|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Microgravity parable
From Herb Schaltegger:
The statement you are quoting has been accepted physics since it was spelled out in detail in Isaac's Principia. You and Newton on a first name basis these days? At his mixers, he may have preferred to be called "Sir Isaac" to impress the ladies. ~ CT |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
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. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Microgravity parable
Stuf4 wrote:
From Scott Hedrick: (Stuf4) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: - Gravity is *distinctly different* from acceleration. While gravity has a property of acceleration, it is *not* acceleration. Verifiable reference, please. Not just the name of a book, please provide the specific page and a quote. I just found this page that gives a good set of q/a's: http://amos.indiana.edu/library/scri...rogravity.html Excerpts: "...there's no such thing as zero gravity." "...weightlessness and zero gravity are two different things." I'm sure there are lots more references with accurate physics. Hey, maybe even *NASA* has an accurate webpage on this. I'll check there and let you know if I find something good. ~ CT In response to your opening post, I listed many more references. I also tried to find sources which discredit "microgravity". Mostly I found sources which defined microgravity. But here are mo http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=microgravity 1. An environment in which there is very little net gravitational force, as of a free-falling object, an orbit, or interstellar space. 2. A minute shift in gravity that can occur through geologic factors in a region, such as the movement of the earth's crust along fault lines. http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary microgravity a condition in space in which only minuscule forces are experienced : virtual absence of gravity; broadly : a condition of weightlessness http://www.bartleby.com/cgi-bin/texi...avity&db=a hd ....1. An environment in which there is very little net gravitational force, as of a free-falling object, an orbit, or interstellar space. 2. A minute shift in gravity... Hmmm...the term is part of the vernacular language. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Microgravity parable
From Dave Fowler:
(Stuf4) I hope this analogy helps to illuminate the fundamental problem with the widely used terminology: zero/microgravity. No.... it just proves again that you're the same smug, self-satisfied jerk that you always were..... It is said that, "You can't please everyone." But my understanding of the way things work is that -you can't please *anyone*- beside yourself. They must find their own happiness, and if they happen to be malcontent that is their choice, not mine. So I would agree with the part about me being self-satisfied, and I consider that to be a worthy goal. Perhaps Polonius said it best: "to thine own self be true". ~ CT |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Microgravity parable
From Rand:
Well, if one wants to get pedantic, gravity is a quantitative mathematical model invented by Newton to explain why apples fall from trees and planets orbit suns. Please note that we have been discussing gravity and acceleration as actual physical phenomena, not just math models. No, we've been discussing math models of physical phenomena. (Disagreement noted.) The main point of focus has been that the concept of gravity is distinct from the concept of acceleration. While the force of gravity causes acceleration, many accelerations are not caused by the force of gravity. Which is irrelevant to your lunatic theory that space engineers and scientists don't understand the theory. Perhaps you'd like to offer an explanation as to why astronauts are quoted as speaking about "no gravity" in orbit, or why NASA scientists advertise facilities with "low gravity". ~ CT |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Microgravity parable
From stmx3:
In response to your opening post, I listed many more references. I also tried to find sources which discredit "microgravity". Mostly I found sources which defined microgravity. But here are mo http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=microgravity 1. An environment in which there is very little net gravitational force, as of a free-falling object, an orbit, or interstellar space. 2. A minute shift in gravity that can occur through geologic factors in a region, such as the movement of the earth's crust along fault lines. http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary microgravity a condition in space in which only minuscule forces are experienced : virtual absence of gravity; broadly : a condition of weightlessness http://www.bartleby.com/cgi-bin/texi...avity&db=a hd ...1. An environment in which there is very little net gravitational force, as of a free-falling object, an orbit, or interstellar space. 2. A minute shift in gravity... Hmmm...the term is part of the vernacular language. ....and NASA put it there! I consider it NASA's civic duty to take it out. That requires education. Today I was glad to find this webpage from Jim Oberg, former employee at NASA JSC: http://www.jamesoberg.com/myth.html Space Myths and Misconceptions OMNI magazine, May 1993, pp. 38ff Quote: "The myth that satellites remain in orbit because they have "escaped Earth's gravity" is perpetuated further (and falsely) by almost universal use of the zingy but physically nonsensical phrase "zero gravity" (and its techweenie cousin, "microgravity") to describe the free-falling conditions aboard orbiting space vehicles. Of course, this isn't true; gravity still exists in space. It keeps satellites from flying straight off into interstellar emptiness. What's missing is "weight," the resistance of gravitational attraction by an anchored structure or a counterforce." If one person at NASA can keep this all straight, I don't see why the entire agency can as well. But in scrubbing that URL TLD for the term "zero gravity", I was disappointed to see usage of the term subsequent to the date on this OMNI article. This supports the view that people *do* know the difference and they just use the bogus terms anyway. Along the lines of: "...what I said was "no gravity"...but you know what I meant." ~ CT |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Microgravity parable
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 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Relevancy of the Educator Astronaut to the Space Program | stmx3 | Space Shuttle | 201 | October 27th 03 11:00 PM |
Microgravity parable | Stuf4 | Space Shuttle | 90 | October 24th 03 03:28 PM |