellites to get caught in Earths gravity field for a few revolutions, and then slip back out. An occasional satellite slipping in and out the the hole that is supposedly created by time and space would be reasonable, but a constant stream of these satellites point to an electrical imbalance. IMO

news.discovery.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:07 PM
link   
Or large cloaked objects sitting at Lagrange points. there mas would have that type of affect. Old saying just because you can't see it does not mean its not there:-) Especially in the visible light spectrum.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


Not at all:


It seems that the Earth must have some strange balance requirement that such tiny satellites fulfill. To me, this suggests an electrical explanation for gravity.


In the other thread on this topic it's well-understood, and the physics of gravity are well-presented.

There is no "strange balance requirement" for the Earth (whatever that may mean?) and of course, gravity as no electrical components. Now, there MAY be some sort of as-yet-undiscovered fundamental force relationships still to be understood....in fact, that is the so-called "Theory Of Everything" holy grail of research....

Some see the effects of electro-magnetism, and therefore jump to these conclusions (wrongly) about the "nature" of gravity.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


What other thread, maybe you could provide a link.

Maybe you could take a shot at explaining your opinion.

I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation for gravity, or small force and large force, or the whole force concept.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 





From what I know of science current theory on gravity, this situation with these tiny satellites does not fit the model. How would warping of time and space cause a continuous stream of small satellites to get caught in Earths gravity field for a few revolutions, and then slip back out. An occasional satellite slipping in and out the the hole that is supposedly created by time and space would be reasonable, but a constant stream of these satellites point to an electrical imbalance. IMO


I think your opinion is flawed.

Gravity is relative to Mass. Think of a bowling ball being placed onto a mattress, the mass of the ball causes the mattress to deform under it. now try to imagine that happening in 3 dimensions, that is how mass distorts space/time.

It doesn't rip holes in it. the earth's gravity only goes out so far before the "gravity well" where you can put an object into orbit and it stays there, forever basically.

Because the earth has a moon, is in a solar system with a massive star at the center and other planets orbiting, there is a bit of tugging and pulling.

The angle of entry of an object, as well as it's mass, will determine what happens. If the angle is shallow enough, it might come into an orbit pattern following the earths rotation until it spins back out.

there is evidence to support string theory
There is evidence to support quantum theory
There is no evidence to support an "electric universe" as of yet.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Tachyeon
 


I think we are looking out into space these days at frequencies beyond visible light. That must be some amazing cloaking tech.

Personally, I think higher level beings exist as Plasma. Probably don't need space ships.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


OK....I will use the Search feature:


What other thread, maybe you could provide a link.


Ah, here it is:

www.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on Thu 22 December 2011 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Not exactly breaking news. It's been known for quite a while.
Here's the other thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Was all caps really necessary?
edit on 12/22/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Isn't there requirments for something to be considered a moon or planatary body? (Sorry for spelling >.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 



the earth's gravity only goes out so far before the "gravity well" where you can put an object into orbit and it stays there, forever basically.


Yeah, as I pointed out in my original post, these tiny satellites are slipping in an out of Earth's orbit, and my understanding of mainstream theory on gravity is as you state, it should stay there forever. You might want to reread my op.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 

There are gravitational influences other than from the Earth.
The Sun, the Moon, the other planets. All affect objects in space. Not all orbits are stable.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


It has been known for the while that there are small asteroids caught in Earths orbit, but this article implies something subtle, but very important, in difference, that I tried to emphasize on my op.

That these small satellites slip in and out of Earth's orbit on essentially a continuous basis, looks like an electrical imbalance, not asteroids rolling around on the rim of Earths gravity well.

I just copied and pasted the headline as it was.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


You should read more than just that one sentence. Phishy also said:


The angle of entry of an object, as well as it's mass, will determine what happens. If the angle is shallow enough, it might come into an orbit pattern following the earths rotation until it spins back out.


Besides, if these are mainstream scientists modelling this, then you can bet they're not modelling it with the Electric Universe theory in mind. Since they model it, we can safely assume they're doing so within the confines of General Relativity.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 




That these small satellites slip in and out of Earth's orbit on essentially a continuous basis, looks like an electrical imbalance, not asteroids rolling around on the rim of Earths gravity well.


See my previous post...and the other thread.

edit on 12/22/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Maybe you could take a stab at how other gravitational forces would create this kind of phenom.

Possibly the moon bumping these asteroids out of orbit, but that looks like magnetism.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


No. It looks like gravity.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by CLPrime
 


This isn't something that should be modelled, it is something that should be observed and tracked.

It is as if people don't realize how incomplete our current theory of gravity is.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Or in other words, you can't back up your claims with logic or reason, so you just post your usual holier than thou statement loved by your minions.

Do you have an inkling of imagination? Are you capable of explaining the ideas behind your opinion?

Cause this does not fit current gravity theory. See other link in my Op.



posted on Dec, 22 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


It doesn't matter...if it's being modelled using the standard theory of gravity, then what's the problem? Just because you, poet1b, can't understand how something can be captured by the Earth for a limited duration, that doesn't mean it's not physically possible. You've had two explanations so far of how this is possible, not to mention been linked to another thread discussing the subject. You may think others can't see flaws in the theory of gravity, but it seems you can't see a legitimate explanation when you're given one (or two).



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join