| |
|
Article: <[email protected]>
From: [email protected](Nancy )
Subject: Re: Why do the planets continue to revolve?
Date: 3 Jan 1997 15:25:24 GMT
In article <[email protected]> Eric Kline
writes:
>> The cumulative effect of drag is that the object slows
down at a faster
>> and faster rate. That was our statement. Try to deal
with all that
>> was put into that sentence, at once, dear boy, if you
can.
>
> Acceleration or deceleration is due to a force. Drag is a
force
> that always acts to decelerate (i.e. slow down) an object.
The
> drag force is a function of the object speed and as the
object slows
> down, the drag force decreases.
> eric kline <[email protected]>
In article <[email protected]> Greg Neill
writes:
> Drag effects are maximum at maximum speed, and taper off as
the
> speed drops. That this is so would seem to be obvious if you
stop
> to think: if drag effects increased with decreasing speed,
then
> they would be maximum (possibly infinite) at zero speed;
> everything stationary would be 'glued' in place, and nothing
> could move. It would also explain why leaves falling from
> trees actually manage to reach the ground.
> [email protected] (Greg Neill)
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
You cannot discuss or comprehend the concept of the cumulative
effect of drag because we're not using a TERM, a label you've
attached to the concept? Drag is singular and cannot be
cumulative? Hahahahah! We must say "force of
deceleration" rather than "cumulative effect of
drag"? This is science? These are thinking human beings?
Where it would seem that the discussion has stopped because of a label or term, in fact this is just the EXCUSE. They are fussing like this BECAUSE THEY CAN'T DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM PRESENTED. When boggled, digress. Simple as that.
The problem, again, dear dead-head lads, is this:
If a planet is continuing in a steady orbit, without any
impetus such as the propulsion humans find necessary to keep
their probes and satellites from drifting off the path they are
set upon, then something is either steadily pulling or pushing
the planet to maintain its orbit in the face of all other
influences. The influence of the orbiting planets upon each other
would otherwise, over time, alter the orbits dramatically. Why
would they not? Each time a given planet lined up with the
massive Jupiter, and was perturbed to speed up or slow down due
to this influence, unless there were another influence this
perturbed planet would remain in motion a bit slower or faster,
perpetually.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])