Re: ZetaTalk and Spaceguard UK (D8)

David Tholen wrote:
>> Greg and Bill are saying that their math, Newton,
>> explains why something that is a million trillion metric
>> tons can orbit the Earth at only 1023 m/s or so.
>
> What does the mass have to do with it?  You could put a
> penny at the same distance and it would orbit the Earth with
> essentially the same speed.

David Tholen, meet Greg Neill and Bill Nelson.  Are we on the same page
here, guys?  Yes or no, are the implications of Newton's math as I've
described them?  If the mass of the primary is the ONLY thing an
orbiting object needs to be concerned with, in how close it can come and
how fast it orbits about the primary (these being the only factors in
the law), then what seems to be the problem?  The elephant and the
mosquito could zoon around the Earth, at near surface level, side by
side, same speed, no problem whatsoever.   So says Newton.

Greg Neill wrote:
> In sci.astro Nancy Lieder <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The IMPLICATION:
>> So if your math RULES, then moving the Moon closer
>> to the Earth only requires that the Moon move as fast as
>> the satellites, to stay aloft.
>
> No, it does not say that. While the velocity of the Moon and
> the satellite would be similar, they would be different - with
> the Moon having a higher velocity.  Why?  Because the
> gravitational attraction of the Earth/Moon system is higher
> than the gravitational attraction of the Earth/satellite
> system.

Bill Nelson wrote:
> In sci.astro Nancy Lieder <[email protected]> wrote:
>> This produces some interesting results, where the Moon
>> could theoretically orbit at the same distance as Satellites,
>> at the same velocity (see next post).
>
> Unfortunately, you have shown that you do not understand
> orbital dynamics  ... Nor have you provided any mathematical
> support for what is really a very simple physical system.