Users Online Now: 2,440 (Who's On?) Visitors Today: 1,821,573 Pageviews Today: 2,490,112 Threads Today: 830 Posts Today: 14,169 07:57 PM

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
If you stopped the Earth from moving, and the Earth were fixed, which is what we're talking about, the Moon would not show all its sides.

Quoting: mclarek 971744

That's NOT what he asked. Again, if the moon were to suddenly stop orbiting the earth and stayed over one location on the earth, what would we see and why?

There are 2 movements going on in this system: the Earth's rotation about its own axis AND the Moon's rotation about the Earth's axis, at different rates, by the way.

But the MOON IS NOT SPINNING!

Second, if you DID suspend the Moon, the point would be fixed and in fact we'd leave it behind as we, with our spin about ourself, moved on on our forward, orbital path (a dual motion).

The Moon has no such dual motion of spin and orbital forward momentum on the circular path.
Quoting: mclarek 971744

Yes, it does. All motions are independent and can and are analyzed as such, as I explained in an earlier post. The rotation of the moon ON ITS AXIS is superimposed onto it's orbital motion around the earth. That is a simple fact and no amount of arm-waving by you can change that.

If the Moon were spinning on its axis as it moved forward on its spin around the Earth's axis, the Sun would "see" (or shed light on) the faces of the Moon more quickly than the mere orbit currently does.

Quoting: mclarek 971744

It DOES. That is why the sidereal period of the moon is 27.32 days while the synodic period is 29.53 days.

Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/20/2010 02:22 PM
Report Abusive Post

What about your own thought experiment did you not understand? Or better: what about the points re. Nancy did you not understand?
Quoting: mclarek 971744

So, you refuse to address ANY of the thought experiments?

She didn't understand the Moon has an orbital path whose speed is not determined solely by the Earth, hence it is a true orbit, not a fixed satellite.
Quoting: mclarek 971744

Pure gobbldygook and nonsense.

Nancy went on and on at sci.astro about how Newton didn't truly explain the Lunar orbit. She certainly understood that it *IS* an orbit!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
This claims it moves about its axis. Which it does, ON A PATH. It does not SPIN on its axis as it moves.

Quoting: mclarek 971744

Then explain to us just how an observer on, say, Mars would see a different side of the moon as it moved around the earth. If it did not spin as it moves, then the observer on Mars would always see the same side.

Clare, it's time for you to simply accept that you are wrong on this. EVERY astronomer and physicist (I have a degree in physics) on the planet disagrees with you.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
05/20/2010 02:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare.

Of course, as has been said of others, the Moon will not rotate in a frame where it does not rotate, but that seems to be neither here nor there.

Train running on circular track, with you sitting in the middle of said track. You only see one side of the train from your vantage.

Put a COMPASS on the train.

Will the train point through all points of the compass as it makes its trip? Then how is it not rotating?

And no need to get impatient, or nasty, with people. Please.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 976357
United States
05/20/2010 02:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare, it's time for you to simply accept that you are wrong on this. EVERY astronomer and physicist (I have a degree in physics) on the planet disagrees with you.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 558013

I've yet to see a zetard admit they're wrong.
Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/20/2010 02:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Second, she understood better than you guys that it does not orbit on its OWN AXIS (relative to its path). Its axis changes direction of the whole, along a path relative to other things. But its body, in turning around its circle always faces its next forward motion; it does NOT show different faces along its circle relative to the circle. This is viewable inside the circle (e.g., from Earth) but outside the circle, if the Earth were not in the way, the circular total movement would be visible without moving to see it, if you were far back enough.
Quoting: mclarek 971744

And if Earth suddenly went missing...? Would the Moon suddenly START rotating??

You are simply picking a vantage point(s) where the Moon SEEMS to not rotate.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:28 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare, why have you not answered my question about standing on the moon's north pole?

Also, I gave you the data on the historical Chandler's Wobble. No response?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare, it's time for you to simply accept that you are wrong on this. EVERY astronomer and physicist (I have a degree in physics) on the planet disagrees with you.

I've yet to see a zetard admit they're wrong.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 976357

It's command 64 on page 110 of the Zetatard manual.
mclarek
User ID: 971744
05/20/2010 02:30 PM
Report Abusive Post
DUUUH.

Now clare is sounding just like Nancy.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 976357

Yah, I got pissed off and exasperated. I don't mind people not getting something but it is in a context of such nastiness.

So you know why I sound like her -- though I am not spouting any non-science (unless there are things I humbly don't know yet)? The reason you get that treatment is some of YOU GUYS SOUND LIKE NANCY (angry) but minus the kind words along the way. So it's spiteful from you.

You have to get this science or we'll never progress. And you have to be nicer for people to want to deal with you. I reacted; others of you CAUSED. Oh, sorry! No fixed points here ... HA HA HA HA HA

Think about a train set and you'll get it.

Then add in the relativity, so you see why things look different.

Don't confuse the two to start.

Back to patience from me -- and NO, I don't mind if people DON'T UNDERSTAND, but this self-assurance nastiness is different than exasperation expressions ... and of course, at ANY POINT EVEN IF YOU'RE RIGHT, it is inappropriate unless someone else is being nasty.

And even then, it's good to try to keep cheerful back. I lost my cheer briefly.

Shall we understand relative Moon movements now?

And how we can equivocate terms of use and say that when the Moon completes an orbit its total movement, being centred on its axis, "moved about its axis", as that page did ...

but how this is different than movement about its axis RELATIVE TO ITS POINT IN THE PATH AND MOVEMENT AT ANY GIVEN MOMENT.

In the latter, it would begin to face its PATH differently.

Anything more complicated is then any relative movement of other points in relation to the path. But if the total path is fixed relative to another point which is fixed therefore relative to it ...

and a body is moving along that path ...

and it is not presenting any different faces to the path's next point where it is going, whether back or forward ...

then it is not SPINNING ON ITS PATH RELATIVE TO ITS AXIS.

The total path might take it, if diagrammed in one spot, in a circle which could be drawn relative to its axis, but its actual motion was forward-axial, and not spin-axial on its path.

xoxo
:)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Second, she understood better than you guys that it does not orbit on its OWN AXIS (relative to its path). Its axis changes direction of the whole, along a path relative to other things. But its body, in turning around its circle always faces its next forward motion; it does NOT show different faces along its circle relative to the circle. This is viewable inside the circle (e.g., from Earth) but outside the circle, if the Earth were not in the way, the circular total movement would be visible without moving to see it, if you were far back enough.

And if Earth suddenly went missing...? Would the Moon suddenly START rotating??

You are simply picking a vantage point(s) where the Moon SEEMS to not rotate.
Quoting: Menow 935048

Right. The only true vantage point is a distant point in the universe so the majority of the universe is the reference. From that viewpoint, all sides of the moon are seen as it orbits the earth. Therefore, it spins.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 976357
United States
05/20/2010 02:34 PM
Report Abusive Post
then it is not SPINNING ON ITS PATH RELATIVE TO ITS AXIS.

Quoting: mclarek 971744

But, it is spinning non the less. A spin that's equal to one orbit around the earth.
Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/20/2010 02:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Another way to think about it. Let's say that the moon is not orbiting the earth, but is somehow hanging in space stationary at some distance from the earth, and it's rotating at some high rate...say once every 20 hours. We would see all sides of it every time it revolved and someone standing on its north pole would see the sky appear to be rotating around it. I don't think anyone would
Actually, for the "doesn't rotate" crowd, the question should be "What heavenly bodies *DO* rotate about an axis, and why?

Clare said that applied to bodies "not having an orbit", but she included Earth as falling under that definition. Whoops!

The Earth rotates about its axis ... because if it were fixed relative to the Sun (and the Sun is fixed relative to us and spins, so you could use it as your example) ...

IT WOULD STILL BE MOVING AS A BODY AROUND ITS CENTRE.

Eliminate the forward movement (rotation path) of its axis relative to the fixed point of the Earth, and NO SPIN OF ITSELF OCCURS with the Moon.

Can we get this point?

The earth does not rotate around it's center. It rotates around the barycenter of the earth/moon system, as shown in the animation posted earlier.

Geeeeez.

The Earth of its OWN, definitional physical self is rotating around its own centre.
Quoting: mclarek 971744

Then so is the Moon. If you only take an Earth-centered, relative point of view, the sort of concept you have been trying to bend to do your will, then Earth is NOT rotating at all!

The Earth and Moon are (in reality) a system, but they are also PART of the SOLAR SYSTEM, and so on.
Quoting: mclarek 971744

So is the Earth-Moon system rotating?

So let's stick with, the Earth moves relative to its own axis.

It's also on a path around the Sun.
Quoting: mclarek 971744

That means its not a "self-spinning" body, per your earlier definition.

THE EARTH IS SPINNING RELATIVE TO THAT PATH DIRECTION.

The Moon is not spinning, relative to its own path direction around the Earth.

Clare
Quoting: mclarek 971744

Of course that is marginally true if you ignore that the Moon's orbit is not circular, but again you are simply specifying a particular frame of reference where your claim comes true.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
You have to get this science or we'll never progress.

Quoting: mclarek 971744

I will say that to you as well. If you think that your viewpoint on this is "science", then surely you should have no trouble finding us even one refrence that agrees with you, right? (Quoting Nancy's foolishness does not count).

Think about a train set and you'll get it.

Then add in the relativity, so you see why things look different.
Quoting: mclarek 971744

Relativity has nothing to do with this. You're making up the definition of "relativity" again.

Don't confuse the two to start.

Quoting: mclarek 971744

That's exactly what you're doing. Go find the definition of relativity and get back with us.

and it is not presenting any different faces to the path's next point where it is going, whether back or forward ...

then it is not SPINNING ON ITS PATH RELATIVE TO ITS AXIS.

Quoting: mclarek 971744

Since when does that very specialized vantage point have the authority to determine if the moon is spinning or not, whan virtually every other viewpoint in the entire universe says differently?
Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/20/2010 02:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Now, where are the Chandler data?

Thank you.
Clare
or "Moi" --- which someone went so far as to suggest I was using an alibi! What idiocy.

Quoting: mclarek 971744

Why is it not idiocy when Nancy claims that anyone who questions her pronouncements is a government debunker who is paid to lie?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare, if you can be bothered, please answer THIS question, since you've ignored all the rest.

At some point in the future, the earth will become tidally locked to the sun, as Mercury is now. That means that the earth, spinning at a rate of once every 24 hours now, will gradually slow to a rate of once every 365 days, so that one side will always be in sunlight and one side in darkness.

When it slows to one rotation every 10 days, is it still spinning? Yes or no?

When it slows to one rotation every 100 days, is it still spinning? Yes or no?

When it slows to one rotation every 365 days, is it still spinning? Yes or no?
mclarek
User ID: 971744
05/20/2010 02:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare, it's time for you to simply accept that you are wrong on this. EVERY astronomer and physicist (I have a degree in physics) on the planet disagrees with you.

I've yet to see a zetard admit they're wrong.

It's command 64 on page 110 of the Zetatard manual.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 558013

Oh I see what you are talking of!

You are talking of over space in the non-fixed sense!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, if you draw it out from on top as a total forward movement, not relative to a fixed Earth -- as your diagram did ...

Then YES, you will see the moon spiral. YES!

No problem.
"YOU WIN ON THAT"! :) Of course. Yes. It's an optical illusion. Yes! We are ROLLING BY IT AS IT ROLLS.
In physical fact (not definition as a fixed system, for understanding the movement relative to EACH OTHER as a fixed system) ... No it doesn't.

But from the point of the Earth, and how the spin would work as seen if we were diagramming it from fixed understanding, it does not "spin" on its orbit relative to us.

And though Nancy doesn't understand these two things -- and I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY IT, because most people were actually confusing forward momentum in a FIXED system, with SPIN in a FIXED system ...

if you consider its physical total forward movement, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN NON-SPIN ON AXIS AROUND US, then in the RELATIVE MOTION OF THE FORWARD-MOTION AROUND THE SUN, yes, it "moves around its axis in truth, relative to the sun" ..

which you could say is "physical" but it is just as physical to say it doesn't and it is facing the inner circle of the fixed point of the centre of the Earth AT ALL TIMES.

You are confusing relativity from the Sun as we move forward,

with what we're doing relatively together, which is no spin, relative to the centre of the Earth.

And the Earth could stop in its spin on its own orbit, and still the moon, as the two moved forward, would never spin all its faces toward the Earth ... just as your diagram shows.

Move the diagram, or a non-spinning earth to your right or left, and still that moon, relative to the Earth, does not spin.

But relative to the Sun WHEN THE MOON AND EARTH MOVE FORWARD, yes, we perceive the Moon, from on high (not on the Earth) as doing a spin.

You have just pointed out how I may be dancing with a doll and it move about me, and never show another face to ourselves (If I don't spin too and only it does), but in space, that doll will DRAW A SPIN.

It will in fact do turns of relative spin-orbit. We cancel each other out, except when moving and then you'll see it over time in the movement.
Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/20/2010 02:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
The Moon is not spinning, relative to its own path direction around the Earth.

Clare
Quoting: mclarek 971744

Gee, that's funny... you have also stated this: "A spin on an axis is defined relative to fixed points."
Quoting: mclarek 971744

How is the Moon's path around Earth a "fixed point"?

You are simply trying to bamboozle people with bullshit. And it's not even consistent bullshit!
Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/20/2010 02:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
I think everyone agrees that the moon is tidally locked so the same side is always facing the earth. However, this also means that it rotates once per lunar cycle. In other words one revolution around the earth = one rotation on its axis. If the moon didn’t rotate, then every part of the moon would face the earth at one point or another during a month.
Quoting: Setheory 869850

Clare has ended up asserting that the Moon doesn't appear to rotate from a perspective which would follow it around, no matter where it might twist or turn or even ROTATE! How droll.
mclarek
User ID: 971744
05/20/2010 02:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Let me clarfy:
When astornomrs tals of the Moon spinning on its axis, they are conflating two meanings of "axis".

One is the axis relative to a movement in forward system movement, as the Earth progresses with it, the Moon spins on its axis.

Relative to its path with the Earth, there is no spin.

It is this path which I (and Nancy and your original diagram) were clarifying.

Relative to the Moon's own movement path, the Moon does not spin.

Relative to the axis of its forward path around the Sun, it spins on its axis.

Clare
And yes, it's my name.
Returner
User ID: 997
United States
05/20/2010 02:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
And Clare honey, I'll drop the nasty when you drop the condescending air of quiet superiority.

You are superior to no one here, in any sense of the word.

And you haven't a clue what relativity means.

Of course, neither did Volar...
Menow
User ID: 935048
United States
05/20/2010 02:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
THE EARTH IS SPINNING RELATIVE TO THAT PATH DIRECTION.

The Moon is not spinning, relative to its own path direction around the Earth.

Clare

What, in your opinion, is the difference, other than the rate of rotation of the moon?

In my opinion?!

Let me explain again -- okay? I don't mind. :(

If the moon showed different faces TO ITS PATH as it moved .

Quoting: mclarek 971744

Then what happens if Earth suddenly goes missing? Did the Moon suddenly START spinning?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare doesn't seem to answer any questions put to her. I wonder why that is?
mclarek
User ID: 971744
05/20/2010 02:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
I think everyone agrees that the moon is tidally locked so the same side is always facing the earth. However, this also means that it rotates once per lunar cycle. In other words one revolution around the earth = one rotation on its axis. If the moon didn’t rotate, then every part of the moon would face the earth at one point or another during a month.

Clare has ended up asserting that the Moon doesn't appear to rotate from a perspective which would follow it around, no matter where it might twist or turn or even ROTATE! How droll.
Quoting: Menow 935048

It twists and rotates relative to points.

Which point, is what we are talking of.

It ROTATES relative to the Earth (the path where it faces and does not spin).

It spins relative to the Sun, but only if you count forward-rotation of its centre point of path (the Earth's centre).

If you stop the system from moving relative to the Sun, and only have the Moon and Earth relative to the fixed Sun, and no forward total movement of the Earth-Moon system, the Moon does not spin on its orbit of the Earth, whether the Earth spins or not (as in your first diagram).

But the Moon does draw an axial spin on the EARTH ORBIT PATH FORWARD ... but not relative to its own forward motion.

The Earth does BOTH: it spins on its axis relative to the forward motion around the Sun AND draws a circle of total forward axial momentum.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 976357
United States
05/20/2010 02:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare doesn't seem to answer any questions put to her. I wonder why that is?
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 558013

It's also in the Zetard manual on how to dodge any question that will show that Nancy and the zetas are full of crap.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 02:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
And Clare honey, I'll drop the nasty when you drop the condescending air of quiet superiority.

Quoting: Returner 997

More like willful ignorance.
mclarek
User ID: 971744
05/20/2010 03:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare doesn't seem to answer any questions put to her. I wonder why that is?
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 558013

You wonder what?

I didn't notice.

Re-post please. I will try to get to them when I get back from work.

(I say the latter so that the little worries and egos involved here don't jump on me for not answering for a few hours, as though I haven't shown that I try.)

I do not want to repeat.

That would make me "spin"!

Ha!

Clare
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 03:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Clare doesn't seem to answer any questions put to her. I wonder why that is?

You wonder what?

I didn't notice.

Re-post please. I will try to get to them when I get back from work.

(I say the latter so that the little worries and egos involved here don't jump on me for not answering for a few hours, as though I haven't shown that I try.)

I do not want to repeat.

That would make me "spin"!

Ha!

Clare
Quoting: mclarek 971744

Ok, here it is again...

At some point in the future, the earth will become tidally locked to the sun, as Mercury is now. That means that the earth, spinning at a rate of once every 24 hours now, will gradually slow to a rate of once every 365 days, so that one side will always be in sunlight and one side in darkness.

When it slows to one rotation every 10 days, is it still spinning? Yes or no?

When it slows to one rotation every 100 days, is it still spinning? Yes or no?

When it slows to one rotation every 365 days, is it still spinning? Yes or no?
mclarek
User ID: 971744
05/20/2010 03:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
And Clare honey, I'll drop the nasty when you drop the condescending air of quiet superiority.

You are superior to no one here, in any sense of the word.

And you haven't a clue what relativity means.

Of course, neither did Volar...
Quoting: Returner 997

You haven't.

Einstein wouldn't have truck with you on this stuff.

It also works with relative perception of different geometries of motion.

I DO know what I know.

<shrug>

And Returner, honey, I'll stop being superior in these things when you all get to my level on this obvious stuff.

Oh, and Returner, honey, your nasty pre-dated my arrival, so -- "relatively" speaking -- you ask for it before anyone starts with you.

Now, can we get back to facts, investigation, and quiet NICENESS, and if anyone has a possibly superior point to make, can we all recognize, charitably, that they might in fact be superior ON THAT POINT?

Or would that be too realistic to your ego to handle?

For anyone else who is not of this disposition, I apologize that posts have included such emotional nay-saying elements.

The facts stand.

Have a good day anyway, Returner.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 03:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Now, can we get back to facts, investigation, and quiet NICENESS, and if anyone has a possibly superior point to make, can we all recognize, charitably, that they might in fact be superior ON THAT POINT?
Quoting: mclarek 971744

You mean like when you called my post "idiotic" when my degree and career is in physics?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 558013
United States
05/20/2010 03:08 PM
Report Abusive Post