Problems in Newtonian Mechanics

[hansgeorg]

I just picked this post. John doesn't really understand any of it very well, as can be evidenced by these comments on centrifugal force.

But that one was what was about centrifugal force, not one which was about elliptic orbits.

[oxmixmudd]

But that one was what was about centrifugal force, not one which was about elliptic orbits.

And whether you call it centrifugal or centripetal force, the balance between it and gravity can be observed in the orbits of Jupiter's moons and Jupiter around the sun.

Jim

[JohnMartin]

And whether you call it centrifugal or centripetal force, the balance between it and gravity can be observed in the orbits of Jupiter's moons and Jupiter around the sun.

Jim

Jim shifted the goal posts in his original response and ow he gives an evasive answer to why he shifted the goal posts. Jim's statements have little to do with the problems of the centrifugal force.

JM

[oxmixmudd]

Jim shifted the goal posts in his original response and ow he gives an evasive answer to why he shifted the goal posts. Jim's statements have little to do with the problems of the centrifugal force.

JM

There aren't any problems to focus on!

And as I said, most if not all of your supposed 'prpblems' with newtonian mechanics can be seen to be bogus just observing jupiter and it's moon's. There, in a system you ADMIT is governed by gravity we see all the elements you call 'problems' in action and doing exactly what you claim they can't.

It's just like Bagdad Bob claiming the Americans are not in Baghdad while in the background an American tank rolls by.

You lose.


Jim

[JohnMartin]

There aren't any problems to focus on!

And as I said, most if not all of your supposed 'prpblems' with newtonian mechanics can be seen to be bogus just observing jupiter and it's moon's. There, in a system you ADMIT is governed by gravity we see all the elements you call 'problems' in action and doing exactly what you claim they can't.

It's just like Bagdad Bob claiming the Americans are not in Baghdad while in the background an American tank rolls by.

You lose.


Jim

Jim avoids the problems again.

JM

[oxmixmudd]

Jim avoids the problems again.

JM

There are no problems, just a whole bunch of stuff you either can't or don't want to understand.

Jim

[hansgeorg]

And whether you call it centrifugal or centripetal force, the balance between it and gravity can be observed in the orbits of Jupiter's moons and Jupiter around the sun.

I call gravity (if any) centripetal, and tangential inertia centrifugal.*

Whether gravity exists or not, supposing here it does, supposing here a balance can be observed**, we can NOT observe that the two forces by themselves are enough to maintain the balance.

Angels conducting Jupiter and its moons might be a needed aid for the forces to balance.

On a bike, there is a balance between gravitation (or whatever makes objects fall to the ground) on one and on other side, maintained by speed, and a balance between speed and gravitations of either side maintained by a biker. Try to roll a bike down a hill and see if it stays rolling down straight or turns over.

I think you can repeat that experiment even with the steering tied fixed forward, it would still roll over.

So, whether we do or do not observe the said balance in Jupiter and in its moons, we most certainly do not observe the two forces being sufficient to balance each other.

In string on stone object, string is NOT just centripetal, it is also a solid object, holding the stone in, putting a limit on the centrifugal.

In tub of death, the walls of the tub are a solid, both being a third factor between the two forces.

* I did Latin, and if ever I confound petere and fugere, seek and flee, please tell me it's time to blush!

** In its results, not in itself - as with electrons in electricity!

[oxmixmudd]

I call gravity (if any) centripetal, and tangential inertia centrifugal.*

Whether gravity exists or not, supposing here it does, supposing here a balance can be observed**, we can NOT observe that the two forces by themselves are enough to maintain the balance.

Angels conducting Jupiter and its moons might be a needed aid for the forces to balance.

On a bike, there is a balance between gravitation (or whatever makes objects fall to the ground) on one and on other side, maintained by speed, and a balance between speed and gravitations of either side maintained by a biker. Try to roll a bike down a hill and see if it stays rolling down straight or turns over.

I think you can repeat that experiment even with the steering tied fixed forward, it would still roll over.

So, whether we do or do not observe the said balance in Jupiter and in its moons, we most certainly do not observe the two forces being sufficient to balance each other.

In string on stone object, string is NOT just centripetal, it is also a solid object, holding the stone in, putting a limit on the centrifugal.

In tub of death, the walls of the tub are a solid, both being a third factor between the two forces.

* I did Latin, and if ever I confound petere and fugere, seek and flee, please tell me it's time to blush!

** In its results, not in itself - as with electrons in electricity!

I'm sorry - I always forget that you postulate unknown supernatural forces that can't be detected or measured as part of the mix*. In your world, there can be no real knowledge of anything, because there can always be an undetected supernatural being somewhere pulling some string we can't possibly know about so that we will foever be decieved. I don't believe God works that way, and so I see no need to acknowledge such idiocy in my statements.

However, we can measure the force of gravity, we can measure masses of objects, and we can run calculations that show the forces balance - as long as their aren't little supernatural imps out there making sure we are forever deceived.

And from this point forward I'm going to no longer cede your little postulated imps are Angels. You have painted God as deceiver, which is actually who the other fellow is. So whatever little guys you postualte are out there doing the deceiving, they aren't Angels.

And in the end, the little suprenatural imps you postuate always behave AS IF there is gravity, so I can rest assured that working with the equations of gravity, I'll get the right answer.


Jim

* and of course, like any good game of Calvin Ball, Hansgeorg determines which forces are supernaturally tweeked and which ones aren't.

[hansgeorg]

I forgot your tendency to paint any argument of mine in a complete strawmannish way, as soon as you cannot answer.

I'm sorry - I always forget that you postulate unknown supernatural forces that can't be detected or measured as part of the mix*. In your world, there can be no real knowledge of anything, because there can always be an undetected supernatural being somewhere pulling some string we can't possibly know about so that we will foever be decieved. I don't believe God works that way, and so I see no need to acknowledge such idiocy in my statements.

Even if there are always undetected supernatural forces there, everywhere, we can certainly know they are not required to an apple falling to the ground, once it has no support in hanging.

In a stone on a string experiment, we can certainly need that the most supernatural force needed is the will of the visible and detected person doing the experiment.

We have NO example on earth of two foces just continuing to balance as forces without any third factor, like a solid object, like someone pedalling a bike.

So, how can you "know" no such force is needed out there.

However, we can measure the force of gravity, we can measure masses of objects, and we can run calculations that show the forces balance - as long as their aren't little supernatural imps out there making sure we are forever deceived.

The measurements are in some ways approximative, and the calculations cannot be expected to account for all details.

What about meteor shower each year? Could that be a power which would slow down your model of how years work, unless angels were doing some work? I don't think Newton knew of them.

Or magnetic fields of sun and earth, could they never clog, unless some angel were doing some and God another work?

And from this point forward I'm going to no longer cede your little postulated imps are Angels. You have painted God as deceiver, which is actually who the other fellow is. So whatever little guys you postualte are out there doing the deceiving, they aren't Angels.

You have been repeating atheistic clap trap.

The full and consistent version of what you say is "if god and angels existed, we could know nothing" and you saying "I don't think God works that way" is just half hearted.

[Roy]

We have NO example on earth of two foces just continuing to balance as forces without any third factor, like a solid object, like someone pedalling a bike.

I can think of several examples where two forces balance each other with other attendant forces being negligible. A hovering helicopter is one, a box on a table is another.

But I'm not surprised that you can't. I doubt you've even tried.

[oxmixmudd]

I forgot your tendency to paint any argument of mine in a complete strawmannish way, as soon as you cannot answer.

And I forgot that when you don't understand or can't accept my answer, you claim i didn't answer ...

Even if there are always undetected supernatural forces there, everywhere, we can certainly know they are not required to an apple falling to the ground, once it has no support in hanging.

In a stone on a string experiment, we can certainly need that the most supernatural force needed is the will of the visible and detected person doing the experiment.

We have NO example on earth of two foces just continuing to balance as forces without any third factor, like a solid object, like someone pedalling a bike.

Ever heard of a spacecraft in orbit. Or an airplane flying a parabolic arc to create a temporary weightless state?

We can also see that the precise accelleration of the ball falling to the ground would be perfectly balanced by a tangential velocity of about 5 miles per second. We exactly how much the Earth will drop beneath such an object per second at that velocity. That is, in fact, what an orbit is BTW. And so we can, and do, see those forces in precise balance all the time. We can, in fact, also see that regardless of the mass of the object, the force exerted is exactly that needed to cause it to accelerate at the know 32 ft/sec², thus keeping the velocity reguired for orbit the same, regardless of mass. And further, we can in fact measure the decrease in this same force on the mass as the object gains altitude by observing the decrease in velocity required to maintain orbit - and we can again note that this decrease in force is always precisely proportional to the mass. And we can - in orbits around various plants and asteroids, observe the same kinds of relationships vary directly with the mass of the attracting object.

So, how can you "know" no such force is needed out there.

As I point out above, I can simply measure the effect and correlate it with the masses of the objects involved.

The measurements are in some ways approximative, and the calculations cannot be expected to account for all details.

You are correct in this. But we don't need to postulate little supernatural imps with the job of deceiving us into believing God mad a regular universe that behaves according to certain fixed principles. In fact, the latter believe is far more consistent with Scripture than the former. And so they are always behaving as we expect gravity to behave. We don't know the precise masses of the planets, but we can estimate them based on material composition. We find surprises sometimes, mercury is more massive than originally expected, implying a larger than expected iron/nickel core.

What about meteor shower each year? Could that be a power which would slow down your model of how years work, unless angels were doing some work? I don't think Newton knew of them.

Most meteor showers are the result of passage through cometary debris. We don't need to postulate devilish imps trying to deceive us into thinking the comets left the debris, we know the orbits of the comets, and we know about how much debris they tend to leave behind.

Or magnetic fields of sun and earth, could they never clog, unless some angel were doing some and God another work?

And why would it make sense for God to create a faulty universe that had magnetic fields that needed unclogging?

You have been repeating atheistic clap trap.

The full and consistent version of what you say is "if god and angels existed, we could know nothing" and you saying "I don't think God works that way" is just half hearted.

It has nothing to do with existence. It has to do with you making up jobs for them that nowhere have been revealed in scripture and then thinking you somehow must be right.

Secondarily, how God implements the basic aspects of the universe is not of great importance in this specific discussion. If it makes you see the power of God more clearly to imagine Angels implement the forces we observe, what is that to me? But that is NOT what you propose.

What is of great importance is that instead of assigning the angels the role of legitimately implementing the basic forces of this vast universe, you turn them into devilish little imps deceiving us into thinking such forces exist by painting false images on a rather large movie screen. And that is contrary to a sound theology of who God is and how He interacts with us.



Jim

[TheLurch]

I'd point out that the changes in the length of the year that occur because of stuff like earthquakes and melting glaciers is further proof that the Earth moves. But i can't rule out angels, Poseidon, or little green pixies, so there's obviously no point in accepting well established physics.

[JohnMartin]

I'd point out that the changes in the length of the year that occur because of stuff like earthquakes and melting glaciers is further proof that the Earth moves. But i can't rule out angels, Poseidon, or little green pixies, so there's obviously no point in accepting well established physics.

The length of the year changes are only the results of models. Change the model.

JM

[oxmixmudd]

And I forgot that when you don't understand or can't accept my answer, you claim i didn't answer ...




Ever heard of a spacecraft in orbit. Or an airplane flying a parabolic arc to create a temporary weightless state?

We can also see that the precise accelleration of the ball falling to the ground would be perfectly balanced by a tangential velocity of about 5 miles per second. We exactly how much the Earth will drop beneath such an object per second at that velocity. That is, in fact, what an orbit is BTW. And so we can, and do, see those forces in precise balance all the time. We can, in fact, also see that regardless of the mass of the object, the force exerted is exactly that needed to cause it to accelerate at the know 32 ft/sec², thus keeping the velocity reguired for orbit the same, regardless of mass. And further, we can in fact measure the decrease in this same force on the mass as the object gains altitude by observing the decrease in velocity required to maintain orbit - and we can again note that this decrease in force is always precisely proportional to the mass. And we can - in orbits around various plants and asteroids, observe the same kinds of relationships vary directly with the mass of the attracting object.




As I point out above, I can simply measure the effect and correlate it with the masses of the objects involved.




You are correct in this. But we don't need to postulate little supernatural imps with the job of deceiving us into believing God mad a regular universe that behaves according to certain fixed principles. In fact, the latter believe is far more consistent with Scripture than the former. And so they are always behaving as we expect gravity to behave. We don't know the precise masses of the planets, but we can estimate them based on material composition. We find surprises sometimes, mercury is more massive than originally expected, implying a larger than expected iron/nickel core.



Most meteor showers are the result of passage through cometary debris. We don't need to postulate devilish imps trying to deceive us into thinking the comets left the debris, we know the orbits of the comets, and we know about how much debris they tend to leave behind.



And why would it make sense for God to create a faulty universe that had magnetic fields that needed unclogging?




It has nothing to do with existence. It has to do with you making up jobs for them that nowhere have been revealed in scripture and then thinking you somehow must be right.

Secondarily, how God implements the basic aspects of the universe is not of great importance in this specific discussion. If it makes you see the power of God more clearly to imagine Angels implement the forces we observe, what is that to me? But that is NOT what you propose.

What is of great importance is that instead of assigning the angels the role of legitimately implementing the basic forces of this vast universe, you turn them into devilish little imps deceiving us into thinking such forces exist by painting false images on a rather large movie screen. And that is contrary to a sound theology of who God is and how He interacts with us.



Jim

My apologies for the dropped letters and words. I don't know if it's the spell checker, a bad keyboard, or bad eyes (or some combination of them all), but it seems unless I proof a post 3 times before I send it out, this kind of frustrating hack job of what I'm intending to say is what magically appears. Maybe some of Han's mischievious little imps are stealing letters from me?

Anyway - I'll see if I can do better going forward.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

The length of the year changes are only the results of models. Change the model.

JM

The changes in length of the day and year are measured John. Measured using very accurate time-keeping devices. Do you have a reason not to trust those devices and measurements (other than you don't like the result)?

Jim