Gravitational Slingshot And Voilation of Newton's Third Law of Motion.

MathMagician says...

I'm guessing that you are the same person as Androcles. Why
do you keep changing your name?

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY

"Daryl McCullough" wrote in message ...
MathMagician says...

I'm guessing that you are the same person as Androcles. Why
do you keep changing your name?

--
Daryl McCullough
Ithaca, NY

"Tom Roberts" wrote in message . ..
Newton's laws are obeyed.
Tom Roberts

Note that: NEWTON's laws, not Einstein's ridiculous GR.

http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/di...insEvents.html
"We use 3 inertial reference frames" [because Dorks can't get the result they want in two]
"In neither of these frames any form of acceleration is felt" [neither one of all three].
"In order for the travelling twin to make HIS trip, SHE must be in frame S'
while going away"
"if T = 5 years and v = 0.8c, then the stay at home twin will have aged 10 years"
Belgium is where the farts blow.
"Your conclusion is dead wrong.
Start over, but skip the first part and the conclusion." -- Dork Van de ****head.
"You made a mistake" -- Dork Van de psychotic fumble mumbler



I'm guessing you are the same McCullough that gave me the
numbers for
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonde...mart/Smart.htm

Why do you continue to defend your ridiculous religion?
What are you frightened of, McCullough?
Ridicule by Dork Van de merde or Roberts, or ridicule by me?

Herb Schaltegger wrote:

--
You can run on for a long time,
Sooner or later, God'll cut you down.
~Johnny Cash

..
God is like Dog. When you run, Dog will chase you and bite. But if you
do not move and stare straight in his eyes, Dog will go away.

You got nothing to fear except fear itself. What does not cut you down
makes you stronger.

BTW, I appreciate your feedback. There is deep meaning in moron,
PLONK, f*** which will help me to understand physics better.

I am meditating on it. Thanks.

neo wrote:
Gravitational Slingshot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_slingshot

.
Flyby Anomaly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly

.
Gravitational slingshot increases velocity of spacecraft without
expelling propellant or reaction matter. This obviously voilates
newton's third law of motion and flyby anomaly supports voilation of
newton's third law of motion.

How is it a violation of Newton's third law? The momentum of the
center of mass of the system doesn't change.

Eric Gisse wrote:
neo wrote:
Tom Roberts wrote:
neo wrote:
Gravitational slingshot increases velocity of spacecraft without
expelling propellant or reaction matter. This obviously voilates
newton's third law of motion and flyby anomaly supports voilation of
newton's third law of motion.

Not true. The planet involved changes momentum by an amount equal and
opposite to the change of the spacecraft's. Of course this is
unobservable, due to the enormous mass ratio. Newton's laws are obeyed.

I give you chance to retract before someone add your post to 'immortal
fumbles'.

Take a classical mechanics course and stop being a moron.

I admit that I did mistake. It is always better to ask someone in town
about specific road rather than going in library to find town map.
Problem is that you must also know road which leads to library.

Every info about physics is available in books, physics journals,
internet. Then why does this ng exists? What is meaning of
'discussion'? Can you dig single thread from archive which has
contributed to physics?

Just shut down sci.physics.

In sci.physics neo wrote:


I admit that I did mistake. It is always better to ask someone in town
about specific road rather than going in library to find town map.
Problem is that you must also know road which leads to library.

Every info about physics is available in books, physics journals,
internet. Then why does this ng exists? What is meaning of
'discussion'? Can you dig single thread from archive which has
contributed to physics?

Just shut down sci.physics.

Are you really this stupid or are you in a bet with someone as to
who can create the most inane post to USENET?

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In article . com, "neo" writes:

Eric Gisse wrote:
neo wrote:
Tom Roberts wrote:
neo wrote:
Gravitational slingshot increases velocity of spacecraft without
expelling propellant or reaction matter. This obviously voilates
newton's third law of motion and flyby anomaly supports voilation of
newton's third law of motion.

Not true. The planet involved changes momentum by an amount equal and
opposite to the change of the spacecraft's. Of course this is
unobservable, due to the enormous mass ratio. Newton's laws are obeyed.

I give you chance to retract before someone add your post to 'immortal
fumbles'.

Take a classical mechanics course and stop being a moron.

I admit that I did mistake.

Anybody can make mistakes. When somebody says or writes something and
you say "I disagree because..." then you may or may not be right and
if you're not right then you made a mistake but no harm was done and,
in fact, a benefit was derived since at the end the issue is being
clarified. If, on the other hand, your response is like the above,
"I give you chance to retract before someone add your post to
'immortal fumbles'." then you've just marked yourself as an abnoxious
moron. Was this your goal?

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:28:30 GMT, in a place far, far away,
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:

Anybody can make mistakes. When somebody says or writes something and
you say "I disagree because..." then you may or may not be right and
if you're not right then you made a mistake but no harm was done and,
in fact, a benefit was derived since at the end the issue is being
clarified. If, on the other hand, your response is like the above,
"I give you chance to retract before someone add your post to
'immortal fumbles'." then you've just marked yourself as an abnoxious
moron. Was this your goal?

It's never the goal of obnoxious morons to mark themselves that way.
It's just what they do. They can't help it--they're obnoxious morons.

In article , h (Rand Simberg) writes:
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:28:30 GMT, in a place far, far away,
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:

Anybody can make mistakes. When somebody says or writes something and
you say "I disagree because..." then you may or may not be right and
if you're not right then you made a mistake but no harm was done and,
in fact, a benefit was derived since at the end the issue is being
clarified. If, on the other hand, your response is like the above,
"I give you chance to retract before someone add your post to
'immortal fumbles'." then you've just marked yourself as an abnoxious
moron. Was this your goal?

It's never the goal of obnoxious morons to mark themselves that way.
It's just what they do. They can't help it--they're obnoxious morons.

Well, yeah, can't argue with this. On the plus side, it is nice of
them to advertise what they are so prominently, that minimizes the
effort required to identify them and filter them out.

Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
| chances are he is doing just the same"

Tom Roberts wrote:
neo wrote:
Gravitational slingshot increases velocity of spacecraft without
expelling propellant or reaction matter. This obviously voilates
newton's third law of motion and flyby anomaly supports voilation of
newton's third law of motion.

Not true. The planet involved changes momentum by an amount equal and
opposite to the change of the spacecraft's. Of course this is
unobservable, due to the enormous mass ratio. Newton's laws are obeyed.


Tom Roberts

Newton's ballistic agenda filtered through the Ra/Dec system.

Nobody with enough sense to spot that the system is based on a 1461 day
cycle broken into 3 years of 365 days and 1 year of 366 days.

http://www.pfm.howard.edu/astronomy/...S/AACHCIR0.JPG

It was quite a feat to force planetary orbital motion into the 1461
day calendrical cycle but then again Newton could make you believe
anything.

Newton's laws obeyed indeed !,the only obeying done is with celestial
sphere geometry governing it all.

A question for the brilliant 'space guys'.What day does a star NOT
return in 23 hours 56 minutes 04 seconds ?.If you figure out that it
requires an additional day every fourth year to work then you might get
an inkling of just what you are 'obeying'.