Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What makes them qualified to look into someones heart??
Are they 'god'?
I've been an outcast my whole life...and I happen to like, enjoy, science...
I love to learn, I love to ask questions, cause that's how you learn...
And who is this Tek Freek to tell me I can't learn or that the issues I raise aren't legitimate?
They remind me of the popes of old Europe, who were into 'censorship' if something or someone wasn't in lock step and cinc or schinc or sink or ....dm it..I don't know...scinck...in sync...
with certain doctorine...
I wish Tek Freek would leave me alone...and just let me be...
I really enjoy learning stuff from you guys...I mean when your not hammering me over the head...I do learn...
I do listen, consider, and learn...it might not seem like it, but I do...
But I'm not just going to lay over and let you crawel all over me....
or is it crawl?
That's how we make ourselves better, brighter, and smarter, is by 'challenging'...not by blindly accepting or swallowing...but by challenging...and when done properly it makes you sharper....
That's why football teams have 'scrimmidge'...'scrimmadge'...I don't know...
Anyways...i really do enjoy our dialogues...
I actually took a photo of the last shuttle launch ever...but on that day the launch was canceled...so I never got to see it launch...
I took this photo myself...ok...If I didn't have a curiosity for such stuff, rockets, rocks, explosions, anything that deals with matter or chemistry...why would I go so out of my way to take such a photo??
How dare this anomymous poster insult me by saying my curiosity for life isn't geniune...
People, like this jss....have always put me down my whole life...
If I continue...I'd probablly get in trouble...so I'll stop...
but how dare them judge me like that...
I have a right to be alive....they know nothing about me, or my past, and the crap I've overcome just to be here....screw them!!!!!
Like the idea that the less mass is beneath you, the lighter you become...so say if people could dig 300 miles into the core of the earth...they would weigh lighter...
No, you'd weigh more because the force of gravity is stronger as you get closer to the core. In effect, gravity is stronger at your feet that it is at your head. If you were in Denver, you'd weigh less than you would at sea level or in Death Valley. It's a very tiny difference, but there is a difference.
Anyways...i really do enjoy our dialogues...
I actually took a photo of the last shuttle launch ever...but on that day the launch was canceled...so I never got to see it launch...
Sorry, the metadata imbedded in the picture shows that this was taken on 4/29/11, meaning that this is not STS-135 the Atlantis, but likely STS-134 the Endeavour which was launched on 5/16/11. So not the 'last' shuttle launch.
But either way, too bad you missed seeing a launch.
No, you'd weigh more because the force of gravity is stronger as you get closer to the core. In effect, gravity is stronger at your feet that it is at your head. If you were in Denver, you'd weigh less than you would at sea level or in Death Valley. It's a very tiny difference, but there is a difference.
Actually T&S got that one right, for there would be 300 miles less mass below you, and mass is what attracts any other object toward it and 300 miles mass above you also pulling up. The Denver analogy vs. Death Valley is correct because there is no mass above you pulling up.
If you could get to the center of the earth, you would weigh nothing, for the mass attracting you would be equally pulling you in ever direction.
Actually T&S got that one right, for there would be 300 miles less mass below you, and mass is what attracts any other object toward it and 300 miles mass above you also pulling up. The Denver analogy vs. Death Valley is correct because there is no mass above you pulling up.
If you could get to the center of the earth, you would weigh nothing, for the mass attracting you would be equally pulling you in ever direction.
Thanks. You're quite right and I stand corrected. However, that assumes ideal conditions because it assumes a perfect sphere with uniform density (from surface to center). It's okay because it sets a basic standard, but is that how things really are? It's fair to say that the Earth is not a perfect sphere nor does it have uniform density from the surface downward. The exception would be black holes, and maybe neutron stars. I'm not sure about the neutron stars although their density would be so compact from the surface down that there'd be no 'wiggle room' for the particles which might make its density uniform.
Of course, we do have to have certain standards, otherwise we'd get absolutely nowhere in terms of advancing knowledge. Having said that, this may be more in the way of a bit of nit-picking, but still perhaps interesting to consider.
The Earth also has other features skewing things inside such as it's shape, its spin, tidal forces, and that both the surface (plates) and interior are in motion. In addition, the mass of the Earth increases somewhat from dust and debris that come in from space. It's estimated 10,000 to 40,000 tons of material enters the Earth each year (Pegasus Satellite Program). That's not much, but it does make a small difference and adds to the mass of the planet over long periods of time. On the other hand, since we keep shooting things out into space that slightly reduces the overall weight gain of the planet.
There's also intense heat and pressure. Heat and pressure are trying to escape by pushing outward (we see that in volcanic eruptions) which would seemingly result in bouyancy counteracting gravity, and it does. But it wouldn't make you weigh less. You'd be fighting against it trying to get to the center. There are other issues as well to take into account. Stuff moves around.
Although the Earth as a whole has a mean gravitational center, my guess is that the 'center' wobbles and is never in the exact same spot all the time. In effect, the center changes to counter any wobble of the core inside.
We'd also have to consider the conditions of digging into the Earth. If the path inside is like an open well, then the digger is still exposed to surface gravity. If that's the case, then the weight issue would be greater than the example of Death Valley. If the path is immediately covered as the digger moves downward, then granted the gravitatonal effect would be more relative to your position of the Earth's mass around you. But even that would vary based on the wobble of the the Earth's core.
That's all taking into consideration that the Earth is an active planet. I'm not sure about the Moon. It''s safe to say the density of the Moon is much lighter than the Earth, so its gravitational pull is much weaker. I think it's also fair to say that its density is not perfectly uniform, so there is likely to be varations in terms of how gravity works in relation to its interior. The core of the Moon might be dead, but we don't know for sure. The twin Grail lunar probes currently in orbit should give us a pretty good idea of what's going on inside it, the idea being that by mapping the Moon's gravity, we should be able to peek al the way to its core. If the core shows signs of activity, even if it's residual, that would likely provide a difference in its gravitational signature. It'll be interesting to find out if the Moon is just a dead rock or not. Even if the core of the Moon is dead, the lunar gravity would still not be perfectly uniform because of tidal forces related to the Earth which has some effect on the shape of the Moon.
In relation to the Earth, the question I would raise is that if there are gravitational variations due to shifting or wobble of the core, how much of a variation would that have at points elsewhere above the core?
As a footnote, this thread has really wobbled way off course from whether or not man ever landed on the Moon. That's pretty well been answered though.
The whole purpose of movies like the Blair Witch Project or Apollo 18 is to scare the pants off the viewers. The reason why these movies work as they do is by stimulating imagination with fear of the dark instincts and perceived dangers. Think about it. How much danger are you exposed to by watching a video in the safety of your own home? LOL!
The Apollo "truthers" even have a website www.lunatruth.com
I guess they don't know how big a Saturn V rocket is and the chances of "hiding" a liftoff.
At best it is an okay sci-fi horror movie, no where near as scary as T&S implies.
Spoiler
Of course a spacecraft possibly infected with an unknown life-form wouldn't be allowed to return, this fact was KNOWN to all astronauts
Last edited by Trackwatch; 01-12-2012 at 01:52 AM..
The Apollo "truthers" even have a website www.lunatruth.com
I guess they don't know how big a Saturn V rocket is and the chances of "hiding" a liftoff.
At best it is an okay sci-fi horror movie, no where near as scary as T&S implies.
There are several conspiracy forums that are focused on the idea that the Moon landings were fake. Similar to the Blair Witch fanatics. There are wacky forums and websites convinced that Paul McCartney died in the 1960s and was replaced by a doppleganger, or a shapeshifting reptilian. It's amazing what can be found on the Internet. What's disturbing about such nonsense is that they go to great lengths to "prove" their case bit by bit with mountains of confusing "evidence". It feeds on the gullibility of some people who really don't know or can't tell the difference, as well as the fears (monsters in the closet) that the government is secretly plotting against the world and if you don't believe it, then you're just deceived like the other blind "sheeple". Who wants to be a sheeple? I guess for many there's the Indiana Jones-like thrill of the heroic hunt to save the world by being on the cutting edge of unveiling sinister deeply hidden sinister plots.
One complaint that's been made concerning the movie, Apollo 18, is the shaky, in and out of focus camera, the idea being that it gives it more of a non-professional look and calling it "lost footage". The same thing was done in the orginal Blair Witch Project, as well as Cloverfield. Very difficult and irritating to watch, especially when overused.
You're right. It'd be impossible to keep such a launch a secret. That's not to mention the idea that someone got ahold of some lost footage and turned it into a production for millions to see. NASA has fits as it is over missing moon rocks and parts from spacecrafts being sold to collectors. Sometimes NASA seems to go overboard about it. But it's stuff like this that provides fodder for the conspiracy buffs. 74-Year-Old Woman Terrified During NASA Moon Rock Sting - KHQ Right Now - News and Weather for Spokane and North Idaho |
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
too many facts, stuff my 9 year old grandson knows and you don't?, So you resort to mindless retorts....... 
