[geocentrism] Uranus

Phil,
 
O'deary....i can live with a YES..to everything up to this point.....
 
From here I want you to relook at this demonstration from the beginning and alter

the rate of rotation of the top to spin at 100 rpm, and keep the orbits at 100 orbits per minute. They are synchronised. This is the only change we make.

Will the ball now present the same face to the centre of the orbit?   Difficult for anyone to visualise?. 

then try it with the spin of the shaft just One rpm and the orbit just one orbit per minute.

 

Of course the answer is yes. And we have two separate motions."

NO!......You not going to like this at all and it is sure to keep your (not mine) debate going until either someone intellectually honest from the MS side of the aisle explains it to you, or you start to consider the forces involed........but the short of it is Phil, the only way to get your 100 RPM between your orbit and your spin to “synchronize”…is to continue to reduce the force applied to the spin of the ball until such time as there is a net zero spin force and a net zero spin rate wrt the parent body and the satellite….Phil, I’m sorry but this is fact that is can demonstrated even using your own basic apparatus for your own experiment, no matter what RPM and orbital rate you use....(note there must be some "engine" in both the orbit and the spin of your apparatus to cause thoes motions i will reference that force since the nature of forces are what you are not understanding..) I will attempt to show this to you without going into all the techno jargon….but first I want the “shock” of what I just said to wear off so you will be able to think with a clear mind…..…so…go ahead and get it out all of your system , ..let it all out……I know the things I just said are outrageous to your scientific mind!…..  

If you can pull yourself from the shock of my outrageous statements, and hold back your fury long enough to tell us,…. no trick question, I will give you my answer first……think about it….Is it possible to have two identical motors (Forces)under identical environmental conditions to produce the same effects with different energy inputs/outputs and rotation rates of the two motors…?

 

I would of course say no and expect anyone one else to say the same since if the RPMs or energy inputs are not the same then either the environmental conditions or the effects and or both are not the same…thus I would say if the effects are the same for two identical motors then the conditions are the same as well…..what say you?  

 

If you disagree please tell us how we can have two identical motors under identical conditions have two different effects …

 

If you agree then for the two identical motors to have the same effects they must be in under identical conditions…….

--- On Tue, 12/9/08, Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Uranus
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, December 9, 2008, 7:16 AM

 

 

 

 
--- On Mon, 12/8/08, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Uranus
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Monday, December 8, 2008, 3:49 PM

Alan If I am a stupid student, then you are like the incompetent teacher I have often known, who fails to help the student understand. If I fail to understand it is the teachers fault not the stupid students.
 
At least thats how I judged myself when in the business of instructing classes. 
 
I am having one last attempt. Pure mechanical  rotations no liberations, (am already liberated) what ever that is .
 
So may I take the chalk and in front of the class ask the teacher to answer a sequence of questions over the following diagrams . Please answer in the space provided, so that all the class of varying stupidities may really understand.
 

Class lesson on motion

This diagram represents a disc top like kids spin. It is set to spin at 500 rpm

This question may sound stupid, but for stupid onlookers will you agree that the

Ball at the top is spinning 500rpm as well as the arrow bearing at the bottom.

 

Tick   YES             or           NO

 

Now we have set the top gyrating as happens when it is put off balance.

The shaft is still made to spin at 500 rpm but in addition the ball is now moving in

An orbit as shown by the arrowed circle above it, at 100 orbits per minute.

 

Do you agree that as the shaft and bearing point is still rotating at 500 rpm

the ball likewise is still spinning (rotating) 500 rpm.

 

tick      YES                             NO

 

do you agree then that there are two motions of the ball.  One rotating at 500rpm

and the other orbiting (translating) at 100 orbits per minute.

 

Tick     YES                             NO

 

So far everybody should have answered yes to all questions.

 

From here I want you to relook at this demonstration from the beginning and alter

the rate of rotation of the top to spin at 100 rpm, and keep the orbits at 100 orbits per minute.

They are synchronised. This is the only change we make.

 

Will the ball now present the same face to the centre of the orbit?   Difficult for anyone to visualise?. 

then try it with the spin of the shaft just One rpm and the orbit just one orbit per minute.

 

Of course the answer is yes. And we have two separate motions. Please note I have always said motions, not

rotations. the ball rotates, once and it orbits or tramslates once. Two separate motions.

 

From here perhaps we can jump from simple mechanics to celestial motions, and consider the moon.

 

Allen if you have an objection and must answer No at any point down this page, please note your reason in the

appropriate place.

 

Philip.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 1:21 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Uranus

Rotaion: A progressive Radial oreintaion to a common point......?!
 

Gee wiz wiz Phil are you and Paul both having a bout of stupenditis?!…Things move in a direction and way such that way that its effects would follow the spokes on a “wheel” (Perfect circle or not) That is a radial orientation!……That radial motion is defined wrt a common point aka the hub of that same wheel!……… (like the center of mass or geometric center)

It is not that hard...in fact you might could even say "it is self evident"!?

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image

GIF image

Attachment: disc top vert.GIF
Description: GIF image

Attachment: gyrating top.GIF
Description: GIF image

Other related posts: