Civilization Among The Other Planets

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
okay so the force you exert 'on the tank' by pushing it is 'split' between the two objects?
and what if the two are moving away from eachother, and a third object came and bumped the tank in a different direction than where it was goin. basically the tank would move to the left or right(whichever 'way' its pushed). wouldnt this change the location of the center of mass? i think it will, but it also changes the example haha
Action = reaction. When you push on the tank, the amount of work (force integrated with time) being done by you on the tank, and by the tank on you, is the same.

If we introduce a third body, then the common center of mass of all three bodies is the rest point. The center of mass of any two bodies becomes only a part of the whole.
cheers 'neer
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
mindphuk, isnt that exactly what I said in each post and example I provided? I claimed that a truely heavier object, in space, will move much much less than a smaller object. yes it is all relative but as far as geographical movement, and not perspective of the other object, the large object will always move less.
Sorry if I misunderstood your post. I thought you said the tank will not move.
Let's go back to the moon and earth. The moon's gravity attracts the earth to it as much as the earth attracts the moon. I was taking issue with your comment about gravity only working on earth or something.
 

LightningMcGreen

Active Member
No, it means that you are able to overcome the force of gravity on the paperclip with just your muscles. You can also pull the paperclip away from the magnet too so you might think you are stronger than magnetism. However, I can produce a magnet that you would not be able to pull it away from. At short distances, magnetism is extremely strong but does not work over distance. Even though gravity is very weak, it acts over enormous distances.
Touche'! But just so we're clear, that wasn't in any way a demonstration of my lack of knowledge..just a douchey remark to try and ease the tension amongst the debaters lol but thanks for the added fact. Also, in the demonstration of the transfer of motion through the line of skaters in the vid, is there any loss in momentum or force by the time the transfer pushes the last one in line? Assuming this is taking place in a vaccum? (not even sure if that matters lol)
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
You've been hostile to me since yesterday. So STFU. No one was hostile till you got hostile saying "I hope my children are taught better than you." When you don't back up SHIT...EVER...EVER. You have videos of people talking and Newtons laws. WE KNOW NEWTONS LAWS, your the one confused about how they apply to the world, but even you KNOW the laws. You are the one that has been educated poorly as you are prepared to accept science fairy tails.

I don't think I know more, I just don't think they should be allowed to upturn 100 yrs of science or more without TRULY TRULY proving it. And I don't think you should believe them until they do. I'm sorry you like to jump the gun.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Touche'! But just so we're clear, that wasn't in any way a demonstration of my lack of knowledge..just a douchey remark to try and ease the tension amongst the debaters lol but thanks for the added fact. Also, in the demonstration of the transfer of motion through the line of skaters in the vid, is there any loss in momentum or force by the time the transfer pushes the last one in line? Assuming this is taking place in a vaccum? (not even sure if that matters lol)
The problem is there shouldn't be any debate. The laws of physics are well known. Everything in this universe with mass has gravity. All things with mass are attracted to one another through this force we call gravitation. I really don't know why thenumber and the fish dude keep claiming things that go against known physics.
 

THENUMBER1022

Well-Known Member
Mindphuk,
There is gravity throughout the universe, but it could be a million times stronger in another galaxy for unknown reason. All I was saying is that what we can measure as G on earth does not apply on a different planet/mass. Clearly the moon effects Earth but only our surface is really effected. Earth on the other hand, has the moon rotating around it. It has to be different, or else the tides wouldn't change, but we don't rotate on the same axis.
 

LightningMcGreen

Active Member
The problem is there shouldn't be any debate. The laws of physics are well known. Everything in this universe with mass has gravity. All things with mass are attracted to one another through this force we call gravitation. I really don't know why thenumber and the fish dude keep claiming things that go against known physics.
Well just seeing the volley of info between everyone makes me feel like a complete damn retard haha as l know next to nothing in the physics department...so coming from someone who knows nothing, kinda makes it difficult to sift and decipher the information, from disinformation, as just reading them both sides sounds well...sound lol but again, l don't know jack, so that's why l just sit and read, and watch the vids, try and get a little education haha
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
The problem is there shouldn't be any debate. The laws of physics are well known. Everything in this universe with mass has gravity. All things with mass are attracted to one another through this force we call gravitation. I really don't know why thenumber and the fish dude keep claiming things that go against known physics.
Exactly why your wrong.

If that is true then it can't be proven true. THE EARTH COUNTERACTS ANY TEST OF THAT.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Unless you can show some evidence of a test prepared and done in space, where this was proven to be 99% true(earth and sun are still there, so are other things). Show something, or mention an name that I can look up. PLEASE.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
You've been hostile to me since yesterday. So STFU. No one was hostile till you got hostile saying "I hope my children are taught better than you." When you don't back up SHIT...EVER...EVER. You have videos of people talking and Newtons laws. WE KNOW NEWTONS LAWS, your the one confused about how they apply to the world, but even you KNOW the laws. You are the one that has been educated poorly as you are prepared to accept science fairy tails.

I don't think I know more, I just don't think they should be allowed to upturn 100 yrs of science or more without TRULY TRULY proving it. And I don't think you should believe them until they do. I'm sorry you like to jump the gun.
I was not hostile. I attempted to correct some of your misunderstandings and you took exception to it. I stopped posting to you when you started to act like a little bitch and made it personal. Then you went off on Heis when he was trying to help correct some of the same things you were wrong about. I am quite well educated in science and physics. You, OTOH, have made repeated errors about what science is and does and how it works. That video of a person talking is Eugenie Scott, the director of National Center for Science Education. I posted it to help you understand the difference between a law, theory and fact because you seem to think that theories somehow become fact after they are "proved." Theories are never proven in the technical sense. They are updated and revised as they get more and more refined. You cannot tell me one theory that has ever been 'proved' now can you?
 

Luger187

Well-Known Member
Action = reaction. When you push on the tank, the amount of work (force integrated with time) being done by you on the tank, and by the tank on you, is the same.

If we introduce a third body, then the common center of mass of all three bodies is the rest point. The center of mass of any two bodies becomes only a part of the whole.
cheers 'neer
doh! i didnt think of the third object also having a gravitational effect
 

THENUMBER1022

Well-Known Member
These are great laws but they haven't been tested or applied to planets. At all. Solar systems contain infinite energy and if you can explain what started each planets trajectory, than you can explain life. Yes an object in motion stays in motion, but why an orbital motion without collision? The universe is a big place, you are suggesting that two genius's from Earth wrote the laws of the universe and they apply to all and are right forever. I am just not buying it. The laws can be proven, but they can also be disproven.

If an object in motion stays in motion, then a plane only needs enough fuel to get up to speed and can remain in flight indefinitely, well no, because air is considered friction. There are many factors that these laws conveniently leave out.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
Exactly why your wrong.

If that is true then it can't be proven true. THE EARTH COUNTERACTS ANY TEST OF THAT.
Unless you can show some evidence of a test prepared and done in space, where this was proven to be 99% true(earth and sun are still there, so are other things). Show something, or mention an name that I can look up. PLEASE.
I'm not sure what you are asking me to prove, that Newton was right?
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Mindphuk,
There is gravity throughout the universe, but it could be a million times stronger in another galaxy for unknown reason. All I was saying is that what we can measure as G on earth does not apply on a different planet/mass. Clearly the moon effects Earth but only our surface is really effected. Earth on the other hand, has the moon rotating around it. It has to be different, or else the tides wouldn't change, but we don't rotate on the same axis.
It is reasonable/likely to assume that gravity, notably the gravitational constant, is "flat" throughout observable space. The reason i say that is because when constant g is plugged into the massive computer simulations of the evolution of the young universe, familiar structures emerge: spiral galaxies, galactic clusters, the "foamy
" distribution across hundreds of millions of parsecs of visible matter. If g were as little as 10% off the accepted value elsewhere (across a large enough volume), it would show up on sky survey plates. Astronomy allows access to places where the earth's gravitational field is essentially absent. Jmo.
cheers 'neer
 

THENUMBER1022

Well-Known Member
if newtons law was right, then firing my beretta 9mm will result in me and my rifle being thrown backwards at 800fps for a few miles?

Every action has a reaction that is effected by many variables. Thats about as close to the law as I am getting.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
Well here's on of the articles that explains it better than l can lol

In the center of the Earth, there are equal amounts of mass in all directions at any given distance, so gravity pulls equally hard in all directions, so an object at the center of the Earth would feel zero net gravity. Such an object would be under enormous pressure, because it does feel the weight of all mass that lies on top of it.
Outside of the Earth, gravity behaves as if all mass of the Earth were concentrated in the very center point, but inside the Earth gravity does not behave like that.
Gravity comes from mass, not from a particular point. Only in the precise center is the gravity equal to zero.
This holds also in the center of a black hole, if the law of gravity as we know it is still valid there (which we don't know).
If the Earth were hollow inside, and all of its mass were in the surface shell, and the mass distribution was spherically symmetric, then you'd be weightless everywhere in the hollow space inside the Earth.
The green line in http://www.splung.com/kinematics/images/gravitation/variation of g.png shows the variation of the strength of gravity with distance from the center of the Earth. Gravity is zero in the very center, then rises fairly linearly to about 109% of the surface gravity at about 55% of the distance to the surface, then drops back to about 100% and stays there until the surface. Beyond the surface the gravity decreases with the square of the distance from the center.
The red line in the same graph shows the variation of gravity if the Earth were equally dense everywhere. Then the strength of gravity would increase linearly from 0 in the middle to 100% at the surface. That in the "real" Earth the variation of gravity is different is because the Earth is not equally dense everywhere, but is a lot denser near the middle than near the surface.

Plus READ THIS ARTICLE THAT PROVES WHAT I'M SAYING. Read the bottom, go ahead. The earth is densest at the middle. Making more gravity at the middle.

You were Hostile first, I returned hostility because I'm not going to be corrected over and over by a VERY VERY VERY confused individual.

Please prove A SINGLE POINT.
 

mindphuk

Well-Known Member
if newtons law was right, then firing my beretta 9mm will result in me and my rifle being thrown backwards at 800fps for a few miles?

Every action has a reaction that is effected by many variables. Thats about as close to the law as I am getting.
NO! The FORCE is the same, not the velocities. The force on the piece of lead that weighs about 140gr is the same force that pushes the gun back in your hand. However, the combined mass of you and the gun and the friction of your feet on the ground create a lot of inertia. If you were in space and fired that gun, you WOULD be pushed back, certainly not the same velocity as the bullet, but you would begin moving away from your starting position.
 
Top