@T-J

Quote:

And answer me this - why don't solar flares have any impact?

Massive solar flares will have an impact. But not on earth's orbit as the magnetic link between the sun and earth is very strong and the mass of the earth is much much much more than the combined mass of the molecules which slams into earth's magnetosphere in these short periods and thus will have a near neglectable effect on orbit speed.

However these solar flares over billions of years will have an enormous impact on the oribt of the earth. Not with regard to its distance to the sun but with regard to solar wind (the magnetic material will orbit the sun as a spiral due to the sun being a big rotating magnet).

As I stated if the earth would suddenly stop its orbit for a period, it will be continuously bombarded by a wall of matter within earth's orbit as the earth will be moving much slower (or not at all) than everything else in this spiral "wind". Thus earth's orbit is not only the direct effect of the sun's rotation it's also due to indirect effect of the sun's rotation as it also effects everything else.

Last edited by MikeB on 13-May-2011 at 01:53 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

I think you still don't understand. Neither Newton's or Einstein theories on gravitiy in outer space works.

OK So you think Einstein is the village idiot! PROVE IT!
Either produce a better equation or admit that you are just trolling.
We have equations that can be used to calculate the trajectory of a space probe using a gravity well slingshot off Jupiter. You have an opinion.

Quote:

The ancients had no trouble predicting the orbits of planets nearby including Venus, Mars and the moon.

If you read a verbose horoscope you will find it littered with terms like "Venus in retrograde". People used to believe that the planets turned round and went backwards. Your opinions have less scientific validity than my horoscope in this mornings paper.

There was a time when the whole planet had not been fully mapped and charts had huge unexplored areas. honest mapmakers simply left these areas blank, to be filled in as new discoveries were made. Charlatans filled in the gaps with the figments of their imaginations. "Here be draggons!"

Quote:

The one time you used Newton's equation you were off by more than a factor of 225 million!!! While proclaiming "it works" after I gave you a second chance pointing out you made a mistake. So you've got your chance, now it's BrianK and Nimrod's turn.

T-J made an arithmetical error, it happens. T-J tried to help you by doing the maths for you, since you seemed incapable, and this is how you show your gratitude. I notice that you did not see fit to correct my arithmetic when I followed the equation that you supplied but instead tried to weasel out by saying that I had used "the wrong kind of mass", and that I was using the wrong equation.
I will repeat myself yet again and tell you that as the challenger it is up to you to prove that your opinion is better than the current mathematically established theories and provide mathematical proofs. It is not up to BrianK, or myself, it's YOUR turn.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@Nimrod

Speaking of Here Be Dragons Check out that link. (MikeB you'd do well to review this). It's a good introduction into how to regard and consider others view points based on open critical thinking.

@Nimrod

Quote:

OK So you think Einstein is the village idiot! PROVE IT!

Come on Einstein died more than half a century ago. If his theory for trying to enhance Newton's theories are wrong he is suddenly an idiot? So is a scientist who theorizes the existance of dark matter trying to enhance Einstein's theories suddenly also an idiot? Etc, etc, etc.

No, Einstein was a very intelligent man in terms of mathematical skills. But maybe if people like him would have lived long enough he might have come up with a far superior alternative theory instead.

Quote:

We have equations that can be used to calculate the trajectory of a space probe using a gravity well slingshot off Jupiter.

Putting something in orbit around Jupiter shouldn't be too hard considering the amount of stuff of many different sizes and masses are already orbitting Jupiter (its rings of dust, asteroids and moons).

Putting something in a stable orbit around the moon is far more of a challenge.

Quote:

T-J tried to help you by doing the maths for you, since you seemed incapable, and this is how you show your gratitude

I suggest you reread. In my book if someone tries to help one doesn't combine this "help" with derogatory comments aimed at such people.

And yes I can use these equations probably better so than anyone else posting within this thread. However I say they are plain crap for usage on an universal scale. They can be used for the inner solar system as the decrease of spiral force is gradual further away from the sun just like the theorized force of gravity.

However with my theory small objects (like SO16) and large objects (like the earth) can orbit around the sun at similar distance and speed. The most stable speed being a velocity close to the speed at which everything else is moving within this orbit (such as for example tiny asteroids and dust).

A very extensive video on chemtrails (which unlike contrails last very long in the sky):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA

@MikeB

Quote:

Explain and calculate our moon's orbit around the earth/sun using solely the theory of universal gravity

Measuring the masses and charges of these objects indicate that gravity is the larger Force at work on the system at this time.

Quote:

Also explain why all the objects which slammed into the moon and earth over time didn't impact the orbits

MikeB this is your strawman. I don't recall Nimrod ever saying objects slamming into the earth would have 0 impact. And I certainly didn't either. In fact the last time you asked this I explained it fairly straight forward.. We need to know mass, speed, and trajectory of the impact to see what occurred during that event.

The earth is spinning away from the sun at about 4 cm / year. This also slows down our spinning a bit? What would happen if the earth moved a 1/2 meter farther? So now instead of 149,597,870.691 we were 149,597,871.191? If we assume no change to acceleration we'd continue to spin away from the sun. We'd be 1/2 meter closer to being free from the sun's gravity. Though in either case you won't be a live to see us rip free.

Quote:

When you're done, please also explain why our solar system is flat shaped just like our galaxy based on universal gravity. Why the earth is tilted, why all the planets are all orbiting in the same counter-clockwise direction as the sun rotates, but long period comets do not. Why the distance between galaxies is expanding at an accelerated rate and why an asteroid would be terraphobic as NASA claims based on just universal gravity.

MikeB again the problem is your your complete misunderstanding. Today we know that evolution is the predominate force that acts on animals. This doesn't in anyway mean that evolution is the predominate force in biogensis (non-living to living transition.) We can, and do, observe that gravitation is the predominate force that acts on the planets. This doesn't in anyway mean that gravitation is the predominate force in the creation of matter.

BTW - you must have missed it as I provided you my hypothesis on this. And I why don't I call it a 'Theory' like you do? Well, I realize that Scientific Theories are supported by observational evidence and predictability. My hypothesis of the creation of the galaxy has little solid evidence. Just as yours done. I'm simply wise enough to not conflate conjecture.

What you seem to not understand is if this is your 'Theory' then you need to bring the evidence. If your "milkshake brings all the boys to the yard" ya's gotta bring it! Again claiming it's so doesn't make it so.

@MikeB

Quote:

Putting something in orbit around Jupiter shouldn't be too hard

Please reread my post, paying special attention to the word"slingshot". The probes in question were not placed in orbit, but accelerated using the gravity well and then sent from Jupiter at a far greater speed than they approached, and turned in the correct direction to its next destination.

Quote:

Putting something in a stable orbit around the moon is far more of a challenge.

No more of a challenge than putting something into a stable orbit around Earth, although the Earth orbit is getting more difficult these days due to the sheer volume of stuff up there getting in the way.

Quote:

And yes I can use these equations probably better so than anyone else posting within this thread.

Please allow me to repeat an earlier statement of mine. I am not a scientist, I am an engineer. I believe in using the most appropriate tool for any given task. If I have problems with nuts I use a spanner, if somebody has a screw loose I correct matters using a screwdriver. Likewise with mathematics, I will always use the most appropriate equation. If you have a better equation then all you have to do is give me that "new improved" equation, and then everything will be O.K.
Until such time as you can produce an equation that explains and predicts better than the current equations then you are merely indulging yourself in wishful thinking.

Quote:

However I say they are plain crap for usage on an universal scale.

I was going to reply to this statement, however BrianK's explanation of the difference between a hypothesis and a theory is far more succinct than anything I could manage.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@MikeB

Quote:

The one time you used Newton's equation you were off by more than a factor of 225 million

Off was in calculation not equation. Thus do not conflate a mistake in calculation with a mistake in Theory. They aren't the same.

@MikeB

Quote:

However with my theory small objects (like SO16) and large objects (like the earth) can orbit around the sun at similar distance and speed.

Perhaps you'll find reality an interesting divergence from your thought. The orbit while earthlike is much more circular, so not the same. Nor is the speed the same as SO16's speed in orbit speeds up and slows down. The trip from one end of the horseshoe to the other for SO16 is 175 years.

@MikeB

Quote:

The one time you used Newton's equation you were off by more than a factor of 225 million!!! While proclaiming "it works" after I gave you a second chance pointing out you made a mistake. So you've got your chance, now it's BrianK and Nimrod's turn.

Do you know why I was wrong?

It was because I used a figure of 1AU instead of the 15000AU that Tyche is actually hypothesised to orbit at.

Do you know why I did that?

Because I've got bigger things on my mind right now than doing the maths for an armchair genius on the internet who has still failed to provide a single equation to describe his own ideas.

And now I'm going to get it thrown back in my face every time I make the perfectly reasonable demand for you to do the simplest maths in return.

Typical conspiracy theorist arrogance.

I also notice that you've ducked out of answering any of my questions by referring back to my mathematical mistake earlier. That is not intellectually honest, or open. And in fact fails to treat me or the rest of us with the respect you demand from us.

Quote:

And yes I can use these equations probably better so than anyone else posting within this thread.

Ah, the misunderstood genius line! First thing, you haven't proved it. You tell us our equations are wrong, but you can't bring anything of your own to the table. Your evidence has either been shown to directly disprove your theory, or to be evidence of something far more complex than magnets, ie, Quantum.

And regardless of that, you can't provide any maths to allow us to predict anything based on your beliefs. For that reason alone, you aren't doing science, you're preaching a religion. And I'm sorry, but there's plenty of far more credible religions out there I would rather believe in, if I had to choose one.

Next, I imagine you'll claim that I'm mocking you, and proceed to tell us that 'they' laughed at earlier geniuses, yes?

They laughed at Copernicus, they laughed at Galileo. They also laughed at Bonzo the Clown.

Last edited by T-J on 13-May-2011 at 04:59 PM.
Last edited by T-J on 13-May-2011 at 04:57 PM.
Last edited by T-J on 13-May-2011 at 04:55 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

A very extensive video on chemtrails (which unlike contrails last very long in the sky): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA

A very extensive video on rainbows which are not natural

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjZY0KufWao

Last edited by BrianK on 13-May-2011 at 05:54 PM.

@T-J

Quote:

I'm sorry, but there's plenty of far more credible religions out there I would rather believe in, if I had to choose one

I'd like to make a pitch for a most credible religion.

@Nimrod

Quote:

Please reread my post, paying special attention to the word"slingshot". The probes in question were not placed in orbit, but accelerated using the gravity well and then sent from Jupiter at a far greater speed than they approached, and turned in the correct direction to its next destination.

This little trick has IMO nothing to do with the stuff we talked about.



Entirely compatible with my views as well.

@MikeB

Quote:

MikeB wrote: @Nimrod Quote: Please reread my post, paying special attention to the word"slingshot". The probes in question were not placed in orbit, but accelerated using the gravity well and then sent from Jupiter at a far greater speed than they approached, and turned in the correct direction to its next destination. This little trick has IMO nothing to do with the stuff we talked about. Entirely compatible with my views as well.

The calculations that were used to produce this trajectory were based on GRAVITY as the overriding force and not EM.
If EM were the overriding force as you hypothesize then the calculations would have produced an incorrect result and the probes would have been lost.
Since the probes were not lost it indicates that the calculations were correct and that the predominant force in the operation of the solar system is gravity and not EM.

Opinion is irrelevant. the only hope for your hypothesis to be taken seriously is to support it with mathematical equation that can be used to replace the Newton/Einstein equations.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@BrianK

You are an unholy heretic, and will be burned at the stake. There is only one true religion

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

@Nimrod

Quote:

The calculations that were used to produce this trajectory were based on GRAVITY

But I said gravity does have great influence this close to a planet.

@MikeB

Quote:

Quote: The calculations that were used to produce this trajectory were based on GRAVITY But I said gravity does have great influence this close to a planet.

Do note they also used gravity to calculate how to get the probe to Jupiter. So part of the importance in figuring out the trajectory was ensuring the probe traveled correctly for the first roughly 750,000,000 km, let alone correctly afterwards.

@BrianK

Of course you can calculate at such distances. However what I state is that gravity between objects as far as the planets are apart gravity is reduced to near nothing.

So when you stand on the earth or are for example in an ariplane the force of gravity will be huge. However when talking about distances in the range of AUs this isn't at all the case.

@ BrianK

For simplified understanding imagine the true scale of our galaxy:
http://www.phrenopolis.com/perspective/solarsystem/

Now imagine them not as planets, but as one large drop of matter and various small drops of matter at equal scale distance (themselves floating in a thin layer of less dense matter and all around extreme low density matter/contained waves).

At the distance of moon-planets, these drops will have cohesion and adhesion forces between them (imagine this as "gravity" distance). But at planetary distances we are talking about near nothingness of force between the two drops of matter (scroll the above website to understand the involved scale).

But it happens that the sun is a huge magnet and the planets and moon are made up of the same good old magnetic stardust and thus are also magnetic to some degree. It happens the field lines of the sun extend far beyond the orbit of pluto. This is the major overriding force in our galaxy, universe and maybe also an important force between different universes/wave dimensions.

Last edited by MikeB on 13-May-2011 at 08:27 PM.

@MikeB

But magnetism has an inverse-square law governing its action over distance, just like Gravity.

Your idea doesn't make sense. And will you stop waffling on about hypothetical blobs of matter floating on non-existant thin layers. I'm sure all this qualitative nonsense makes perfect sense to your philosophy, but if you want to play at science, you need to actually start providing us some equations to test your 'theory' with.

And I note that you still haven't answered my earlier questions about your idea.