The Moon does not cause tides: John99 proves science wrong.

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Dywyddyr, Feb 17, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,521
    Fool!
    I specifically wrote "October 5th with cheese and penguins". Do you not know what that means?
    Are you a sceintificalous ignumu ignarnti idoit?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    Yes...yes I am....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    but I still want a cheese and penguin sandwich...with relish.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,521
    Reported.
    For being you and probably drunk.
    Or not being drunk and being you.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. orcot Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,414
    well well well look at this if you want my humble opinion this thread should be closed and moved to the chesspool
     
  8. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    and end the circle jerk?
    sorry
    no can do
    many many orgasms yet to be had

    i mean....just look at the troll dwywywiwddyr's staying power.....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
  10. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,521
    I think you missed a "y" out of that particular spelling of my name.
     
  11. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    The only requirement for an idea to survive is for at least one idiot/genius to believe in it.
     
  12. MacGyver1968 Fixin' Shit that Ain't Broke Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,028
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.--Frank Zappa
     
  13. Emil Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,789
    What?
    Please, please, let's make a revolution! I'm in! :bravo:
     
  14. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,140
    Yes, let the revolution begin! Let put all stupid people against a wall and shot them, that why there won't be any more people on earth! Aaah peace and quite.
     
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,354
    Saquist:

    James is fine. I have found that on sciforums, without exception, the only people who have ever referred to me as "Jimmy" have been attempting to be condescending by using a dimunitive name. I have also noticed that this kind of thing is by no means restricted to me. People who mangle other members' screen names usually do so in a conscious effort to ridicule them, belittle them or otherwise insult them.

    There are plenty of examples where I have banned people for trolling in essentially the same way as this. A few have been mentioned by others, above.

    Absolutely. And if it hadn't been in this thread it would have been in another one. In fact, his ban in this instance related to this thread AND one other, not just this one.

    Not at all. If you say "I can flap my arms and fly to the Moon", then the scientific response is to say "Show me". Then you say "If you give me a pair of sunglasses, I'll do it." So I give you a pair of sunglasses and wait for you to do what you said you'd do. This is essentially what happened here.

    What would you prefer? "The Moon doesn't cause tides." "Oh, ok, whatever you say, John. Let's rewrite all the physics books based on your say-so." Or perhaps "You're crazy John. Let's ban you immediately for making a statement that we as scientists disagree with."

    The actual response was: "John, scientists believe the Moon causes tides. Here are some links to show you why...." "I can prove that all of that information is wrong, if you only start a thread on the topic for me." "Ok, John, show us."

    How would you have handled this, Saquist? You seem to have all the answers. What would you have liked to have seen happen, instead of what did happen?
     
  16. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,357
    What matters is not whether someone believes the moon (and sun) are responsible for the Earth's tides. What matters is how we can exploit those who choose to believe otherwise. Wanna be stupid? Go right ahead, just don't blame the rest of us for taking advantage.
     
  17. fedr808 1100101 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,706
    "there are only two constants, light and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Einstein
     
  18. orcot Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,414
    I believe the quote goes: "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
    I've never heard your version of it
     
  19. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    You are all Geoff now.
     
  20. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,587
    An Off-Thread remark.
    Luna is not a true Earth satellite. It has a planetary orbit perturbed by the Earth.

    Sol’s gravitational force on the Luna is greater than Earth’s force.​
     
  21. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,354
    Dinosaur:

    Please define "satellite" for me. If the moon isn't a satellite, I'm not sure what is.
     
  22. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Ok if I do so? Well since you did not say no,

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    here is definition I use:

    S is a satellite of mass A, IFF the gravitational field of A is larger than all others at S's average separation from A.
    (With "average" I am trying to extend definition to be a little more general than restricted to quasi circular orbits. In complex gravity fields, perhaps S can be a satellite of A for a while and then a satellite of B for a while but such systems generally are not very stable. For example a binary star system with S making "figure eight loops" about both stars.)

    Thus Dinosaur is correct as the main gravitational field acting on the moon is that of the sun. If you plot the moon's trajectory on 8.5inch by 11inch paper with pencil -the graph so made is identical to the Earth's trajectory graph, unless you use an exceptionally fine pointed pencil. Why not call both these trajectories satellites of the sun instead only one of them being so called?

    Now that I have defined "satellite" for you, please tell your definition which makes the moon a satellite of the Earth instead of the sun - I.e. How you distinguish between the two almost identical orbital trajectories of Earth and moon about the sun.

    To be more on thread, I note that the gradient of the moon's gravity at Earth is greater than the gradient of the sun's gravity at Earth because the gradient falls off as the inverse cube so the moon, not the sun, does dominate the tides of Earth. The tides depend upon the gradient of the field, not the field.

    SUMMARY: The moon is a satellite, OF THE SUN. The only alternative is to allow the moon to be a satellite of every thing in the universe. To say: the moon is a satellite of the Earth and of the sun, and of the local stellar group's mass center, and of the central black hole of our galaxy and of the mass center of the local group of galaxies, etc. But I reject that as then there really is no meaning to the term "satellite." If "nute" is a property of everything, then there is no meaning to nute.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 3, 2011
  23. D H Some other guy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,257
    That, of course, is pure crap.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page