Microgravity parable

Stuf4 wrote:
************************************************** ****************

Scientist: "I just measured this box with my ruler. It has one
human-foot."

CT: "You mean to say that the box is one foot long, right?"

Scientist: "I mean to say that it has one human-foot."

CT: "How can it have a human foot if it is just a box? I'm certain
that what you mean to say is that your box has the same length as one
human foot, with length being a common quality to both the box and the
foot. But a "human-foot" as a bodily appendage is distinctly
different from a "foot" as a measure of length."

Scientist: "You are just being pedantic. The terminology you are
using may apply to the field of biology, but it does not apply to my
specialty field of measuring boxes."

CT: "Um, no. I see a distinct conceptual difference between a human
foot and the length of the side of a box."

Scientist: "Now you're just playing with semantics!"


~

I think you've established your opinion on this topic. Here are a few
links to educate you and the public:

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/html/microgex.htm
"Many people mistakenly think that there is no gravity above the Earth's
atmosphere, i.e., in "space," and this is why there appears to be no
gravity aboard orbiting spacecraft."

http://microgravity.nasa.gov/wimg.html
"...scientists perform their experiments in microgravity - a condition
in which the effects of gravity are greatly reduced, sometimes described
as 'weightlessness.'"

http://microgravity.grc.nasa.gov/combustion/
"The study of combustion in an environment of apparent
weightlessness—microgravity..."

http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio...hers.Guide.pdf
Note, this is a pdf document...if you don't want to open this document
directly, click on
http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio.../Microgravity/


"By this definition, *a microgravity environment is one in which the
apparent weight of a system is small compared to its actual weight due
to gravity.*"
Elsewhere in the same document:
"However, freefall can be used to create a microgravity environment
*consistent with our primary definition of microgravity.*" (the emphasis
is mine)

http://www.esa.int/export/esaHS/ESAT...esearch_0.html
Note...this is an esa website ("microgravity" is an international
phenomenon)
"Scientists prefer the term microgravity to weightlessness or zero-g
because it is more accurate. There is always some residual acceleration
force, although in a good microgravity environment it is a very small
fraction of the full 1-g gravity that gives us our weight on the surface
of the Earth. Incidentally, microgravity does not mean that gravity
itself has been reduced, only gravity's effects."

http://www1.msfc.nasa.gov/NEWMSFC/slg.html
"Contrary to popular belief, Earth’s gravity still has an effect on a
spacecraft that is orbiting Earth. When in orbit around Earth, a
spacecraft has escaped only 10% of Earth’s gravitational pull. So why
does everything appear to float? Objects that are in orbit around Earth
are actually in a continuous state of freefall. This state of freefall
is called low-gravity, or microgravity, because the effects of gravity
have been greatly reduced."

http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio...ce/.index.html
Note - this is a NASA educational website.
(If you can't reconstruct the link, try http://tinyurl.com/qbv6 )

"*Microgravity* literally means very little *gravity*. Another way to
think of 'micro-' is in measurement systems, such as the metric system,
where micro- means one part in a million or 1 x 10^-6 g. Scientists do
not use the term microgravity to accurately represent millionths of 1 g.
The microgravity environment, expressed by the symbol mu-g, is defined
as an environment where some of the effects of gravity are reduced
compared to what we experience at Earth's surface."


I could go on. Google gave me 340,000 returns on "microgravity". But,
it doesn't matter because you choose to look through filtered glasses
where you see only what you want to see.

Some of the articles above explicitly acknowledge that "microgravity"
doesn't mean there's no gravity in a freefall. That is what *you* think
it means. You are free to continue to subscribe to the belief that the
known is the prison of past conditioning and that you achieve the wisdom
of uncertainty by stepping into the unknown and join the dance of the
universe. But you're dancing alone and in some other universe.

Your opinion in this matter is irrelevant.

From stmx3:
snip
http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio...ce/.index.html
Note - this is a NASA educational website.
(If you can't reconstruct the link, try http://tinyurl.com/qbv6 )

"*Microgravity* literally means very little *gravity*. Another way to
think of 'micro-' is in measurement systems, such as the metric system,
where micro- means one part in a million or 1 x 10^-6 g. Scientists do
not use the term microgravity to accurately represent millionths of 1 g.
The microgravity environment, expressed by the symbol mu-g, is defined
as an environment where some of the effects of gravity are reduced
compared to what we experience at Earth's surface."


I could go on. Google gave me 340,000 returns on "microgravity". But,
it doesn't matter because you choose to look through filtered glasses
where you see only what you want to see.

Some of the articles above explicitly acknowledge that "microgravity"
doesn't mean there's no gravity in a freefall. That is what *you* think
it means.

....and the view I hold is in agreement with a quote that you yourself
provided:

"*Microgravity* literally means very little *gravity*."

You are free to continue to subscribe to the belief that the
known is the prison of past conditioning and that you achieve the wisdom
of uncertainty by stepping into the unknown and join the dance of the
universe. But you're dancing alone and in some other universe.

Your opinion in this matter is irrelevant.


~ CT

Stuf4 wrote:
From stmx3:
snip
http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio...ce/.index.html

Note - this is a NASA educational website.
(If you can't reconstruct the link, try http://tinyurl.com/qbv6 )

"*Microgravity* literally means very little *gravity*. Another way to
think of 'micro-' is in measurement systems, such as the metric system,
where micro- means one part in a million or 1 x 10^-6 g. Scientists do
not use the term microgravity to accurately represent millionths of 1 g.
The microgravity environment, expressed by the symbol mu-g, is defined
as an environment where some of the effects of gravity are reduced
compared to what we experience at Earth's surface."


I could go on. Google gave me 340,000 returns on "microgravity". But,
it doesn't matter because you choose to look through filtered glasses
where you see only what you want to see.

Some of the articles above explicitly acknowledge that "microgravity"
doesn't mean there's no gravity in a freefall. That is what *you* think
it means.


...and the view I hold is in agreement with a quote that you yourself
provided:

"*Microgravity* literally means very little *gravity*."


Yup. I didn't leave that out. I want to be as objective as possible
and I don't go into selectively editing quotes or take them out of
context. There were a few more you could have grabbed hold of and
pointed out their support for your position.

Of course, if you stopped reading after the first sentence of that
quote, you would walk away with the wrong definition of microgravity.
And that quote can be confusing. But it later gives the proper def. of
microgravity...it just doesn't do a good job at contrasting the two
meanings (i.e. the literal translation and the vernacular usage)

[snip]

Stuf4 wrote:
************************************************** ****************

Scientist: "I just measured this box with my ruler. It has one
human-foot."

CT: "You mean to say that the box is one foot long, right?"

Scientist: "I mean to say that it has one human-foot."

CT: "How can it have a human foot if it is just a box? I'm certain
that what you mean to say is that your box has the same length as one
human foot, with length being a common quality to both the box and the
foot. But a "human-foot" as a bodily appendage is distinctly
different from a "foot" as a measure of length."

Scientist: "You are just being pedantic. The terminology you are
using may apply to the field of biology, but it does not apply to my
specialty field of measuring boxes."

CT: "Um, no. I see a distinct conceptual difference between a human
foot and the length of the side of a box."

Scientist: "Now you're just playing with semantics!"


~

I think you've established your opinion on this topic. Here are a few
links to educate you and the public:

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/html/microgex.htm
"Many people mistakenly think that there is no gravity above the Earth's
atmosphere, i.e., in "space," and this is why there appears to be no
gravity aboard orbiting spacecraft."

http://microgravity.nasa.gov/wimg.html
"...scientists perform their experiments in microgravity - a condition
in which the effects of gravity are greatly reduced, sometimes described
as 'weightlessness.'"

http://microgravity.grc.nasa.gov/combustion/
"The study of combustion in an environment of apparent
weightlessness—microgravity..."

http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio...hers.Guide.pdf
Note, this is a pdf document...if you don't want to open this document
directly, click on
http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio.../Microgravity/


"By this definition, *a microgravity environment is one in which the
apparent weight of a system is small compared to its actual weight due
to gravity.*"
Elsewhere in the same document:
"However, freefall can be used to create a microgravity environment
*consistent with our primary definition of microgravity.*" (the emphasis
is mine)

http://www.esa.int/export/esaHS/ESAT...esearch_0.html
Note...this is an esa website ("microgravity" is an international
phenomenon)
"Scientists prefer the term microgravity to weightlessness or zero-g
because it is more accurate. There is always some residual acceleration
force, although in a good microgravity environment it is a very small
fraction of the full 1-g gravity that gives us our weight on the surface
of the Earth. Incidentally, microgravity does not mean that gravity
itself has been reduced, only gravity's effects."

http://www1.msfc.nasa.gov/NEWMSFC/slg.html
"Contrary to popular belief, Earth’s gravity still has an effect on a
spacecraft that is orbiting Earth. When in orbit around Earth, a
spacecraft has escaped only 10% of Earth’s gravitational pull. So why
does everything appear to float? Objects that are in orbit around Earth
are actually in a continuous state of freefall. This state of freefall
is called low-gravity, or microgravity, because the effects of gravity
have been greatly reduced."

http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio...ce/.index.html
Note - this is a NASA educational website.
(If you can't reconstruct the link, try http://tinyurl.com/qbv6 )

"*Microgravity* literally means very little *gravity*. Another way to
think of 'micro-' is in measurement systems, such as the metric system,
where micro- means one part in a million or 1 x 10^-6 g. Scientists do
not use the term microgravity to accurately represent millionths of 1 g.
The microgravity environment, expressed by the symbol mu-g, is defined
as an environment where some of the effects of gravity are reduced
compared to what we experience at Earth's surface."


I could go on. Google gave me 340,000 returns on "microgravity". But,
it doesn't matter because you choose to look through filtered glasses
where you see only what you want to see.

Some of the articles above explicitly acknowledge that "microgravity"
doesn't mean there's no gravity in a freefall. That is what *you* think
it means. You are free to continue to subscribe to the belief that the
known is the prison of past conditioning and that you achieve the wisdom
of uncertainty by stepping into the unknown and join the dance of the
universe. But you're dancing alone and in some other universe.

Your opinion in this matter is irrelevant.

Stuf4 wrote:
************************************************** ****************

Scientist: "I just measured this box with my ruler. It has one
human-foot."

CT: "You mean to say that the box is one foot long, right?"

Scientist: "I mean to say that it has one human-foot."

CT: "How can it have a human foot if it is just a box? I'm certain
that what you mean to say is that your box has the same length as one
human foot, with length being a common quality to both the box and the
foot. But a "human-foot" as a bodily appendage is distinctly
different from a "foot" as a measure of length."

Scientist: "You are just being pedantic. The terminology you are
using may apply to the field of biology, but it does not apply to my
specialty field of measuring boxes."

CT: "Um, no. I see a distinct conceptual difference between a human
foot and the length of the side of a box."

Scientist: "Now you're just playing with semantics!"


~

I think you've established your opinion on this topic. Here are a few
links to educate you and the public:

http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/PAO/html/microgex.htm
"Many people mistakenly think that there is no gravity above the Earth's
atmosphere, i.e., in "space," and this is why there appears to be no
gravity aboard orbiting spacecraft."

http://microgravity.nasa.gov/wimg.html
"...scientists perform their experiments in microgravity - a condition
in which the effects of gravity are greatly reduced, sometimes described
as 'weightlessness.'"

http://microgravity.grc.nasa.gov/combustion/
"The study of combustion in an environment of apparent
weightlessness—microgravity..."

http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio...hers.Guide.pdf
Note, this is a pdf document...if you don't want to open this document
directly, click on
http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio.../Microgravity/


"By this definition, *a microgravity environment is one in which the
apparent weight of a system is small compared to its actual weight due
to gravity.*"
Elsewhere in the same document:
"However, freefall can be used to create a microgravity environment
*consistent with our primary definition of microgravity.*" (the emphasis
is mine)

http://www.esa.int/export/esaHS/ESAT...esearch_0.html
Note...this is an esa website ("microgravity" is an international
phenomenon)
"Scientists prefer the term microgravity to weightlessness or zero-g
because it is more accurate. There is always some residual acceleration
force, although in a good microgravity environment it is a very small
fraction of the full 1-g gravity that gives us our weight on the surface
of the Earth. Incidentally, microgravity does not mean that gravity
itself has been reduced, only gravity's effects."

http://www1.msfc.nasa.gov/NEWMSFC/slg.html
"Contrary to popular belief, Earth’s gravity still has an effect on a
spacecraft that is orbiting Earth. When in orbit around Earth, a
spacecraft has escaped only 10% of Earth’s gravitational pull. So why
does everything appear to float? Objects that are in orbit around Earth
are actually in a continuous state of freefall. This state of freefall
is called low-gravity, or microgravity, because the effects of gravity
have been greatly reduced."

http://spacelink.nasa.gov/Instructio...ce/.index.html
Note - this is a NASA educational website.
(If you can't reconstruct the link, try http://tinyurl.com/qbv6 )

"*Microgravity* literally means very little *gravity*. Another way to
think of 'micro-' is in measurement systems, such as the metric system,
where micro- means one part in a million or 1 x 10^-6 g. Scientists do
not use the term microgravity to accurately represent millionths of 1 g.
The microgravity environment, expressed by the symbol mu-g, is defined
as an environment where some of the effects of gravity are reduced
compared to what we experience at Earth's surface."


I could go on. Google gave me 340,000 returns on "microgravity". But,
it doesn't matter because you choose to look through filtered glasses
where you see only what you want to see.

Some of the articles above explicitly acknowledge that "microgravity"
doesn't mean there's no gravity in a freefall. That is what *you* think
it means. You are free to continue to subscribe to the belief that the
known is the prison of past conditioning and that you achieve the wisdom
of uncertainty by stepping into the unknown and join the dance of the
universe. But you're dancing alone and in some other universe.

Your opinion in this matter is irrelevant.

stmx3 wrote...

(Some interesting stuff three times)

I occasionally get that multiple-posting glitch with Outlook Express. On
some level, I'm glad to see it on Netscape mail as well

- Peter

Peter Smith wrote:
stmx3 wrote...

(Some interesting stuff three times)

I occasionally get that multiple-posting glitch with Outlook Express. On
some level, I'm glad to see it on Netscape mail as well

- Peter



Yes...I found it unusual. Actually, I think it was my own fault. I hit
"Reply All" but it wouldn't send because Stuf4's email address wasn't
recognized. I removed the 'spamblock' from the address, tried to send
again, but nothing happened. Finally, I removed his email address
altogether and voila! 3 posts!

Or maybe the forum was trying to emphasize my post?