link to Home Page

Re: Why do the planets continue to revolve?


Article: <5aj8d4$2ul@dfw-ixnews10.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Re: Why do the planets continue to revolve?
Date: 3 Jan 1997 15:25:24 GMT

In article <32CB4AC2.70B1@acs.tamu.edu> Eric Kline writes:
>> The cumulative effect of drag is that the object slows down at a faster
>> and faster rate. That was our statement. Try to deal with all that
>> was put into that sentence, at once, dear boy, if you can.
>
> Acceleration or deceleration is due to a force. Drag is a force
> that always acts to decelerate (i.e. slow down) an object. The
> drag force is a function of the object speed and as the object slows
> down, the drag force decreases.
> eric kline <emk9267@acs.tamu.edu>

In article <5agl18$bpr@pollux.cmc.doe.ca> Greg Neill writes:
> Drag effects are maximum at maximum speed, and taper off as the
> speed drops. That this is so would seem to be obvious if you stop
> to think: if drag effects increased with decreasing speed, then
> they would be maximum (possibly infinite) at zero speed;
> everything stationary would be 'glued' in place, and nothing
> could move. It would also explain why leaves falling from
> trees actually manage to reach the ground.
> ynecgan@cmc.doe.ca (Greg Neill)

(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
You cannot discuss or comprehend the concept of the cumulative effect of drag because we're not using a TERM, a label you've attached to the concept? Drag is singular and cannot be cumulative? Hahahahah! We must say "force of deceleration" rather than "cumulative effect of drag"? This is science? These are thinking human beings?

Where it would seem that the discussion has stopped because of a label or term, in fact this is just the EXCUSE. They are fussing like this BECAUSE THEY CAN'T DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM PRESENTED. When boggled, digress. Simple as that.

The problem, again, dear dead-head lads, is this:

If a planet is continuing in a steady orbit, without any impetus such as the propulsion humans find necessary to keep their probes and satellites from drifting off the path they are set upon, then something is either steadily pulling or pushing the planet to maintain its orbit in the face of all other influences. The influence of the orbiting planets upon each other would otherwise, over time, alter the orbits dramatically. Why would they not? Each time a given planet lined up with the massive Jupiter, and was perturbed to speed up or slow down due to this influence, unless there were another influence this perturbed planet would remain in motion a bit slower or faster, perpetually.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])