| |
|
Article:
<[email protected]>
From: [email protected](Nancy )
Subject: Re: Why NEWTON IS A GOD
Date: 20 Dec 1996 16:08:20 GMT
This is a serious answer, and the Zetas are giving Kent a serious (and non-insulting) reply.
In article <[email protected]> Kent
Nickerson writes:
> Curt Bathras wrote:
>> A friend asked me this question the other day and I
could not
>> come up with an intelligent answer: Why do the planets
>> continue to revolve about the sun? Why do they stay in
this
>> perpetual state of equilibrium?
>
> An object in orbit around a body will want to continue on a
> tangent to the orbit (inertia), but will fall (gravitation)
toward
> the object it orbits. An orbit has a tangent path which
recedes from
> the orbited body as fast as the orbited body pulls the
orbiter
> towards itself (an equilibrium between inertia and
gravitiational
> attraction). It's like the orbiter is falling all the time,
but the
> surface of the orbited body is receding just as fast (for a
circular
> orbit).
> Kent Nickerson <[email protected]>
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
The flaw in this argument is the idea that motion is a THING,
immutable, unchangeable, eternal, once born at the start (during
a big bang or whatever) never to go away. Motion is not a THING,
it is a result, a reaction, and as such DOES CHANGE as you well
know! Your explanation on orbits as a balance between a straight
line motion and a gravity tug to the side looks good on paper,
but examine the reality a bit closer and the contradictions and
inadequacy of that argument emerge.
Each time an orbiting object corrects its straight line path due to gravity tug, its straight line path would be diminished in its intensity. Is this not the case in your all-too-familiar situation of having to put on the brakes when driving? The car is in motion along a flat plane, propelled continuously only as long as the foot is on the gas pedal. This equates to your forward or tangential motion. Should one brake simultaneously while still stepping on the gas, the car slows. This equates to the interference in the orbiting object's tangential motion caused by gravity. Now take the foot off the pedal, and you DO NOT have the same forward motion as before. It was not a THING, but a reaction, and now it is a reaction to the push caused by the foot on the gas while starting from its state of rest.
Just so, the orbiting planet requires a continual PUSH, from something, in order to continue to move. Left without this push, the object would steadily spiral into the sun, and you would scarcely have had time to evolve into the intelligent creature pondering this scenario as the spiral would not take all that long! This spiral is what happens to your Earth orbiting satellites, which are often kept aloft only due to a puff now and then from the jets built into them. Left alone, they spiral to Earth, the gravity tug affecting their forward motion each instant. The gravity tug is not strictly a sideways tug, as in all cases the planet's path is pointed AWAY from the sun, however slightly. For any given instant moment:
Thus, there is erosion in the forward motion,
which is not a THING but a reaction. In order to keep the planet
continuously revolving, there must be a PUSH, and a push there
is. It is caused by the swirling matter in the sun's core, which
creates fields of influence such as magnetic fields that affect
the orbiting planets to varying degrees depending upon THEIR
composition. Why do you suppose that planets orbit all in the
same direction? Is it by accident that this same pattern presents
in all solar systems? Retrograde planet motion is the extreme
exception, another day's discussion, so the fact that planets
invariably revolve in the same direction should be a compelling
clue to anyone seeking an explanation for why planets continue to
revolve. However, humans worshipping Newton as a god would not
DARE.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])
All rights reserved: [email protected]
http://www.zetatalk.com