(alpha) Are Artificial Satellites Orbits Influenced By An Expanding Earth?

Topic: Are Artificial Satellites Orbits Influenced By An Expanding Earth?

Published In: Annals of Geophysics, Volume 49, Scalera 2006: http://www.earth-prints.org/bitstream/2122/1066/6/20 Scalera.pdf

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

OIM:

Unless you put some sort of thesis here for discussion, this thread is bound for the cesspool.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thesis: The Earth is in fact expanding and effecting the orbits of satellites as suggested by Scalera.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

lets say that earth expands certain number of centimeters in diameter per million of years....and satellite exists for 10-30 years at most...does the expansion of Earth influences satellite orbit when satellite only experiences that change for 30 years? No, of course not...

just as a feather dropped on the surface of the ocean...just as the sand particle dropped in a desert...just as a star that shines bright amongst limitless heavens

 

Clearly you didn't read the Scalera paper in the OP.

 

well now that I did, my opinion has not changed, whats more to add Scalera's absurd statement that Earth expands 1.2 centimeters/year is...errr ridiculous.

 

There is no model in that paper, only tedious assertion of uninteresting numbers.

 

Not a numbers guy I take it?

 

So, in other words, the effect he spent three pages calculating has absolutely no effect on the thing he thought it would.

 

Too much of a numbers guy. I like my measurements with methodological error bounds and supported with a detailed comparison to a model.

This paper has low production values.

 

I don't think OIM read the paper.

I think he just posted an abstract with an alpha tag to see what I'd do.

And, as OIM doesn't seem interested in talking about physics, I can think of better places for this thread.

 

If the question was "Would satellite orbits be influenced by an expanding Earth" the thread might be an interesting one because you could calculate the relationship between the orbits and the diameter change in a hypothetical situation. However, since the Earth is not expanding anywhere close to the rate OIM wants or thinks it is, the question as posed is nonsense.

 

Too much math in the paper for fixed-earth fundamentalists to comment intelligently.

 

Given Ben and I can run rings around you when it comes to maths (along with physics, chemistry, biology, geology and sanity) that's pretty funny.

Have a look at some of these papers. Those are the kind of papers Ben and I read each day. Heck, we've even written some ourselves (not together). When was the last time you did any maths other than failing to work out how much matter would have to fall to Earth from space each day for your claim about an expanding Earth to be true.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

But if you want to show off your maths skills, how about giving me a hand here. Of course if you can find a way to construct a complete list of 12 dimensional Lie algebras that'd be even better.

 

You're kidding right? I think the terms prokaryote and eukaryote are about as much Ben knows about biology.

 

^ Even if that's true, it's more biology than OIM knows, which is what I said.

 

You can't even add and subtract correctly. And if hydrocarbons are biological organisms and not chemical compounds then you are correct, I don't have a clue about biology.

 

So biology is about memorizing words?

Fair enough Reiku. I'm sure you have more words memorized than I do.

 

Ben, biology is riddled with elongated words you need to meemorize. However, i do have an excellent memory capacity.