[geocentrism] Re: CAM and CoE
- From: "Gary L. Shelton" <GaryLShelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 22:26:23 -0500
Worzel, huh? That makes for an interesting connection. Thanks for
identifying yourself. Don't take offense at this but coming over to this
site has made you seem much more the diplomat than when you were on BA.
(D'ya think it would do the same for even Maksutov? Hmm. That fellow was
harsh. At any rate, I don't think a guy who tosses hotel bibles in the
trash for fun would ever darken our door.) I should re-read some of your
posts there now. When I went to BA I wondered if Rob Glover would show up
and then one day he recognized me from here and identified himself as
Yorkshireman. It all makes for some interesting connections. (Where does
"Worzel" come from, BTW?)
Mike wrote:
> But the point is this isn't completley closed. The kinectic engergy is
> disapted as heat while the angular momentum remains constant. I was
> showing you that loss of kinetic energy is not necessarily loss of
> angular momentum. Do you agree with that statement?
>
Mike, from what I know, I agree with you on the "completely closed" thing.
I don't understand how anything could really be considered "closed" in this
universe, except in some very limited "mostly closed" sense. So as far as
this thought that losing kinetic energy would not affect AM, let me say that
it seems to me you are postulating that this part of your metaphor IS in a
closed situation where, yes, the AM would be conserved. But, Mike, if there
is openness for the kinetic energy to dissipate, isn't it just as true there
would be openness for the AM to dissipate? Is not friction a valid
"outside" force for both, Mike?
I mean, a number of times someone or the other on BA would tell me that
space is not a perfect vacuum. And Dr. Jones just stated that it is full of
"debris". Well, if that's true (or if aether is considered) then would
there not be a component of friction in your hypothetical space example that
would actually reduce, albeit possibly minutely, the AM between the two
bodies? Now I suppose you could say that the AM of "space", or of the
particles that caused the friction in space at least, would have changed a
corresponding amount, but then that does seem mighty open. If we're talking
about friction on the earth's atmosphere from space, then over billions of
years what effect would that have had?
Thank you,
Sincerely,
Gary
Other related posts:
