|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#461
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 12:32 pm, Timberwoof wrote: In article , BradGuth wrote: On May 25, 12:09 am, David Johnston wrote: On Sat, 24 May 2008 22:01:01 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: How well protected from a nuclear surface blast is a submarine hiding under 3~4 meters worth of the Arctic polar ice cap? How long is a piece of string? As long as you'd care to make it, such as nearly from our moon to Earth is technically doable, and of otherwise almost unlimited if deployed out past the moon's L2. OOPS! taboo/nondisclosure (aka need to know) The answer is, not at all. At least not by the ice. I suppose a 100 megaton would cause such ice to move and otherwise vaporise, although that in of itself takes away a great deal of energy. Say if given a one km radius of 3 meter thick ice is 2.355e6 m3 of such ice that needs to get displaced and/or melted. (more likely a 10 km radius = 230e6 tonnes of ice) Seems likely that amount of ice would moderate that kind of nuclear blast energy in more ways than just thermal energy, because as a physical blast or shockwave shield itself is going to take quite a bit of that kinetic energy away too. So, your "not at all" is perhaps yet another one of those special conditional laws of physics in order to suit your interpretation that'll benefit your side of this rant. Again, you're just talking in adjectives. You've thrown in a few numbers here and there so it looks scientific, but you haven't shown your math. So your explanation is rejected. Besides, there's no evidence that anyone ever detonated such a warhead in the Antarctic, so the question is moot. Are you suggesting that our government has no secrets and tells no lies? That's OK because, you would knowingly reject your own mother if you ever realized what unusual orifice you'd emerged out of. . - Brad Guth lets talk about accelerations. and the definition of excess escape velocity. first off an orbit is constrained and the energy function is negative. -- a fact of life any bound orbit will have negative energy. so a circular orbit is V^2 = GM/R to escape completely from the orbit. the V = (2)^1/2 * Vcircular. that little bit of extra energy will escape the system. in real terms that little bit of energy would be 1.4121 times any circurlar speed to escape from that orbit. whether elliptical or circular. a. a moon would escape from the earth b a planet would escape from the sun. any passing object ( sirius or any other sun) would exchange energy with the planets and moons and as it swoops by. they would bobble and leave the solar system. the problem is delineated in "Astrodynamics" by Bates, Mueller and White. Dover 1971 easy reading If you know a little bit of calculus and and lot of algebra. thats ok Brad does not read that kind of stuff. josephus -- I go sailing in the summer and look at stars in the winter, "Everybody is ignorant but on different subjects" --Will Rogers Its not what you know that gets you in trouble its what you know that ain so. --josh billings. |
#462
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 12:28 pm, Timberwoof wrote: A better cite would be...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus#Orbit_and_rotation "[Venus] reaches inferior conjunction every 584 days, on average." 584 days / 365 day * 12 months = 19.2 months venus, mercury, Jupiter Saturn and lots of moons have small integer relations. it occurs everywhere. AE Roy talked about this. the real question is "Does this fact have anything to do with orbital stability?" I remember a simulation at JPL had a problem. I heard about it from one of the developers. the simulation was a stepwise emulation of the Solar System. well, some programmer made a mistake and when they ran the simulation the EARTH was missing. Venus and Mercury became unstable and Venus escaped the solar system. rather clear evidence that the hierarchy is particular and specific to stability. However, "Whether this relationship arose by chance or is the result of some kind of tidal locking with the Earth, is unknown." That's very true enough and directly usable for this argument. The Venus orbit is not unaffected by the tidal radius of Earth. What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of an icy proto-moon (be it complex)? You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible. Yes I have, Well, you've presented what you thought were reasons, but they've been disputed. lithobreaking is like antigravity and shares properties with it. it requires a mechanism the stop the inertia of an entire PLANET. F= GM*V^2 that is the energy to decellerate the earth. that decelleration would violently alter our orbit ( 1.4121* V is the definition of EXCESS HYPERBOLIC VELOCITY. Only within your totally subjective=objective mindset that's manic bipolar into accepting absolutely anything via your government or from their DARPA/NASA as the one and only word of your white Semitic God(s). but no matter the possible or not, it's still capable of being supercomputer simulated in full interactive 3D animated eye- candy mode. They have also simulated what would happen if dinosaurs were recreated and ran amuck on a tropical island. It proves nothing. It goes a long ways towards proving as to what's reasonably possible, and of what isn't. While you're at it; do tell us where that terrific arctic ocean basin came from? How about telling us when Earth got the vast majority of its seasonal tilt? The planets of the solar system vary widely in their range of axial tilts. There is nothing especially unusual about Earth's. Other than indications that before having our moon there existed a nearly monoseason environment, because there was only a small amount of seasonal tilt, although having a somewhat greater elliptical orbit and roughly a third the ocean tidal action taking place would have made the tropics quite survivable by us humans, regardless of how much polar ice expanded. But you've presented no evidence that any of this happened, and you've ignored other evidence that contradicts it. Yes I have, and no I have not. Terribly sorry about that. . - Brad Guth -- I go sailing in the summer and look at stars in the winter, "Everybody is ignorant but on different subjects" --Will Rogers Its not what you know that gets you in trouble its what you know that ain so. --josh billings. |
#463
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
wrote:
On May 25, 12:25�pm, BradGuth wrote: As of prior to 12,500 BP, the best available science thus far tells us there were no apparent human or animal migrations pertaining to How the "F" can anyone know what occured 12,500 without robust, reliable, detailed records being made and kept safe for 12,500 years ??! What "F"ing best available science are you referring to ??! None exists! Grow up little dreamer. You appear fairly educated and somewhat bright here and there, yet you subtract this notion with a single paragraph. Then perhaps your forever closed mindset and faith-based nayism shouldn't bother trying to deductively figure anything out for your self. I mean, why bother when the mostly subjective science of your mainstream status quo box is always Old Testament or Qur'an like, more than good enough? (even when 2+2 doesn’t equal 4) Tell us why didn't you hold your DARPA/NASA and of their Apollo fiasco to those same standards that you insist all others must provide? God forbid, apparently you wouldn't ever want to police your own kind. . - Brad Guth |
#464
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
BradGuth wrote:
On May 23, 10:35 pm, wrote: On May 23, 9:06 pm, BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 7:52 pm, wrote: On May 23, 4:06 pm, BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 8:21 am, wrote: On May 23, 7:43 am, David Johnston wrote: No degree of thickness of ice would keep the moon from shattering from such an impact. Absolutely, but what ice? Where's all that ice today? Your manic bipolar mindset is showing its ugly head again. And here you've boldly stated that Einstein was essentially a phony from the very get go. Now I'm not exactly certain which mainstream puppet is telling the truth, or even the half truth. Is that why you and others of your DARPA kind wouldn't dare run off those simulations? . - Brad Guth No hidden agendas or motives, just trying to see where the ice came from and where it went. Evasion noted. Dumb and dumber noted, as well as your denial of being in denial, or rather DARPA damage-control noted. When will you spooks and moles of the mainstream status quo (aka Dark Side) ever learn? Productive responses. Not. BTW, I'd thought Oort clouds were icy (somewhat worse off than those icy Saturn rings). So, how exactly does one migrate through the realms of such Oort clouds without getting icy? . - Brad Guth Evasion still noted. ? evasion ? Are you saying them Oort clouds are not icy? Are you saying them rings around Saturn are not icy? How about the Kuiper belt and of them KBOs, are they not icy? Speak up and tell us village idiots what is not icy out there? . - Brad Guth most of it. because the "ice" is not ice but methane. josephus -- I go sailing in the summer and look at stars in the winter, "Everybody is ignorant but on different subjects" --Will Rogers Its not what you know that gets you in trouble its what you know that ain so. --josh billings. |
#465
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 26, 12:42 am, josephus wrote:
BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 10:35 pm, wrote: On May 23, 9:06 pm, BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 7:52 pm, wrote: On May 23, 4:06 pm, BradGuth wrote: On May 23, 8:21 am, wrote: On May 23, 7:43 am, David Johnston wrote: No degree of thickness of ice would keep the moon from shattering from such an impact. Absolutely, but what ice? Where's all that ice today? Your manic bipolar mindset is showing its ugly head again. And here you've boldly stated that Einstein was essentially a phony from the very get go. Now I'm not exactly certain which mainstream puppet is telling the truth, or even the half truth. Is that why you and others of your DARPA kind wouldn't dare run off those simulations? . - Brad Guth No hidden agendas or motives, just trying to see where the ice came from and where it went. Evasion noted. Dumb and dumber noted, as well as your denial of being in denial, or rather DARPA damage-control noted. When will you spooks and moles of the mainstream status quo (aka Dark Side) ever learn? Productive responses. Not. BTW, I'd thought Oort clouds were icy (somewhat worse off than those icy Saturn rings). So, how exactly does one migrate through the realms of such Oort clouds without getting icy? . - Brad Guth Evasion still noted. ? evasion ? Are you saying them Oort clouds are not icy? Are you saying them rings around Saturn are not icy? How about the Kuiper belt and of them KBOs, are they not icy? Speak up and tell us village idiots what is not icy out there? . - Brad Guth most of it. because the "ice" is not ice but methane. josephus -- Gee whiz, then that goes exactly along with my other argument about how next to impossible it is for plain old ice to exist/coexist in the vacuum and cosmic gauntlet of space, that is unless having a sufficient mass and way the hell and gone out there (such as Pluto and Sedna should contain such ice, along with their frozen methane and CO2 dry-ice). Of course, it there were a sufficient rocky core of 7.35e22 kg to start off with, as then the associated gravity would tend to hold onto whatever ice, be it of methane, dry-ice or plain old water-ice, as well as for whatever local geothermal energy causing internal gas/ vapors to emerge could also be held onto, and as long as it stayed far enough away from a given star or whatever large planet would also be essential for holding onto an atmosphere that would shield and/or insulate that icy surface, and obviously better yet if there was a magnetosphere for giving that thin atmosphere some protection from whatever solar wind. Perhaps the paramagnetic characteristics of our moon could have helped a little, if not via an active core that once upon a time having sustained just enough of a magnetosphere to have shielded itself, as of prior to merging along with Earth. .. - Brad Guth |
#466
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 25, 3:27 pm, josephus wrote:
BradGuth wrote: On May 25, 12:28 pm, Timberwoof wrote: A better cite would be...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus#Orbit_and_rotation "[Venus] reaches inferior conjunction every 584 days, on average." 584 days / 365 day * 12 months = 19.2 months venus, mercury, Jupiter Saturn and lots of moons have small integer relations. it occurs everywhere. AE Roy talked about this. the real question is "Does this fact have anything to do with orbital stability?" I remember a simulation at JPL had a problem. I heard about it from one of the developers. the simulation was a stepwise emulation of the Solar System. well, some programmer made a mistake and when they ran the simulation the EARTH was missing. Venus and Mercury became unstable and Venus escaped the solar system. rather clear evidence that the hierarchy is particular and specific to stability. However, "Whether this relationship arose by chance or is the result of some kind of tidal locking with the Earth, is unknown." That's very true enough and directly usable for this argument. The Venus orbit is not unaffected by the tidal radius of Earth. What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of an icy proto-moon (be it complex)? You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible. Yes I have, Well, you've presented what you thought were reasons, but they've been disputed. lithobreaking is like antigravity and shares properties with it. it requires a mechanism the stop the inertia of an entire PLANET. F= GM*V^2 that is the energy to decellerate the earth. that decelleration would violently alter our orbit ( 1.4121* V is the definition of EXCESS HYPERBOLIC VELOCITY. Then you have not run the basic moon impacting Earth simulations that clearly proves otherwise. How sad. This is not the least bit all-inclusive, but have you ever run the basic online crater simulator? http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/ . - Brad Guth |
#467
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 25, 2:43 pm, josephus wrote:
lets talk about accelerations. and the definition of excess escape velocity. first off an orbit is constrained and the energy function is negative. -- a fact of life any bound orbit will have negative energy. so a circular orbit is V^2 = GM/R to escape completely from the orbit. the V = (2)^1/2 * Vcircular. that little bit of extra energy will escape the system. in real terms that little bit of energy would be 1.4121 times any circurlar speed to escape from that orbit. whether elliptical or circular. a. a moon would escape from the earth b a planet would escape from the sun. any passing object ( sirius or any other sun) would exchange energy with the planets and moons and as it swoops by. they would bobble and leave the solar system. the problem is delineated in "Astrodynamics" by Bates, Mueller and White. Dover 1971 easy reading If you know a little bit of calculus and and lot of algebra. thats ok Brad does not read that kind of stuff. josephus Why is josephus having to talk as though less than child? Are you Muslim, and thus deathly afraid of using computers, or cameras? In addition to your having ignored the Sirius star/solar system recent loss of 4+ solar mass, and having further ignored the stellar binary considerations that would become trinary once our solar system was close enough. So, where’s that supercomputer simulation? Apparently you have not even bothered to run the basic of moon impacting Earth simulations that clearly proves otherwise. How sad and pathetic at the same time. This limited method is not the least bit all-inclusive, but have you ever run the basic online crater simulator? (apparently not) http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/ . - Brad Guth |
#468
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On Sun, 25 May 2008 12:25:42 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote: On May 25, 10:22 am, David Johnston wrote: On Sun, 25 May 2008 08:32:23 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: Venus as it passes extremely close by every 19 months, as such is nearly as moon like tidal locked to Earth. What's your basis for this claim? Direct observational or observationology (other than the visible spectrum) via radar imaging that tells us exactly which way a given face of Venus is facing Earth. No, tell me where I can look it up. I'm not just going to take your word for it. Oh, by the way, why does it matter? Good grief; just do a basic search for three little words; Earth Venus lock, and lo and behold it should be somewhat near the top of the stack of such topics and numerous web pages that have posted this peer replicated knowledge for more than the past decade. Why does it matter? What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of an icy proto-moon (be it complex)? You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible. Yes I have, No, you really haven't. The introduction to this topic was not about Earth always having that moon, or was that part simply not clear enough? Do you think that sentence makes sense? but no matter the possible or not, it's still capable of being supercomputer simulated in full interactive 3D animated eye- candy mode. Why would anyone bother to do the simulation without some reason to think that it is possible? Why would anyone bother to climb mount Everest, Because they know it's there. If they didn't have reason to think it was there, they'd be idiots to try to climb mount Everest. or try to fly like a bird Anyone who tries to fly like a bird is an eccentric hobbyist at best. Anyone who seriously thinks it's possible is a nutjob. Airplanes and hang gliders do not fly like birds. |
#469
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
On May 26, 10:14 am, David Johnston wrote:
On Sun, 25 May 2008 12:25:42 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: On May 25, 10:22 am, David Johnston wrote: On Sun, 25 May 2008 08:32:23 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth wrote: Venus as it passes extremely close by every 19 months, as such is nearly as moon like tidal locked to Earth. What's your basis for this claim? Direct observational or observationology (other than the visible spectrum) via radar imaging that tells us exactly which way a given face of Venus is facing Earth. No, tell me where I can look it up. I'm not just going to take your word for it. Oh, by the way, why does it matter? Good grief; just do a basic search for three little words; Earth Venus lock, and lo and behold it should be somewhat near the top of the stack of such topics and numerous web pages that have posted this peer replicated knowledge for more than the past decade. Why does it matter? Obviously uncovering the best available truth didn't matter to Hitler, his Zionist/Nazi minions and puppet-masters, or that of our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush), so by all means you coud be 100% correct. What exactly do you not understand about a lithobraking encounter of an icy proto-moon (be it complex)? You have presented no reason to think such a thing is possible. Yes I have, No, you really haven't. The introduction to this topic was not about Earth always having that moon, or was that part simply not clear enough? Do you think that sentence makes sense? Yes I do. What the hell was your interpretation of this topic intro? but no matter the possible or not, it's still capable of being supercomputer simulated in full interactive 3D animated eye- candy mode. Why would anyone bother to do the simulation without some reason to think that it is possible? Why would anyone bother to climb mount Everest, Because they know it's there. If they didn't have reason to think it was there, they'd be idiots to try to climb mount Everest. or try to fly like a bird Anyone who tries to fly like a bird is an eccentric hobbyist at best. Anyone who seriously thinks it's possible is a nutjob. Airplanes and hang gliders do not fly like birds. BTW; You've avoided and/or excluded the swim like a whale part. Silly boy, are we being just a wee bit overly Zionist or perhaps of something far worse these days? You know damn good and well what I'd intended by my question. But then you're clearly one of the DARPA bad guys that's in favor of furthering your faith-based and warlord formulated New World Order on behalf of global domination at all cost and w/o remorse for even those of your own kind. Just like in the good old day of treating that pesky ringworm disorder with your 36,000 fold dosage of gamma and X-rays is what curred them dark-skinned Jews. Why don't you tell us how a ringworm even knew the difference between a dark or white Jew. .. - Brad Guth |
#470
|
|||
|
|||
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth
BradGuth wrote:
On May 25, 2:43 pm, josephus wrote: lets talk about accelerations. and the definition of excess escape velocity. first off an orbit is constrained and the energy function is negative. -- a fact of life any bound orbit will have negative energy. so a circular orbit is V^2 = GM/R to escape completely from the orbit. the V = (2)^1/2 * Vcircular. that little bit of extra energy will escape the system. in real terms that little bit of energy would be 1.4121 times any circurlar speed to escape from that orbit. whether elliptical or circular. a. a moon would escape from the earth b a planet would escape from the sun. any passing object ( sirius or any other sun) would exchange energy with the planets and moons and as it swoops by. they would bobble and leave the solar system. the problem is delineated in "Astrodynamics" by Bates, Mueller and White. Dover 1971 easy reading If you know a little bit of calculus and and lot of algebra. thats ok Brad does not read that kind of stuff. josephus Why is josephus having to talk as though less than child? Are you Muslim, and thus deathly afraid of using computers, or cameras? In addition to your having ignored the Sirius star/solar system recent loss of 4+ solar mass, and having further ignored the stellar binary considerations that would become trinary once our solar system was close enough. So, where’s that supercomputer simulation? 4+ solar mass loss? did you just make that up. please show us a reference to a news release or even, god forbid, a juried magazine. otherwise this is just an unsupported assertion by imagination. Apparently you have not even bothered to run the basic of moon impacting Earth simulations that clearly proves otherwise. How sad and pathetic at the same time. why dont you look up celestial mechanics and orbital motions This limited method is not the least bit all-inclusive, but have you ever run the basic online crater simulator? (apparently not) http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/ . - Brad Guth josephus -- It is true that the person making the claim should show the proof that is approved by the opposition. brad the clueless tries to pass the research of to the opposition. and that is not how science is done. -- I go sailing in the summer and look at stars in the winter, "Everybody is ignorant but on different subjects" --Will Rogers Its not what you know that gets you in trouble its what you know that ain so. --josh billings. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Earth w/o Moon / by Brad Guth | BradGuth | Policy | 523 | June 20th 08 07:17 PM |
Aliens based on moon Brad Guth please review | LIBERATOR | Space Shuttle | 39 | April 22nd 06 08:40 AM |
Aliens based on moon Brad Guth please review | honestjohn | Misc | 2 | April 19th 06 05:55 PM |
Moon is less hot by earthshine, says Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA | Ami Silberman | History | 13 | December 15th 03 08:13 PM |
Moon is less hot by earthshine, says Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA | Ami Silberman | Astronomy Misc | 13 | December 15th 03 08:13 PM |