The tides are the result of the rotation of the Earth and the whirlpools

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Fermer05, Apr 3, 2018.

  1. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,202
    I muffed up the quote.
    Most of that is Michael's words.
    I have corrected my post, above.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Michael 345 Looking for Bali in Nov Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,198
    True. 9.8m/s^2 would be the terminal velocity, it would start off slower.

    Does not change the detail it is weightless in orbit, and indeed remains so until it contacts ground/sea

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,202
    Er. Did you want to revise that?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,162
    What?

    Astronauts are not "attracted to the mass of the station" in any significant way nor do they need to be in "the air inside the station" for microgravity to act on them. Astronauts working outside experience exactly the same forces.

    The two most significant forces on the ISS are tidal (the farthest and closest parts want to be in different orbits) and drag (drag slows it down.) Those forces are the primary reasons why it's not perfect "zero gravity" (i.e. no observable acceleration) inside the station.
     
  8. Michael 345 Looking for Bali in Nov Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,198
    *********
    Near the surface of the Earth, an object in free fall in a vacuum will accelerate at approximately 9.8 m/s2, independent of its mass

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_fall

    *******

    :
     
  9. Michael 345 Looking for Bali in Nov Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,198
    *********
    • Gravity between the spacecraft and an object within it may make the object slowly "fall" toward a more massive part of it. The acceleration is 0.007 μg for 1000 kg at 1 m distance
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro-g_environment

    *******

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,202
    Better. What you wrote in post 122 was ... eyebrow-raising.
     
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,202
    While technically true, this effect is negligible - certainly much smaller than the other dynamics at play.
     
  12. Michael 345 Looking for Bali in Nov Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,198
    From my post #126 The acceleration is 0.007 μg (microgravity) for 1000 kg at 1 m distance

    That's my microgravity contribution. What do your dynamics add?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. Michael 345 Looking for Bali in Nov Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,198

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You should know what I mean

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Bit distracted with friends at shopping centre with ice cream and coffee

    When I get home still have a large tree in back garden from cyclone Marcus 27th last month while I was away in Bali

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,162
    That's only true if the mass is a point source to one side of the astronaut.

    Since astronauts are inside the space station, and it surrounds them, there are contributions from all sides. In the center of a cylinder (which most of the ISS is) the net is zero. Outside of the ISS the truss and the solar panels are _nearly_ symmetric so again almost zero contributions. The radiators are on one side so they might contribute a bit.
     
  15. Michael 345 Looking for Bali in Nov Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,198
    For a large orbital vehicle, like the space shuttle or the International Space Station (ISS), the centre of mass is the best place to locate sensitive experiments, because disturbances increase with distance from the centre

    https://www.britannica.com/science/microgravity

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. Fermer05 Registered Member

    Messages:
    45
    In cosmonautics it is already a proven fact that the area of the attraction of the moon is limited to 10 thousand kilometers from the surface of the moon,
    artificial satellites of the moon with an orbit radius of more than 10 thousand km. break from the orbit.
     
  17. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,803
    Show us the math.
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,202
    OK, Fermer has crossed the threshold from making contentious claims to demonstrating an outright ignorance of physics.

    There is no way to discuss physics with someone who doesn't understand the first thing about it.
     
  19. Gawdzilla Sama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,803
    But enough about his first post.
     
    Michael 345 likes this.
  20. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,162
    Right. Most of that comes from tidal forces.
     
  21. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    14,162
    During the Apollo mission, the CM/third stage fired its engines in Earth orbit to start it on its way towards the Moon. As it climbed away from Earth (coasting along its trajectory) it kept slowing down until it was 40,000km from the Moon. At that point lunar gravity became stronger than Earth gravity, and it started accelerating towards the Moon.

    Looks like reality once again has intruded on your imagination.
     
  22. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,222
    That isn't what I'm asking. I'm asking whether you think artificial satellites of the earth are pulled "upward" by the moon, like the tides. The conventional understanding of gravity is that they are but you seem to think they're not and that that confirms your conjecture.
     
  23. Michael 345 Looking for Bali in Nov Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,198
    ??? Wonder what the barrier is at 10 thousand kilometres from the surface of the moon that stops gravity going any further??

    Sounds like something which could be used as antigravity if science can make it stronger

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page