Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #391740 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-09-07 19:40 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-09-08 11:30 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 163 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-07 19:40 -0700
Re: I was wrong Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-08 13:10 +1000
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-07 20:57 -0700
Re: I was wrong Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-08 14:02 +1000
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 00:22 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 02:06 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 02:58 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 03:48 -0700
Re: I was wrong John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-08 20:16 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 21:05 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 06:48 +0200
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 07:18 +0200
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 07:22 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 21:16 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 23:08 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 09:00 +0200
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 13:13 +0200
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 11:36 -0500
Re: I was wrong Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-08 20:15 +1000
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 11:35 -0500
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 23:10 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 21:20 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 06:44 +0200
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 07:11 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 10:43 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 20:12 +0200
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 07:08 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 03:05 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 04:14 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 04:27 -0700
Re: I was wrong RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-09-14 10:10 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 13:17 +0200
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 11:45 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 10:30 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 12:58 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 11:34 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 13:37 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 11:40 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 13:42 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 10:54 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 12:59 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 11:12 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 13:33 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 11:38 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 14:27 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-08 21:21 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 07:23 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-09 20:20 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 07:45 +0200
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 17:26 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-09 21:20 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 07:48 +0200
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 03:16 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-10 16:43 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 21:06 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-10 22:01 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 23:18 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-11 00:40 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 10:09 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-11 03:41 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 12:50 +0200
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 17:47 -0500
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 17:51 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-11 17:55 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 20:03 -0500
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 17:37 -0500
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 08:21 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-10 02:03 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 23:56 +0200
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 11:18 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-11 03:42 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 12:52 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-11 05:49 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 10:06 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-11 17:40 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 07:59 +0200
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 17:45 -0500
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 07:55 +0200
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 03:11 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 17:40 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-11 17:50 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 20:01 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-11 21:26 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 07:33 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-12 15:39 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:25 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-12 18:51 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 20:59 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-13 01:28 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 11:31 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-13 22:04 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 00:21 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-14 01:00 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 11:32 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-14 01:25 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 13:00 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-14 16:56 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 19:42 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-15 01:28 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-15 01:37 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 10:33 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-15 21:07 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 07:36 -0500
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 08:51 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 12:24 -0500
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 11:32 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 21:37 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 09:20 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 11:10 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 11:50 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 16:47 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 17:58 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 08:37 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-20 17:45 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-20 07:19 -0500
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 22:12 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 09:22 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-15 01:45 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 11:15 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-15 02:42 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 12:38 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-15 19:39 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 10:34 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 02:14 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 12:10 +0200
Re: I was wrong mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-16 03:23 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 04:24 -0700
Re: I was wrong mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-16 05:50 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 18:12 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-17 05:27 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-17 18:37 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-17 21:06 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-17 22:58 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-17 23:31 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-18 03:03 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 04:17 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-18 08:14 -0500
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 11:37 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 11:26 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 11:46 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 18:04 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 18:25 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 19:05 -0700
Re: I was wrong Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 20:23 -0700
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-20 00:02 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 09:15 -0500
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 15:04 +0200
Re: I was wrong mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-16 06:12 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 10:27 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-15 19:37 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 10:31 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 02:09 -0700
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 12:30 +0200
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 18:18 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 07:38 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 18:02 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 09:13 -0500
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-16 07:32 -0500
Re: I was wrong Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-16 18:08 -0700
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 09:14 -0500
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 07:39 +0200
Re: I was wrong Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 20:15 +0200
Re: I was wrong Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-08 11:30 -0500
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-07 19:40 -0700 |
| Subject | I was wrong |
| Message-ID | <0e34d9ea-9038-4436-88a6-eacf9cf5c08b@googlegroups.com> |
I was wrong I am able to predict the a, t, and v trajectory parameters for planets in orbit around the sun knowing either a or t. For satellites of planets I need to know both a and t to predict v, or both a and v to predict t, or both t and v to predict a. Knowing the name of the primary and/or G and/or M for solar free fall objects is not required by my gravity theory. In respect of v, it is the average orbital velocity. If I know the eccentricity of the planet or satellite I can predict the velocity at aphelion and perihelion.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 13:10 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e3c35aF9q4U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #391740 |
On 8/09/2016 12:40 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > I was wrong > > I am able to predict the a, t, and v trajectory parameters for planets in orbit around the sun knowing either a or t. For satellites of planets I need to know both a and t to predict v, or both a and v to predict t, or both t and v to predict a. Knowing the name of the primary and/or G and/or M for solar free fall objects is not required by my gravity theory. In respect of v, it is the average orbital velocity. If I know the eccentricity of the planet or satellite I can predict the velocity at aphelion and perihelion. > If one knows a and t one body in orbit about a primary, then one can infer either from the other for any other body in orbit about the same primary. This is because knowing a and t allows one to calculate the constant of proportionality in Kepler's third law. The value of v always varies along an orbit unless the orbit is circular, so calculating v always involves knowledge of the eccentricity. This is all your theory appears to allow you to do, so it's not an advance on Kepler's third law. Further, since one can calculate the mass of the primary from a and t of a single orbiting body, one can immediately apply general relativity (in its entirety if one's keen, or in a reduced form otherwise) to do the same calculations, so general relativity can do exactly the same as your theory can. Unsurprisingly, we conclude that you have nothing new. You were indeed wrong, as everyone here except you seems to have realised previously. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-07 20:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <365898d7-af8e-408f-8ac8-46e8d8ad7ecc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391742 |
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 11:10:39 AM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote: > If one knows a and t one body in orbit about a primary, then one can > infer either from the other for any other body in orbit about the same > primary. This is because knowing a and t allows one to calculate the > constant of proportionality in Kepler's third law. I need only a or t for a free fall object around the sun to calculate the other and v. > > The value of v always varies along an orbit unless the orbit is > circular, so calculating v always involves knowledge of the eccentricity. > The average v can be calculated with knowing eccentricity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 14:02 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e3c67dFtq0U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #391745 |
On 8/09/2016 1:57 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 11:10:39 AM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> If one knows a and t one body in orbit about a primary, then one can >> infer either from the other for any other body in orbit about the same >> primary. This is because knowing a and t allows one to calculate the >> constant of proportionality in Kepler's third law. > > I need only a or t for a free fall object around the sun to calculate the other and v. This is because you've already determined the constant of proportionality based on one of the planets. >> >> The value of v always varies along an orbit unless the orbit is >> circular, so calculating v always involves knowledge of the eccentricity. >> > The average v can be calculated with knowing eccentricity. > You can get a number. The average velocity is the distance travelled divided by the time. Since the time is not a function of the eccentricity, but distance travelled is, you cannot get the average velocity without knowing the eccentricity. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 00:22 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <be61a231-4774-4ff7-925c-59d763511433@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391746 |
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 12:02:56 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote: > The average velocity is the distance travelled divided by the time. > > Since the time is not a function of the eccentricity, but distance > travelled is, you cannot get the average velocity without knowing the > eccentricity. > > Sylvia. What is the result of the formula v=sqrt(GM/r)? Does it need eccentricity? Can YOU get v knowing only a or t? I can.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 02:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <92f9810b-b750-4d47-aa14-a363932946e8@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391757 |
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 2:22:43 AM UTC-5, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 12:02:56 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote: > > > The average velocity is the distance travelled divided by the time. > > > > Since the time is not a function of the eccentricity, but distance > > travelled is, you cannot get the average velocity without knowing the > > eccentricity. > > > > Sylvia. > > What is the result of the formula v=sqrt(GM/r)? Does it need eccentricity? > > Can YOU get v knowing only a or t? > > I can. Is your memory so short? You FAILED to calculate v_0 for 1566 Icarus and Hipparcos, both of which have highly eccentric orbits. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/R94s4SZChzY/OHl-pGtoAAAJ v=sqrt(GM/r) only works for satellites with nearly circular orbits and whose masses are very small relative to the primary body.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 02:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9583359a-d776-4e6d-ac92-677160d55ea6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391759 |
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 5:06:34 PM UTC+8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > Is your memory so short? You FAILED to calculate v_0 for 1566 Icarus and > Hipparcos, both of which have highly eccentric orbits. > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/R94s4SZChzY/OHl-pGtoAAAJ > How do Icarus and Hipparcos fit in? You said E, F and G were Venera 9, artificial satellite of Venus, Deimos, moon of Mars and Thalassa, moon of Neptune > v=sqrt(GM/r) only works for satellites with nearly circular orbits and > > > whose masses are very small relative to the primary body. There is no such qualification in the literature.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog <prokaryotic.caspase.homolog@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 03:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b937a10a-6c8c-4016-a96f-5563bf93e457@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391760 |
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 4:58:48 AM UTC-5, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 5:06:34 PM UTC+8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > Is your memory so short? You FAILED to calculate v_0 for 1566 Icarus and > > Hipparcos, both of which have highly eccentric orbits. > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/R94s4SZChzY/OHl-pGtoAAAJ > > > How do Icarus and Hipparcos fit in? > You said E, F and G were > Venera 9, artificial satellite of Venus, > Deimos, moon of Mars > and Thalassa, moon of Neptune Icarus and Hipparcos were C and D. Don't you remember? | Here is the semi-major axis for a very real natural satellite of the Sun. | Since T = 2*π*sqrt(a^3/μ), I will give you the period for free. | Your job is to give me the mean orbital speed: | | Natural Satellite of Sun C: | Semi-major axis = 1.078 AU = 161.3 x 10^6 km | Period = 408.9 days | Mean Orbital Speed = ???? | | How about an artificial satellite of the Earth? | Again, I will give you the period for free. | Your job is to give me the mean orbital speed: | | Artificial Satellite of the Earth D: | Semi-major axis = 2.452 x 10^4 km | Period = 0.4423 days | Mean Orbital Speed = ???? https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/R94s4SZChzY/6ghYPbj2BgAJ > > v=sqrt(GM/r) only works for satellites with nearly circular orbits and > > > > whose masses are very small relative to the primary body. > > There is no such qualification in the literature. Of course it is in the literature! Look towards the end of this section: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_speed#Mean_orbital_speed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 20:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <87b4bfd7-5bbb-49c9-b214-1f4964eaf599@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391763 |
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 5:48:23 AM UTC-5, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 4:58:48 AM UTC-5, Peter Riedt wrote: > > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 5:06:34 PM UTC+8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > > > > Is your memory so short? You FAILED to calculate v_0 for 1566 Icarus and > > > Hipparcos, both of which have highly eccentric orbits. > > > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/R94s4SZChzY/OHl-pGtoAAAJ > > > > > How do Icarus and Hipparcos fit in? > > You said E, F and G were > > Venera 9, artificial satellite of Venus, > > Deimos, moon of Mars > > and Thalassa, moon of Neptune > > Icarus and Hipparcos were C and D. > Don't you remember? > | Here is the semi-major axis for a very real natural satellite of the Sun. > | Since T = 2*π*sqrt(a^3/μ), I will give you the period for free. > | Your job is to give me the mean orbital speed: > | > | Natural Satellite of Sun C: > | Semi-major axis = 1.078 AU = 161.3 x 10^6 km > | Period = 408.9 days > | Mean Orbital Speed = ???? > | > | How about an artificial satellite of the Earth? > | Again, I will give you the period for free. > | Your job is to give me the mean orbital speed: > | > | Artificial Satellite of the Earth D: > | Semi-major axis = 2.452 x 10^4 km > | Period = 0.4423 days > | Mean Orbital Speed = ???? > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics.relativity/R94s4SZChzY/6ghYPbj2BgAJ > > > > v=sqrt(GM/r) only works for satellites with nearly circular orbits and > > > > > whose masses are very small relative to the primary body. > > > > There is no such qualification in the literature. > > Of course it is in the literature! Look towards the end of this section: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_speed#Mean_orbital_speed Nobody ever wants to do the real math... it's too tedious.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 21:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c2f0f6c3-7544-478d-a7ce-f7570753ab5a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391834 |
On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 11:16:27 AM UTC+8, John Gogo wrote: > > > Nobody ever wants to do the real math... it's too tedious. Yes, they prefer to copy formulas from text books.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-09 06:48 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nqteu6$l7c$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391838 |
Dne 09/09/2016 v 06:05 Peter Riedt napsal(a): > On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 11:16:27 AM UTC+8, John Gogo wrote: >> >> >> Nobody ever wants to do the real math... it's too tedious. > > Yes, they prefer to copy formulas from text books. > They need not copy these formulas from textbooks. They can derive them from a heas any time, while you prefer to be ignorant to formulas. Working with algebra IS real math. What you do is just number shuffling. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-09 07:18 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nqtgn1$pke$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391844 |
Dne 09/09/2016 v 06:48 Poutnik napsal(a): > > They can derive them from a heas any time, Errata:They can derive them from a head any time, -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-09 07:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nqu9ig$14tj$3@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #391838 |
On 9/8/2016 11:05 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 11:16:27 AM UTC+8, John Gogo wrote: >> >> >> Nobody ever wants to do the real math... it's too tedious. > > Yes, they prefer to copy formulas from text books. > Peter, when I responded to you, I didn't copy formulas. I derived them for you using algebra. It's not hard, and it's a skill you should try to learn. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 21:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <99b89197-3809-476f-addf-b111ce4639c2@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391763 |
On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 6:48:23 PM UTC+8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > | Here is the semi-major axis for a very real natural satellite of the Sun. > | Since T = 2*π*sqrt(a^3/μ), I will give you the period for free. > | Your job is to give me the mean orbital speed: > | > | Natural Satellite of Sun C: > | Semi-major axis = 1.078 AU = 161.3 x 10^6 km > | Period = 408.9 days > | Mean Orbital Speed = ???? > | > | How about an artificial satellite of the Earth? > | Again, I will give you the period for free. > | Your job is to give me the mean orbital speed: > | > | Artificial Satellite of the Earth D: > | Semi-major axis = 2.452 x 10^4 km > | Period = 0.4423 days > | Mean Orbital Speed = ???? > H = 66417m/sec (sun) I = 4031m/sec (earth)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 23:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3e9f988b-8fd9-41c8-b6b1-af6fd3cb0c92@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #391839 |
On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 12:16:03 PM UTC+8, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 6:48:23 PM UTC+8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: > > | Here is the semi-major axis for a very real natural satellite of the Sun. > > | Since T = 2*π*sqrt(a^3/μ), I will give you the period for free. > > | Your job is to give me the mean orbital speed: > > | > > | Natural Satellite of Sun C: > > | Semi-major axis = 1.078 AU = 161.3 x 10^6 km > > | Period = 408.9 days > > | Mean Orbital Speed = ???? > > | > > | How about an artificial satellite of the Earth? > > | Again, I will give you the period for free. > > | Your job is to give me the mean orbital speed: > > | > > | Artificial Satellite of the Earth D: > > | Semi-major axis = 2.452 x 10^4 km > > | Period = 0.4423 days > > | Mean Orbital Speed = ???? > > > H = 66417m/sec (sun) > I = 4031m/sec (earth) correction: H = 28686m/sec
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-09 09:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nqtmn3$8kc$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391850 |
Dne 09/09/2016 v 08:08 Peter Riedt napsal(a): >>> >> H = 66417m/sec (sun) >> I = 4031m/sec (earth) > > correction: H = 28686m/sec > Peter, without your formulas, there is no sense to discuss your "theory". All you do is more or less erroneous imitation of application the Kepler 3rd law and Newton gravity. If you exposed you formulas, they would in the best ideal case just replicate Kepler and Newton. Otherwise they would end broken to pieces. -- Poutnik ( The Pilgrim, Der Wanderer ) Knowledge makes great men humble, but small men arrogant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 13:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nqrh54$df0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #391760 |
On 09/08/2016 11:58 AM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 5:06:34 PM UTC+8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: [...] >> v=sqrt(GM/r) only works for satellites with nearly circular orbits and >> whose masses are very small relative to the primary body. > > There is no such qualification in the literature. > This qualification is implicitly contained in the equation, so scientist need not to read it explicitly. To keep an object on a closed orbit, there must be valid Ekin + Epot < 0 Epot = - GM/r . m Ekin = 1/2 m .v^2 1/2 . m .v^2 - GM/r . m < 0 1/2 . v^2 < GM/r v < sqrt(2GM/r) For given r, v can have any value between 0 and sqrt(2GM/r)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 11:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nqs425$1tll$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #391760 |
On 9/8/2016 4:58 AM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 5:06:34 PM UTC+8, Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog wrote: >> v=sqrt(GM/r) only works for satellites with nearly circular orbits and >>>> whose masses are very small relative to the primary body. > > There is no such qualification in the literature. Bullshit, Peter. I have no idea what your library of literature is that you search, but it must be pitifully small. > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 20:15 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <e3cs1lF5sbaU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #391757 |
On 8/09/2016 5:22 PM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 12:02:56 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> The average velocity is the distance travelled divided by the time. >> >> Since the time is not a function of the eccentricity, but distance >> travelled is, you cannot get the average velocity without knowing the >> eccentricity. >> >> Sylvia. > > What is the result of the formula v=sqrt(GM/r)? Does it need eccentricity? > > Can YOU get v knowing only a or t? > > I can. > It should be obvious that that cannot be the correct general formula for the average velocity. Consider two orbits, one so eccentric that it grazes the surface of the sun, and the other that is circular. Let them have the same semi-major axis, a. In the first case, the total distance travelled in an orbit is a bit over 4a. In the second case, the total distance travelled is 2 * Pi * a, or more than 6a. Since they have the same semi-major axis, they have the same orbital period, but the distances travelled, and hence the average velocity (speed, actually) are very different. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-09-08 11:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <nqs3vs$1tll$4@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #391757 |
On 9/8/2016 2:22 AM, Peter Riedt wrote: > On Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 12:02:56 PM UTC+8, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> The average velocity is the distance travelled divided by the time. >> >> Since the time is not a function of the eccentricity, but distance >> travelled is, you cannot get the average velocity without knowing the >> eccentricity. >> >> Sylvia. > > What is the result of the formula v=sqrt(GM/r)? That formula only applies to circular orbits, not an elliptical orbit. Nobody in their right mind would use that formula to find v for a body in an elliptical orbit. > Does it need eccentricity? > > Can YOU get v knowing only a or t? > > I can. > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web