[geocentrism] Re: (geocentrism) geostationary / geosynchrous sat.
- From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
- To: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Dr. Neville Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Shelton, Gary" <garylshelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxx>, "Glover, Rob" <rob.glover@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Mike Boyd" <mboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:59:43 -0400
Philip,
-----Original Message-----
From: Philip [mailto:joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:47 PM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Dr. Neville Jones; Robert Bennett; Shelton,
Gary; Jack Lewis; Glover, Rob; Mike Boyd; Niemann, Nicholas K.; Philip
Subject: Re: (geocentrism) geostationary / geosynchrous sat.
For all to consider during the holidays?The interested group may cary on a
side correspondence direct email. Neville I will exclude you if you request
it, as I have no desire to add to your work load. ?
It has indeed worried me concerning this stationary satellite. Lets not
bother about orbital inclinations etc, but consider the perfect circular
orbit around a perfect spherical mass. Deviations are just that, accessories
to the fact.
An analysis:
For this geocentric scenario we must initially at least use all the known
basic laws of motion., yet assuming the earth is immobile, and there is no
extraneous galactic motions other than the universal mass around the globe,
which is the centre.
I do not want to have my cake and eat it too. So I have tried to see what
will happen within the parameters above, to a geostationary satellite which
IS NOT MOVING, IF WE DID MOVE IT.
(by the way to kep us on track and prevent us slipping into conventional
ideas, this is not orbiting , but hovering, )
The only possible reason that fits within science that would prevent it
falling is a balanced condition of applied forces from above and below.
Centrifugal force is not happening. The rotation of the cosmos can exert no
influence if it is indeed balanced. to the earth centre, other than
variables similar to those we call irregularities in the Earths grav field
due to the variety of earth densities.
RB: Indeed , the universal firmament rotation DOES influence the
geostat; anything placed into the firmament is influenced by its rotation.
The inertial firmament acceleration Af(d) increases with distance, d, from
Earth's surface and is radially outward. The acceleartion of Newtonian
gravity is radially down: Ag(d) =GMe/(Re+d)^2. At 22,000 miles altitude the
two balance, WITHOUT ANY VELOCITY DEPENDENCE - TOTALLY STATIC.
As I cannot show vectors, and math is a special language not known to
all, I speak in practical physical terms. We may assume that the net force
on the geostat is zero. So we have g down to earth and g outwards. Lets
ignore all the annual gyrations in time, we are dealing with this ?moment?
in time.
Another has already affirmed that the orbit formula is not affected by the
earths rotation THE UNIVERSE ROTATING, or otherwise. So theoretically we
should be able to give geostat a shov either way to make it become a real
orbiter, rather than a hoverer, and the end result would/should be the same,
in either direction, unless UNLESS earth is indeed rotating, with a moving
geostat IN SYNCHRONISM .
RB:Imparting a velocity to the geostat (giving it a shove) will
introduce the kinematic acceleration, Ak = V^2/(Re+d). The satellite - no
longer a geostat - will move to a new value of d for which the new velocity
will satisfy Ag = Af + Ak.
The hypothetical universal mass attraction will be the same no matter
which direction , east or west we shov the geostat.
So I ask the opponents of the geocentric position especially one who is
knowledgeable in the practical working of satellite positioning. What will
happen to geo if we powered him to move east, which is according to
convention speeding him up. And what wil happen to geo if we powered him to
move west, which is according to convention slowing him down.
RB:The velocity dependence is squared; it makes no difference which
way the change is made. Since the geostat was at rest, any change will be
'speeding up'.
What do I think?
Here is my unscientific opinion.
In the former if we power it towards the east, it will begn a real orbit
and develop centrifugal force forcing it out to a higher orbit.
In the latter, if it was a geocentric universe, it would also begin
orbiting and would develop centrifugal force and move outwards to a higher
orbit. Identical to the former.
To return a geo in a geostat universe we would have to rocket it
vertically downwards.
RB:If this means to return a satellite to the geostat condition, this is
done by firing a reverse thruster in the horizontal direction of orbit
motion , which will reduce the velocity to zero, restoring the geostat
position. Firing the rocket vertically, which is intuitive, will change the
radial velocity.
But they don?t do that. Satellites are accelerated + or - in the
tangental plane , I think ?
The reality then , if we did the latter, the satellite will fall to a
lower orbit and increase speed due to g to a have a shorter orbital period,
if that is truly how they bring these birds down.
I don?t know. But if we can get an assured answer, and provable, then I am
afraid I would have to admit there is no geocentrism, not if we have to
depend upon universal mass anyway. I'd have to come back with a more
fantastic idea. There are plenty of those.
Philip
Other related posts:
