You honestly didn't think that all those geostationary communications satelites have the same mass, do you?;)
No, but they all have the same orbital speed. If the earth were to lose mass, the satellites would be moving too fast to stay in the same obit and would spiral out.
No the orbit would not get bigger and bigger. What force would act upon it?
Yes it would, actually. The planet it doesn't need a force acting on it to pull it away. The point is that there is less force acting on it to keep it close in. The star and the planet orbit around a common center of mass. If either one of them loses mass, the radius of their orbits around the c.o.m. will get larger.
He's published several books on the subject including Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology and Academic Science [amazon.com] which presents considerable information that's been surpressed by astronomers whose theories have been threatened.
Well, there's supressing someone, and then there's ignoring someone because their science is shaky. In Arp's case, it's the latter.:) Do a quick search on groups.google.com and you'll find a lot of skepticism about his data. His ideas also conflict with some other observational data. Oh, and here is a quote from the sci.astro Cosmology FAQ:
A common objection to the Big Bang model is that redshifts do not measure distance. The logic is that if redshifts do not measure distance, then maybe the Hubble relation between velocity and distance is all wrong. If it is wrong, then one of the three pillars of observational evidence for the Big Bang model collapses.
One way to show that redshifts do not measure distance is to find two (or more) objects that are close together on the sky, but with vastly different redshifts. One immediately obvious problem with this approach is that in a large Universe, it is inevitable that some very distant objects will just happen to lie behind some closer objects.
A way around this problem is to look for "connections"---for instance, a bridge of gas---between two objects with different redshifts. Another approach is to look for a statistical "connection"---if high redshift objects tend to cluster about low redshift objects that might suggest a connection. Various astronomers have claimed to find one or the other kind of connection. However, their statistical analyses have been shown to be flawed, or the nature of the apparent "bridge" or "connection" has been widely disputed.
At this time, there's no unambiguous illustration of a "connection" of any kind between objects of much different redshifts.
Perhaps its time we shelved Manned Space flight for a while?
No. Manned exploration is only not necessary if you have no imagination.
I want to eventually be able to take weekend excursions to the moon. I was born in '71, so I missed Apollo; and I want to see humans walk on another planet. I want to hear about cargo ships on the way back from mining the asteroids. None of that will be possible until we figure out a better way to get people safely out there and back.
So the only answer is to keep trying until we get it right.
If this represents the near-term (10-20 year) end of manned space flight, we should rejoice. With the billions of dollars wasted insuring that ugly bags of mostly water can survive the trip no longer being spent, perhaps we can go back to conducting real science in space, or spend that money better here on earth.
You are crazy. We should abolutely not rejoice. IMO, our number one priority as a species ought to be figuring out a way off this rock. We have all of our eggs in one basket. As for better spending our money on earth, that's the worst argument ever. If we waited until all our problems are solved down here, we'll never get anywhere.
There is no room in their stated goal to even consider other explanations. They have made evolution a foundational assumption of their work.
This is because we already KNOW evolution happens.
Put it this way: if you are doing experiments with airfoil shapes, the "assumtion" that planes can fly is taken for granted. If you are doing experiments with projectiles, the "assumption" that there is a force which pulls things toward the ground is taken for granted. And if you are doing experiments to see how strains of yeast change, the "assumption" that species evolve is taken for granted.
Re:Amazing number of closed minds...
on
Top of the Crops 2002
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Some of these crop circles are huge. A pair of people may be able to flatten a circle 75 feet across in a few hours during the night, but even a team of people wouldn't be able to finish some of these things in one night.
Yes they can, actually. There was a show on TLC or Discovery channel that showed a time-lapse movie of a team of hoaxsters demonstrating how to make a large, complex circle. It only took them a few hours.
There is an amazing level of geometrical precision to many crop circles.
Nothing says the pranksters aren't allowed to make a plan beforehand.:) Get some compasses and graph paper and you're set.
Have you ever tried to bend the stalk of any plant like grass, wheat or corn to a 90-degree angle without breaking it? Personally, I don't know of any way to do it.
From May to August the grain is green and it's very easy to bend it without breaking it.
No? The larger the circle, the more people it would have taken to create it, and the more chance for some dumbass to get drunk and start bragging about he and his buddies getting together and making "that big crop circle on the south side of town".
Even the big ones only take a few people to make. And it doesn't matter if you brag about it. The True Believers will still believe no matter what. I think the fun is probably seeing how many people you can fool.
Ever think just for a minute that there might be another reason that no one has been able to "catch them at it"? I'll let you ponder that one.
Um, they have been "caught". Well, not really caught, since they voluntarily showed how it was done. Anyway, if it's really aliens making it, then why hasn't anyone been able to "catch them at it"? I'll let you ponder that one.:)
Ever think for a moment that there might just possibly be things out there that we don't understand yet? That science doesn't yet have the answer to everything?
Yes. But none of that applies to crop circles, which are easily explainable in terms of some wise guys with extra time, some ropes, and some boards; coupled with an infinite supply of human gullibility.
Doesn't much matter. The reason circles are astride tractor tracks is that they provide an easy way for the pranksters to walk in and out without leaving evidence of their visit.
Why do human beings think that all crop circles are hoaxes?
Because the simplest explanation is usually correct. The simplest explanation in the case of crop circles is that they are made by a bunch of people with ropes and bits of wood. If it can be demonstrated that human beings can make complicated crop circles (and it has been); then, lacking any solid evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to deduce that it's likely they are ALL made by humans.
Ignore the scientific proof found at many crop circles,
Anything reproducible? Anything detected by someone who is qualfied to know what they're looking for? Anything that couldn't be faked?
The odd thing is that when calling from the US, dialing the initial '0' makes it Not Work. If I wanted to call your example number from the US, I would dial 011 44 207 123 4567.
Totally disagree. If I had started with CoM I probably would never have read the rest of them. It's very good. I would start with Mort or Pyramids myself.
9 made me sick to my stomach, and I have forced myself to read only the first 100 pages thus far of book 10.
Ah, book nine ("Winter's Heart") wasn't bad, at least compared to the rotting carcass that was Path of Daggers.
However, Crossroads of Twilight is (IMO) the worst of the series. My advice: start reading at chapter 21 and you won't miss anything. Actually, you could start at the epilogue and not really miss anything, because NOTHING HAPPENS.
On earth, the presence of geometrical shapes is normally taken as evidence of the presence of man, as in block walls and perfectly round shrubs. Yet when something geometrical is found on Mars, there is a mad dash to see who can come up with the first "explanation" of its natural origin.
The problem is, people took the low-resolution photographs from the old Mariner orbiters, saw thinngs that vaguely looked like a face or pyramids and immediately jumped to the conclusion that OMG there was a civilization on Mars!!
Later, when high-resolution photographs of the same regions became available and the "face" was revealed to be just another hill and the pyramids to be a lot less geometrically perfect, the True Believers immediately jumped up and claimed conspiracy.
That the face on Mars has changed over an extremely short period of time would indicate to me--not that there was something inherently wrong with the original images--but that someone had changed it.
There was nothing *wrong* with the original images. There were just too low resolution to make out any detail; and human brains are very good at supplying detail that isn't really there. It's nothing to get worked up over. There is no evidence of a lost civilization on Mars. It would be COOL if there was, but there isn't.
What he did was this: Step 1: If GR is true, then the strength of the gravitational field can be computed from the mass of the object, the velocity of the object, and the speed of gravity.
Step 2: We know the mass and velocity of Jupiter, and GR predicts the speed of gravity should be c, so we plug the numbers into the equation and come up with a number X for the strength of Jupiter's graviational field.
Step 3: Now we need to measure the strength of Jupiter's gravitational field. We will do this observing by how much the light from a quasar bends as Jupiter passes in front of it. In some arcane way. (Note: I Am Not A Physicist.) We come up with a number Y.
Step 4: X is close to Y, hence GR's prediction about the speed of light is confirmed, or at least, not disproven.
I've always believed that this is the only fair way to do it; a flat tax with ZERO exemptions, and there you go.
Except that it's not fair.:)
Let's assume 20% flat tax after the first $10,000, no exemptions.
Person A: --------- Income: $20,000 Tax: $2,000 Net: $18,000
Person B: --------- Income: $100,000 Tax: $18,000 Net: $82,000
Now: who is going to feel that 18% more? To person making $20k, that loss of $2k might be more than they can bear. To the person making $100k, the loss of $18k means they have to wait a couple years to buy your beamer.:)
Slashdot Mirror
You honestly didn't think that all those geostationary communications satelites have the same mass, do you? ;)
No, but they all have the same orbital speed. If the earth were to lose mass, the satellites would be moving too fast to stay in the same obit and would spiral out.
No the orbit would not get bigger and bigger. What force would act upon it?
Yes it would, actually. The planet it doesn't need a force acting on it to pull it away. The point is that there is less force acting on it to keep it close in. The star and the planet orbit around a common center of mass. If either one of them loses mass, the radius of their orbits around the c.o.m. will get larger.
What about the gravitational pull of the Sun? Does Pioneer 10 have enough velocity to escape its pull?
Yes.
Well, there's supressing someone, and then there's ignoring someone because their science is shaky. In Arp's case, it's the latter.
Perhaps its time we shelved Manned Space flight for a while?
No. Manned exploration is only not necessary if you have no imagination.
I want to eventually be able to take weekend excursions to the moon. I was born in '71, so I missed Apollo; and I want to see humans walk on another planet. I want to hear about cargo ships on the way back from mining the asteroids. None of that will be possible until we figure out a better way to get people safely out there and back.
So the only answer is to keep trying until we get it right.
How do you know "it won't do any good"?
Because they're dead. No amount of prayer is going to change that.
Surely, it won't hurt.
It's a waste of my time. In that sense, it hurts.
If this represents the near-term (10-20 year) end of manned space flight, we should rejoice. With the billions of dollars wasted insuring that ugly bags of mostly water can survive the trip no longer being spent, perhaps we can go back to conducting real science in space, or spend that money better here on earth.
You are crazy. We should abolutely not rejoice. IMO, our number one priority as a species ought to be figuring out a way off this rock. We have all of our eggs in one basket. As for better spending our money on earth, that's the worst argument ever. If we waited until all our problems are solved down here, we'll never get anywhere.
What do you do when someone you care about dies? Say fuck it, and business as usual.
That's what I do, yes. Oh sure, I cry because I know that I'll never see them again. But I don't pray for them, because it won't do any good.
first of all 'cause it sucked major ass
Nah, I had one, and it 0wned. I even (gasp!) liked the joysticks.
There is no room in their stated goal to even consider other explanations. They have made evolution a foundational assumption of their work.
This is because we already KNOW evolution happens.
Put it this way: if you are doing experiments with airfoil shapes, the "assumtion" that planes can fly is taken for granted. If you are doing experiments with projectiles, the "assumption" that there is a force which pulls things toward the ground is taken for granted. And if you are doing experiments to see how strains of yeast change, the "assumption" that species evolve is taken for granted.
Some of these crop circles are huge. A pair of people may be able to flatten a circle 75 feet across in a few hours during the night, but even a team of people wouldn't be able to finish some of these things in one night.
:) Get some compasses and graph paper and you're set.
:)
Yes they can, actually. There was a show on TLC or Discovery channel that showed a time-lapse movie of a team of hoaxsters demonstrating how to make a large, complex circle. It only took them a few hours.
There is an amazing level of geometrical precision to many crop circles.
Nothing says the pranksters aren't allowed to make a plan beforehand.
Have you ever tried to bend the stalk of any plant like grass, wheat or corn to a 90-degree angle without breaking it? Personally, I don't know of any way to do it.
From May to August the grain is green and it's very easy to bend it without breaking it.
No? The larger the circle, the more people it would have taken to create it, and the more chance for some dumbass to get drunk and start bragging about he and his buddies getting together and making "that big crop circle on the south side of town".
Even the big ones only take a few people to make. And it doesn't matter if you brag about it. The True Believers will still believe no matter what. I think the fun is probably seeing how many people you can fool.
Ever think just for a minute that there might be another reason that no one has been able to "catch them at it"? I'll let you ponder that one.
Um, they have been "caught". Well, not really caught, since they voluntarily showed how it was done. Anyway, if it's really aliens making it, then why hasn't anyone been able to "catch them at it"? I'll let you ponder that one.
Ever think for a moment that there might just possibly be things out there that we don't understand yet? That science doesn't yet have the answer to everything?
Yes. But none of that applies to crop circles, which are easily explainable in terms of some wise guys with extra time, some ropes, and some boards; coupled with an infinite supply of human gullibility.
Doesn't much matter. The reason circles are astride tractor tracks is that they provide an easy way for the pranksters to walk in and out without leaving evidence of their visit.
Why do human beings think that all crop circles are hoaxes?
Because the simplest explanation is usually correct. The simplest explanation in the case of crop circles is that they are made by a bunch of people with ropes and bits of wood. If it can be demonstrated that human beings can make complicated crop circles (and it has been); then, lacking any solid evidence to the contrary, it is reasonable to deduce that it's likely they are ALL made by humans.
Ignore the scientific proof found at many crop circles,
Anything reproducible? Anything detected by someone who is qualfied to know what they're looking for? Anything that couldn't be faked?
and finally to 020 7123 4567
The odd thing is that when calling from the US, dialing the initial '0' makes it Not Work. If I wanted to call your example number from the US, I would dial 011 44 207 123 4567.
Book IX - Winter's Heart
Book X - Crossroads of Twilight.
(Which sucks like a Hoover)
It's very good.
Er, I meant NOT very good.
You should start with the The Color of Magic
Totally disagree. If I had started with CoM I probably would never have read the rest of them. It's very good. I would start with Mort or Pyramids myself.
9 made me sick to my stomach, and I have forced myself to read only the first 100 pages thus far of book 10.
Ah, book nine ("Winter's Heart") wasn't bad, at least compared to the rotting carcass that was Path of Daggers.
However, Crossroads of Twilight is (IMO) the worst of the series. My advice: start reading at chapter 21 and you won't miss anything. Actually, you could start at the epilogue and not really miss anything, because NOTHING HAPPENS.
On earth, the presence of geometrical shapes is normally taken as evidence of the presence of man, as in block walls and perfectly round shrubs. Yet when something geometrical is found on Mars, there is a mad dash to see who can come up with the first "explanation" of its natural origin.
The problem is, people took the low-resolution photographs from the old Mariner orbiters, saw thinngs that vaguely looked like a face or pyramids and immediately jumped to the conclusion that OMG there was a civilization on Mars!!
Later, when high-resolution photographs of the same regions became available and the "face" was revealed to be just another hill and the pyramids to be a lot less geometrically perfect, the True Believers immediately jumped up and claimed conspiracy.
That the face on Mars has changed over an extremely short period of time would indicate to me--not that there was something inherently wrong with the original images--but that someone had changed it.
There was nothing *wrong* with the original images. There were just too low resolution to make out any detail; and human brains are very good at supplying detail that isn't really there. It's nothing to get worked up over. There is no evidence of a lost civilization on Mars. It would be COOL if there was, but there isn't.
Mozilla takes a good 15-30 seconds to load. Some days, that's too frickin long.
:)
Not a flame, but I don't really get everyone's obsession with startup times. Start it up once then leave it open.
I don't need Mozilla's mail/news reader because I like Mail and I don't like the news reader
OK, just uncheck the boxes for the mail and news when you install; problem solved.
Basically, all he did was prove his given.
Um. No.
What he did was this:
Step 1: If GR is true, then the strength of the gravitational field can be computed from the mass of the object, the velocity of the object, and the speed of gravity.
Step 2: We know the mass and velocity of Jupiter, and GR predicts the speed of gravity should be c, so we plug the numbers into the equation and come up with a number X for the strength of Jupiter's graviational field.
Step 3: Now we need to measure the strength of Jupiter's gravitational field. We will do this observing by how much the light from a quasar bends as Jupiter passes in front of it. In some arcane way. (Note: I Am Not A Physicist.) We come up with a number Y.
Step 4: X is close to Y, hence GR's prediction about the speed of light is confirmed, or at least, not disproven.
[Step 5: Profit!]
If I take a one light year long solid rod (by solid I mean a material that doesn't stretch or compress, a perfectly dense material, maybe diamond?)
Except that there is no such thing. What will happen is that a wave will propagate down the rod at the speed of sound in the material.
I've always believed that this is the only fair way to do it; a flat tax with ZERO exemptions, and there you go.
:)
:)
Except that it's not fair.
Let's assume 20% flat tax after the first $10,000, no exemptions.
Person A:
---------
Income: $20,000
Tax: $2,000
Net: $18,000
Person B:
---------
Income: $100,000
Tax: $18,000
Net: $82,000
Now: who is going to feel that 18% more? To person making $20k, that loss of $2k might be more than they can bear. To the person making $100k, the loss of $18k means they have to wait a couple years to buy your beamer.
Why on earth we don't just have a simple flat tax is beyond me.
Because a flat tax screws the people with smaller incomes; whereas a graduated tax at least tries to spread the screwing more equitably.
or an email of how your friend saw this really hot chick at Wal-Mart.
Your Wal-Mart must be different. The local one here is staffed almost exclusively by mutant rednecks.