Another Stupid Question

Douglas A. Shrader wrote in article
...

What FACTS do you have that l have a conspiracy theory?

The ones you provide

Prove it

What is stupid, is that you can't figure out who is stupid. And you call
yourself stupid for responding when you responded to NOTHING in your reply!
(THAT's stupid!)

David G. Nagel wrote in article
...
I used to think that there was no truly stupid question but this message
has shown me wrong. Either that or the questioner thinks we are stupid.
I must be since I'm responding to this idiot.


Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
"Flying _Naked_People" http://www.rcip.com/nerdgerl/email.htm wrote in
message ...

You know, y'all can laugh at me all day long. I don't give a hoot.


That's good, because your name alone invites laughter.


But tell me WHY is it, that when the news portrays some mission out in

space,

the actual space SHIP is on TV?!?


Please site which missions you are refering to. In many cases animation is
used to show ships, and is stated as such.


What - they have TV cameras and a television crew out there to video tape

the

thing?


There are cameras in space, some of which could be used if desired, but
most
actual ship footage in from planes during liftoff. The rest is computer
animation. Of course the space station and shuttles all have cameras
aboard,
not that you really want to learn or be presented with any facts to spoil
your conspiracy theories.


How can we see the Spaceship Qwerty-prise on TV when all the people in

space

are supposed to be IN the spaceship??


Go away troll, there is no Quertyprise, and it looks like your confusing
movies with real life now.

"David G. Nagel" wrote...
in message ...

I used to think that there was no truly stupid question but this message
has shown me wrong. Either that or the questioner thinks we are stupid.
I must be since I'm responding to this idiot.

Nah, David... we don't respond to trollers because
we're stupid... we respond to trollers because it's *F*U*N*!

(Just ask Ron and Hap g)

And you're right... there *is* one type of stupid question:::

It's the question that *should* have been asked, but wasn't.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
"Oh give me please the Universe keys
That unlock all those mysteries!"
You pay your fees, you find some keys
That keeps you always groping.

"Oh give me please the Happiness keys
That ease the pain of biting fleas!"
Today you seize you need no keys,
That door is always open.

Paine Ellsworth

"David G. Nagel" wrote in message
...
I used to think that there was no truly stupid question but this message
has shown me wrong. Either that or the questioner thinks we are stupid.
I must be since I'm responding to this idiot.

Yep, I admit I only responded to have a little fun with the troll myself.
I'll stop now ;-)





Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
"Flying _Naked_People" http://www.rcip.com/nerdgerl/email.htm wrote in
message ...

You know, y'all can laugh at me all day long. I don't give a hoot.


That's good, because your name alone invites laughter.


But tell me WHY is it, that when the news portrays some mission out in

space,

the actual space SHIP is on TV?!?


Please site which missions you are refering to. In many cases animation
is
used to show ships, and is stated as such.


What - they have TV cameras and a television crew out there to video
tape

the

thing?


There are cameras in space, some of which could be used if desired, but
most
actual ship footage in from planes during liftoff. The rest is computer
animation. Of course the space station and shuttles all have cameras
aboard,
not that you really want to learn or be presented with any facts to
spoil
your conspiracy theories.


How can we see the Spaceship Qwerty-prise on TV when all the people in

space

are supposed to be IN the spaceship??


Go away troll, there is no Quertyprise, and it looks like your confusing
movies with real life now.

I wasn't calling the responders stupid. I think that responding to
trollers is great fun also. Let's keep up the good work.


Painius wrote:

"David G. Nagel" wrote...
in message ...

I used to think that there was no truly stupid question but this message
has shown me wrong. Either that or the questioner thinks we are stupid.
I must be since I'm responding to this idiot.


Nah, David... we don't respond to trollers because
we're stupid... we respond to trollers because it's *F*U*N*!

(Just ask Ron and Hap g)

And you're right... there *is* one type of stupid question:::

It's the question that *should* have been asked, but wasn't.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

"Flying _Naked_People" http://www.rcip.com/nerdgerl/email.htm wrote in
message ...
You know, y'all can laugh at me all day long. I don't give a hoot.

But tell me WHY is it, that when the news portrays some mission out in
space,
the actual space SHIP is on TV?!?

What - they have TV cameras and a television crew out there to video tape
the
thing?

How can we see the Spaceship Qwerty-prise on TV when all the people in
space
are supposed to be IN the spaceship??

In short, there have never been TV images broadcast from space of a
spacecraft that were not taken from another spacecraft (or space station or
space-walking astronaut). And by that, I mean a known spacecraft. In the
case of missions where one and only one spacecraft was involved---the
Mercury missions, for instance, most of the Gemini series or the early
Shuttle flights---there were no images of the spacecraft in space. If you
believe you have seen TV images where a spacecraft was seen and there would
have been no other spacecraft nearby, please trot them out. My own suspicion
is that since you were referring to memories of 30-year-old Apollo TV
coverage that it is merely your own recollection that is at fault.

RM

Hi Painius and RM In a space ship that is accelerating you would feel
the back of your back pressing you against the back cushion of the
chair. When acceleration stops you feel no pressure on your back.Very
possible you would feel your space suit pressing against you in an
accelerating gravity field.All this comes out of the physics of inertia.
The greatest effect of inertia is when hitting the ground. Its the
sudden stop that kills you. Bert

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
Hi Painius and RM In a space ship that is accelerating you would feel
the back of your back pressing you against the back cushion of the
chair. When acceleration stops you feel no pressure on your back.Very
possible you would feel your space suit pressing against you in an
accelerating gravity field.All this comes out of the physics of inertia.
The greatest effect of inertia is when hitting the ground. Its the
sudden stop that kills you. Bert


I think you posted this to the wrong thread. But as I recall, the original
question was: What you feel if you were falling toward the moon? The answer
is: Nothing. If you are in a spaceship that is also falling toward the moon,
you would still feel nothing since the ship is falling right along with you.
If the spaceship is accelerating faster than you are, however---for
instance, if for some insane reason you started its engine to make it fall
even faster---then, yes, you would feel that acceleration.

RM

RM Sorry if this got posted in the wrong thread. Let it be
accelerating motion created by rockets,or falling in a gravity field,
the effects of accelerating are the same. In a rocket ship when the
rockets are not firing,and you are coasting you feel no effect of
motion. Even looking out the space ship window you can't tell if you are
moving or is the scenery outside moving. Accelerating. Slowing
down,and changing direction show inertia. That is why Asminov wrote a
chapter in his book "Physics" to show how this "mass" (inertia) can
create problems for NASA,and astronauts working,and walking on the moon.
Tricky stuff Bert PS Read Einstien's Equivalence Principle

(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote in news:6619-3F5B4B88-
:

RM Sorry if this got posted in the wrong thread. Let it be
accelerating motion created by rockets,or falling in a gravity field,
the effects of accelerating are the same.

No, Bert, you've got this wrong. If you're free falling in a uniform
gravitational field, you feel nothing, even though you're accelerating
relative to a distant observer who is effectively outside the gravitational
field.

PS Read Einstien's Equivalence Principle

You need to re-read Einstein's Equivalence Principle. If you are held
_stationary_ in a uniform gravitational field (relative to a distant
observer outside the field), the effects are identical to riding in a
spaceship that is not in a gravitational field but is accelerating (at a
rate corresponding to the strength of the field).


--
Steve Gray