Starblade Darksquall wrote:

Richard wrote in message ...
(formerly)" wrote:

Dear Donald G. Shead:

"Donald G. Shead" wrote in message
...

An orbit is the balance between two compensating motions: Impetus, or
momentum, and centripetal free fall. That is, the earth is continually
falling toward the sun, but its impetus keeps it moving in an ellipse.
When
these two motions are at a sufficiently oblique angle to each other a
stable
orbit results.

Better still. An orbit is the line of motion of a mass that has no force
applied to it.

Thus according to your statement, the apple seemingly 'at rest' on the
ground is actually being accelerated upward at 32ft/sec^2. Why isn't it
gaining KE?

It is, but so are the rest of us. In our frame of reference it does
not gain KE, but from the frame of reference of someone in free fall,
at least, some free fall frames of reference, it does.

It's all relative.

I don't agree.


Hmmm, could be because it's not accelerating and you are a
moron. It's particles are however actively accelerating under the
influence of gravity.

So you're saying that the apple falls through itself?

Yes. At any given instant, 1/2 of the particles are falling down through
the apple, and the other 1/2 are decelerating in their rise up through
the apple. Electromagnetic forces superpose over the gravitational
forces, that is, they don't cancel each other on the microscopic scale,
they simply complicate the events. Physical reality is the sum of its
fundamental parts, and its fundamental parts don't include macroscopic
objects, which are nothing more than sentient interpretations of
reality. OTOH the motion of the 'apple' is the vector sum of the motions
of its parts, but this is an idealization, since the facts are that an
apple is not absolute entity, it is constantly evaporating particles
into its surroundings, and conversely absorbing other particles from the
surroundings. Nature cannot be simplified if it is to be 'understood',
all of the messy microscopic details must be accounted for in order to
paint an accurate picture. The standard interpretations of GR (such as
the one that I criticized above) fail when the motions of individual
particles are considered, simply because the geodesic of an apple is
just the vector sum of the geodesics of its particles, all of which are
electromagnetically determined, that is, gravity is as fundamentally
invalid a notion as the apple, where logical consistency is desired. It
was Lewis Carroll who put it best, when he inquired deeply and
sincerely, "What is a thing?"

Richard Perry

http://www.cswnet.com/~rper


You people need to pull your heads out of your
asses and understand that the motion of any extended object is just the
sum of the motions of its parts. The laws of physics only apply
consistently and reasonably to the motions of the parts.


That's not entirely true. Some laws of physics are cumulative in such
a way that the laws of physics of the whole is the same as that of its
parts, simply because of the way the math adds up. Furthermore, to a
given degree of accuracy, we could say that due to the current
macroscopic laws of physics that there is no real contradiction
between reality and the laws we apply to the body.

The fundamental parts are 'never' at rest, thus negating your bull****
meta-physical explanations without question, and half of your physics in
the process. When you attempt to describe reality without a damn clue as
to the fundamental constituents of that reality then your chatter is as
empty as anyone else here posting what you term crackpot notions. If you
can't do better than this, then just quote the ****ing math and shut the
hell up about your interpretations, their just as ****ing illogical, and
inconsistent as any science fiction fantasy that can be pulled out of
the ass.


Well, at least you're right about some of this.

Richard Perry

http://www.cswnet.com/~rper


It is carrying a portion of the system's angular momentum.
If you release the apple, it follows an elliptical orbit, until the dirt
catches it.

No mysterious force required.

David A. Smith

(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)