[geocentrism] Re: Geosynchronous satellites paper
- From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 14:54:38 -0400
Robert B
From Robert Bennett Sun Jul 1 23:09:46 2007
Also, according to the citations, the Artemis team decided to slow down the
satellite by ~200 m/s by firing RITA continuously in the opposite direction
of motion for 340 days. Since the velocity is inversely proportional to the
square root of the radius from Eq(3), this operation would cause the
satellite to rise ~ 5000 km.
You can't be serious. Reducing your velocity while in orbit will reduce your
altitude not raise it. Unless of course you are basing your statement upon
your own private definition of which direction any given satellite is
orbiting. Are you so doing?
Paul D
Yes, occasionally I'm serious.
The answer to your confusion is in the 2nd sentence. If it had teeth it
would bite you.
Neville's Eq(3), derived from Newton's laws, says V2 = GMe/R, which is an
inverse relation between V and R1/2 .
Guess intuition failed you here, Paul. It does seem oxymoronic.
BTW: GWW shows that when an object is pushed straight ahead, it actually
moves backwards! (OK, now I'm not serious)
Robert B
Other related posts:
