Why Did We Get Into Space

I wish mainstream scientists and some of the posters here were half as wise as you are.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sure. I posted the answer already.

A plane that is heavier than air experiences a number of forces one of which is gravity. The same is true for lighter than air flying machines. A simple model for the forces involves thrust, lift, drag, and gravity.

The formula you provided shows how to calculate one of these forces. To fly a plane must have a net force that overcomes the forces of gravity and drag.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So economists are gravitational economists?
Pig farmers are gravitational pig farmers?
Sloppy terminolgy requires correction.

Rubbish, F = G x m1m2/r^2 has nothing whatsoever to do with his comment on the feasibility of heavier than air machines.
It was an engineering comment made by a non-engineer.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Why did Lord kelvin think heavier than air flying machines are impossible?

What forces are you talking about? The electromagnetic force? But I thought gravity is the dominant force in the universe.

 

Still waiting to hear why you think Lord Kelvin rejected gravitation and why he thought heavier than air flying machines are impossible.

Still waiting to hear why you think Lord Kelvin rejected gravitation and why he thought heavier than air flying machines are impossible.

 

Again, this is all misleading.

The is wrong. The moon does fall towards the Earth. That is only one of the forces acting on the moon. The moon is in motion. There is a force tangential to its motion. The net result is a moon in orbit.

Gravity acts on ozone. Why have you decided that it defies gravity?

Help me out here on your thinking. What do you think a cloud is?

To assist you in understanding that gravity works on everything including air, water, people, mountains, etc. please tell us why you think air defies gravity?

 

I spelled them out already in a previous post.

 

Facts are misleading?

Why are facts misleading? Because they contradict your occult 17th century hypothesis?

The moon falls away from the Earth at 3.8 cm per year. It's a fact. Laser Ranging from the Apollo Program.

You mean electromagnetism is a force acting on the moon? But I thought gravitation is the dominant force in the universe. Nevermind the fact that electromagnetism is 2 x 10^39 times more powerful than the alleged force of gravitation.

Relative to what? Relative to the Earth, the moon is in motion away from the Earth at 3.8 cm per year.

How do you know that?

Ozone is found at the highest levels of the atmosphere which defies gravity. Since the atmosphere is a mixture, ozone which is heavier than oxygen should fall to the Earth by specific gravity. But it does not.

Water is heavier than nitrogen.

The air is made of nitrogen, oxygen, argon, and carbon dioxide, and trace compounds.

Argon is the heaviest and should fall to the bottom, but defies gravity because it is 1% of the atmosphere at any altitude.

 

Corrected.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Come on Oli...he slow-pitched that...your definitely slacking on the burns.

 

I haven't said anywhere that he rejected gravitation.
And I have stated that he made a comment on engineering feasibility and that it was an error in judgement.
Which parts don't you understand?

 

Well I'm glad you admit Lord Kelvin believed in gravitation. And it is for this reason (F = G x m1m2/r^2) he didn't think heavier than air flying machines are possible. Still waiting for anyone to demonstrate otherwise.

 

Nothing to "admit", it was never in dispute as far as I was concerned.

And no, it wasn't for that reason, it was an ENGINEERING judgement made erroneously.

 

It was kind of a dumb thing to say on Lord Kelvin's part. There are many examples in nature of heavier than air flight...so he had to know it was possible...just whether or not man could copy natures engineering. Obviously he got it a little wrong.

 

It was only dumb of him once you recognize the statement is based upon an even dumber claim by Isaac Newton, namely F = G x m1m2/r^2.

 

Kinda dumb?
History is replete with examples.
“640K ought to be enough for anybody.” Bill Gates
“The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives.” Admiral William Leahy
"It will be years--not in my time--before a woman will become Prime Minister."
Margaret Thatcher
etc etc...

Oh, and it wasn't Kelvin's only mistake...
Radio has no future.
X-rays will prove to be a hoax.

 

Sources for those quotes?
The only ones that come up on Google are posts by you in previous incarnations.

 

Obviously Sophergeo you already know what you post is false. Very funny.

I can play this game, too.

What facts?

And where is it falling to?

But the nuclear force is stronger.

How do you know that?

When did you measure this?

Why?

That was so much fun writing nonsense. I bet you get a kick out of it, don't you?

 

The moon is moving away from the Earth at 3.8 cm per year. Any questions?

I can tell you where the moon is not falling to, and that's towards the Earth.

 

Ah, thank you.
I notice you misquote it to make your point;

Since I don't have the book I can't comment.
But could it possible you've also misquoted that?

Hmm, also not quite supporting your view: Gardner's comment is about Velikovsky's invented forces - i.e. his interpretation, rather than the accepted attributes.

 

You really do have comprehension problems don't you?
Of course it doesn't.
Which doesn't make your point.
You were misleading if not deliberately dishonest with that quote, I'm done with you.