The God:
I'd like to address two things: (1) the physics, (2) your latest hissy fit.
Let's start with the physics.
Just highlight a single line from this thread which proves me wrong. I challenge both you and James R. Leave aside the other three who could not explain simple momentum transfer even in 100 odd posts.
See the quotes below for your "single line".
The word propulsion was used by DaveC not me. He also made a statement that no natural body can escape from the surface of a planet, I gave him this photon example.
Clearly photons can escape from the surface of a planet, or from a star. But the bulk of your argument was not about that. You are arguing, for example, that in a two-body system, such as the Sun and a comet, it is possible for one body to "capture" the other, when they were initially unbound. That is impossible. Again, in this regard you introduce tangential matters like the following:
He made another assertion that a body cannot be captured in orbital motion in 2 body system, I gave him photon capture and orbital motion around black hole.
Here you introduce black holes. A black hole can "capture" photons that pass within the event horizon, but that is quite a different process than the "gravity assist" manoeuvre that was originally being discussed. You made a mistake early in the discussion, and you've been trying to introduce irrelevancies to avoid having to face that error ever since then.
The capture by a planet (of astroid) depends on initial conditions of astroid as explained in my multiple posts, but you are crying hoarse that it requires 3 body. There is no such need. You do not understand binary systems, you are just catching words here and there.
Does this count as an example of a "single line" error of yours that proves you wrong?
An asteroid in a hyperbolic orbit cannot be captured by a planet if only those two bodies are involved and the asteroid does not actually crash into the planet. Certainly it is impossible for the asteroid to start orbiting the planet, as you claim it can do.
It's a simple matter of conservation of energy. Gravity is a conservative force. If the total energy of the asteroid (kinetic plus gravitational potential energy) is larger than a certain value, then a bound orbit is impossible. The only way to "capture" the asteroid is to dissipate some of its energy somehow - and gravity from the planet alone won't (can't) do that.
And James R does not know that a photon may be massless but it has momentum, there is a momentum Conservation when a photon is emitted from a body, a process quite similar to propulsion. I objected to his casual nonsense.
Ooh. Big bold writing. This must be important.
I suggest you try searching my prior posts on this forum for the terms "photon", "zero rest mass" and "momentum". Then you can apologise to me for making false claims about what I do and don't know. Clearly you were ignorant and made a rash statement without knowledge. Let's see if you can bring yourself to admit you were wrong about this. Let us also hope that you can avoid making similar statements about me or about other people in future, without first checking the available facts.
you are foolishly stuck in this 2 body 3 body N body nonsense.
It's only nonsense to you because you so clearly do not understand why it is important. Maybe you'd do better to take some time out to research this matter yourself, before you attempt to discuss it further.
When two bodies "approach" each other....as put up earlier by me one of the three could happen.
1. They collide.
2. They get into orbital motion.
3. They pass by.
Just to emphasise what I wrote above: they can't "get into orbital motion" if they aren't already in it. Not with two bodies. You can't turn an unbound trajectory into a bound orbit without losing some mechanical energy, either to a third body, or via a dissipative force of some kind.
DaveC feels that #2 cannot happen, and he is supported by few others too. But they are all propagating bad science, and now they will get into straw man.
Then I look forward to your explanation, based on momentum and energy conservation, of how your two bodies can "get into orbital motion", having previously been unbound to one another gravitationally.
But then again, I also wonder why, if you have such an explanation, you failed to post it earlier in the thread.
---
With the physics part done, let's turn to a brief discussion of the hissy fit.
You are acting like a spoilt child who knows some science and undeservingly given the mod position.
You are acting like somebody who has trouble accepting constructive criticism from other people. Instead of admitting you made a mistake, you dug your heels in and started ranting at the people who pointed out your error. A more mature person would have admitted his error, and perhaps have thanked those who pointed it out to him. Refusing to accept that you might be wrong about things actually impedes your learning in the long run, because we often learn best from our own mistakes and misconceptions.
You are also acting like somebody who has a chip on his shoulder against certain moderators. The result is that what could have been a perfectly civil discussion about physics has turned into a childish tantrum on your part. When several members suggested that you tone things down, instead you escalated your inappropriate behaviour. When you were moderated for that, as you must have known you would be once reports were filed, instead of backing off you decided to escalate things further by questioning the moderation. And in the end, the only person you ended up hurting was yourself.
I did not invite a mod to come and write such pathetic shit, but to put the science in right perspective.
Realise this first: no member requires your permission or invitation to post something in a thread.
And this second: your labelling of another member's posts as "pathetic shit" does nothing to address the content. In fact, it suggests that you have no adequate response to the content, so you felt you could only resort to name-calling. This makes you look childish.
And as far as science is concern, it has always been quite clear to me, James R, what I am waiting to see is when will so called pretentious teachers and preachers of this forum learn. With this you have successfully joined that gang of shallow pretenders.
Really? All this over one post in which I commented on some incorrect physics of yours?
You'd have done better do show why I was wrong. That's if you could actually point out an error.
That's the problem with you. You do not follow the full thread and start making half understood biased comments.
On the contrary, I read the entire thread before posting. So, another error on your part.
And James R does not know that a photon may be massless but it has momentum, there is a momentum Conservation when a photon is emitted from a body, a process quite similar to propulsion. I objected to his casual nonsense.
There's that big, bold statement again. But up to the point where you wrote that, I had actually posted
nothing about momentum conservation during the emission of photons in this thread. So there could be no "casual nonsense" from me on that topic.
And what makes you think I need goodwill from likes of origins or DaveCs or sweetpeas etc...I am never a part of mediocre coterie. I am here to see that they do not spread inaccuracies, it's a matter of concern that we have poor mod contribution here in putting the science in right perspective.
It's so dreadfully important to correct people who are wrong on the internet, isn't it? There really should be internet police to come and arrest people who get their physics wrong on web forums.
Until they get the Internet Physics Police Force up and running, I guess it's up to good people like you to just grit your teeth and try to correct as many people as possible, no matter how much of a burden it is and how little you enjoy going onto those forums to post the necessary corrections.
Sure, The God. Mediocre coteries are not for you. You're a true God, crusading for Righteous Physics across the wilds of the interwebs. It's not an easy job, but somebody has to do it. Somebody has to be a hero, and who better than The God?
