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.

 

Helping members understand the physics of Space.

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by metalshredmetal

awesome, terrific addition.

you sound like you'd really enjoy the little book of coincidences that I linked in an earlier post. it's very much filled with these types of facts.




Yes, those are pretty cool.
I wasn't offering, so much, fun facts as a major trend that defines our solar system.

For something that is just plain spooky and fun check out the Metonic Cycle.

But the trend described in my previous post,
is a major trophy just waiting for some astronomer to solve.


David Grouchy




posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by metalshredmetal
 


It reminds me of learning of matrix's (1's and 0's) in Calculus. It is mind boggling how much math is a crutch to understanding and proving the physics to everything in this universe. It works in such harmony. It makes you realize we are truly in just the right spot of our galaxy to support life so greatly.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by chaztekno
 


Thank you for the link! I love all the info I have received so far. It's enough to really get the motor going. I made this thread so that way when I do have a question I can refer to something with multiple explanations to understand.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by jeenyus2008
reply to post by davidgrouchy
 


Forgive me for the spelling error. Thanks


Done!

I edited my post.


David Grouchy



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by davidgrouchy

Originally posted by Illustronic


I'm saying that 1.5 days is not a whole number.


David Grouchy


Maybe in base 10, in base 5 they are whole numbers.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic

Originally posted by davidgrouchy

Originally posted by Illustronic


I'm saying that 1.5 days is not a whole number.


David Grouchy


Maybe in base 10, in base 5 they are whole numbers.


Thanks for the belly laugh.



But even in base 5,
one and a half still contains a fraction.


David Grouchy
edit on 5-1-2012 by davidgrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Space and time are constructed of the same "material". Time is space that is engaged as kinetic expression. Space is time that is engaged as static expression. The two interchange characteristics in reaction to their proximity to the generated, relative non-existence, the infinite impedence. Time is current. Space is voltage. The impedence is the resistance. The Universe is the harmonics expressions of the infinite Ohm's Law. Yes, THE Answer really is that simple.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by tkwasny
 


That makes it a lot easier to understand the relevance of time and space going hand in hand in creation.
And also why everything in space seems the way it does (vast) with near infinite details..
edit on 5-1-2012 by jeenyus2008 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by tkwasny
Space and time are constructed of the same "material". Time is space that is engaged as kinetic expression. Space is time that is engaged as static expression. The two interchange characteristics in reaction to their proximity to the generated, relative non-existence, the infinite impedence. Time is current. Space is voltage. The impedence is the resistance. The Universe is the harmonics expressions of the infinite Ohm's Law. Yes, THE Answer really is that simple.


holy crap that sounds in perfect corroboration to another AWESOME book i've recently read, The Source Field Investigations by David Wilcock!

where did you learn of these things you say?

wilcock posits that the "source field" (the field of quantum potentiality that used to be termed "the ether", what some may call the "spirit world") is actively FLOWING into the Earth and all material objects, and this liquid-like CURRENT of the source field POURING into earth is what creates "gravity" and ALSO the passage of time. this current flow is the flow of time.

he also posits some other very interesting ideas about our space/time in relation to time/space, what it would mean to have 3 dimensions of time and only 1 dimension of space...and what would be necessary to travel from one to the other, which is: Vortexes.

edit on 1/5/12 by metalshredmetal because: forgot about time



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
/sarcasm

Great!
So Wilcock has caught up to the 16th century.

/end sarcasm


René Descartes vortices.


Let us know if he ever gets up to Kepler.


David Grouchy
edit on 5-1-2012 by davidgrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by davidgrouchy
 


yeah, you're right, the study of vortexes, spirals, spires, "cycles" and the like have been around for thousands of years because it's a tried and true phenomenon of our physical world and the universe. wilcock highlights very well the evidence of ancient knowledge of spirals and vortexes.

and actually, from one of wilcock's references (one of 3000 scientific studies) is where i found the Little Book of Coincidences by John Martineau, which speaks very highly of Kepler and expands upon his ideas.

wilcock actually makes the work of martineau and thus kepler a foundation to his over-all and most important hypothesis of the book. which is related to sacred geometry in 3 dimensions and our cycles of "time" and the cycles of the solar system.

youd probably really like the book if you're into the physics of the solar system..I highly recommend it to you.

edit on 1/5/12 by metalshredmetal because: stuff



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Fun Facts you asked for - There's no "Dark Side of the Moon". There is a side that never faces Earth; but, it does receive sunlight.

Here are three URLs to get you started in the FUN area.

www.theplanetstoday.com...

www.solarsystemscope.com... - be sure to click, double-click, click and drag - experiment.

stellarium.org... has a downloadable program so you can be a backyard amateur astronomer without leaving your computer. I also recommend it to the young amateur astronomers I have bought real telescopes for.
edit on 5/1/2012 by Trexter Ziam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   

by DavidGrouchy

...There are 46 "moons" that always show the same face to the body they orbit.
. This is a major trend and fundamental property of our solar system.

Is so-called "tidal locking" sufficient to explain how this happens with eliptical orbits. Eliptical orbits should make the ratio of orbit to side facing the orbited body impossible...



Hi David,
That is quite remarkable!
My first thought is... In practical terms, how do they manage to present the same face whilst rotating on an axis and travelling along an elliptical orbit?
I mean, does their rotational speed vary? or does their orbital velocity vary? both?
If they have a constant rotational speed, and constant orbital velocity, then surely they must present a different face to the body they orbit, due to the elliptical shape of the orbit?
I wish I was smarter!
GTD



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by metalshredmetal

the Little Book of Coincidences by John Martineau, which speaks very highly of Kepler and expands upon his ideas.



I don't think enough can be said about Kepler.

Newtonian physics? Invention of Calculus?
Just a new language to talk about Keplers laws.

Einstein's Relativity, and Special Relativity?
Just showing the Tao of Keplers laws.

Kepler played with sacred geometry for a bit,
and it helped him to "get there" but he discarded it in the end.
High precision decimals. Either that, or your moon landing will miss (best case), or crash (worst case) not matter how "sacred" one feels the geometry is.

/nod
David Grouchy
edit on 5-1-2012 by davidgrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gordi The Drummer

Hi David,
That is quite remarkable!
My first thought is... In practical terms, how do they manage to present the same face whilst rotating on an axis and travelling along an elliptical orbit?
I mean, does their rotational speed vary? or does their orbital velocity vary? both?
If they have a constant rotational speed, and constant orbital velocity, then surely they must present a different face to the body they orbit, due to the elliptical shape of the orbit?
I wish I was smarter!
GTD



You are smarter, in my eyes.

I'm reminded of the old saying "Let no one ignorant of geometry enter" engraved at the door of Plato's Academy.

I find the questions asked in the quote above, to be exactly the right questions. And the kind only someone who knows a little geometry could percieve. Now as to why this isn't all over the Learning Channel, or in the Astronomy class rooms, is beyond me.

It's a conspiracy I tells' ya!


David Grouchy



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by davidgrouchy
And I only mentioned "Tidal Locking" as it is the prevailing version of hand waving done these days, (the reigning theory) and I call B.S.

I have yet to see a rational reason why you call "BS" on a well established fact. In fact, tidal force which induces tidal locking is used to the advantage of satellite operators in order to assist with attitude control. It's called gravity-gradient stabilization. It works.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Gordi The Drummer
 


Orbital velocity increases at perihelion and slows when it is farther away at aphelion. This is true with all solar orbital bodies in the solar system regardless of the body's mass. Moons follow the same dynamics orbiting the parent body (the planet they orbit). Rotational speed has no relationship with the proximity a body is to what it orbits, meaning, the spin doesn't slow and speed up at perihelion and aphelion. Tidal friction can slow a rotation over millenniums, as well as eccentricity of an orbit as well as distance of an orbit.


edit on 5-1-2012 by Illustronic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gordi The Drummer

by DavidGrouchy

...There are 46 "moons" that always show the same face to the body they orbit.
. This is a major trend and fundamental property of our solar system.

Is so-called "tidal locking" sufficient to explain how this happens with eliptical orbits. Eliptical orbits should make the ratio of orbit to side facing the orbited body impossible...



Hi David,
That is quite remarkable!
My first thought is... In practical terms, how do they manage to present the same face whilst rotating on an axis and travelling along an elliptical orbit?

In precise terms, they don't. This is one reason why lunar libration exists; elliptical orbits.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by davidgrouchy
And I only mentioned "Tidal Locking" as it is the prevailing version of hand waving done these days, (the reigning theory) and I call B.S.

I have yet to see a rational reason why you call "BS" on a well established fact. In fact, tidal force which induces tidal locking is used to the advantage of satellite operators in order to assist with attitude control. It's called gravity-gradient stabilization. It works.


So Jupiter, a gas giant, has "tidal locking" on 7 of it's moons.

All while the equator is rotating on it's axis 44 times faster than the Earth.

How would any of jupiters moons have time to get a "lock" ?
and what "tide" are they locking onto in the absence of clear oceans.
The big red eye?


David Grouchy
edit on 5-1-2012 by davidgrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ngchunter

Originally posted by Gordi The Drummer
Hi David,
That is quite remarkable!
My first thought is... In practical terms, how do they manage to present the same face whilst rotating on an axis and travelling along an elliptical orbit?

In precise terms, they don't. This is one reason why lunar libration exists; elliptical orbits.


That is correct, but sidesteps the main implication.
Why don't these tiny variations accumulate into deviation, instead of always evening out.


David Grouchy



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join