Prince*Jedi Posted July 5, 2013 Author Share Posted July 5, 2013 (edited) wth... Wth ...? Read " About us section" : This is precisely what i do : "We also offer our players a place to voice their opinions. Be sure to stop by our forums to let us know who you are, or what you think about us. " It seems i give my opinion for let you know who i am or what i think ; Prince*Jedi Edited July 5, 2013 by Prince*Jedi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_Reincarnated Posted July 9, 2013 Share Posted July 9, 2013 Ahhhhhhh that brings back memories. 1) What some of you may not be aware is that both the feather and the hammer drop at the same rate because they are in close proximity to a mass much greater than them. 2) The gravitational pull on the moon is 1/6th that of earth (1.6 m/s2 on moon and 9.8 m/s2 on earth). 3) This is all relative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince*Jedi Posted July 9, 2013 Author Share Posted July 9, 2013 Ahhhhhhh that brings back memories. 1) What some of you may not be aware is that both the feather and the hammer drop at the same rate because they are in close proximity to a mass much greater than them. 2) The gravitational pull on the moon is 1/6th that of earth (1.6 m/s2 on moon and 9.8 m/s2 on earth). 3) This is all relative. 1) This is " all relative" yes. yes but ...because precisely the gravitational put on the moon is 1/6 th that of earth and don t change precisely the fact that the hammer and the feather failed exactly at the same time on the moon ( with a different acceleration like it will be on Mars ) . 2) Galileo's claim that force causes acceleration is inseparable from his claim that bodies do not require a cause to continue their movement. This latter claim states that a body in motion will continue its motion so long as no factor disturbs that motion. This principle is called preciselly the principle of inertia. 3) This is all relative yes in the sense of Galileo Galilei was right or correct everywhere with the same factors and law : Galileo's law of fall claims that bodies fall at a constant acceleration, i.e., that their speed increases by equal increments within equal time periods, and that the distance traveled by them in equal time periods is not equal. Prince *Jedi P.S I can only advise to watch experience of Galileo here ( in French Sorry ) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-crNe2PfOxI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jhonny/Shinobi Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 Ok then im not right and i m not Galileo Galilei but you , you are always right . Are you happy now ? ; Now 1) Galileo was not right because he wasn t right ; He wasn t right because some people said he was n' t right in 1600 - 2008 ; is it "truth" ? .???2)??? 3) To say " im not right" with 10 vs 1 , dont make you are right and don t make "truth" It is precisely what say this topic and this proof " hammer and Feather" in 1971 . 4 ) Truth need proof on the moon and everywhere . 5 ) Where s your proof i wasn t right ? Conclusion i was right with proof , this proof was arithmetic and Arithmetic is a science . What is your argument front this proof : " YOU WERE NOT RIGHT AT ALL" like the vatican front to Galileo galilei but without proof; you do exactly the same error on me ofc and without proof ofc ; Then yes , Mr Galileo Galilei learned me what is truth and how to prove it ! Prince*Jedi P.S Prove me i wasn t right with proof , i will believe you , without proof it is not possible ( not only for me , but for Mr Galilei like the commander David Scott ) I can't resist it, it's stronger than me, but to point out the obvious --> you Sir, are missing a point 2) My logic is irrefutable ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince*Jedi Posted July 11, 2013 Author Share Posted July 11, 2013 (edited) I can't resist it, it's stronger than me, but to point out the obvious --> you Sir, are missing a point 2) My logic is irrefutable ! Yes your logic is irrefutable and i agree ofc cauz u prove it precisely with proof and not only because u say i m missing a point 2 . It mean you are right or correct for me , for Galileo and ofc for the commander David Scott precisely ; You are right on the point (2) ; I m right cauz for prove something , it need simply to prove it with proof. The point (2) is missing if u show this proof on the Moon , from the Moon or everywhere your logic will be irrefutable like say the point 4 ) " Truth need proof on the moon and everywhere" Your logic prove also the point 2 wasn t necessary XD, then thank you Shinobi Prince*Jedi Edited July 11, 2013 by Prince*Jedi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jhonny/Shinobi Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 Yes your logic is irrefutable and i agree ofc cauz u prove it precisely with proof and not only because u say i m missing a point 2 . It mean you are right or correct for me , for Galileo and ofc for the commander David Scott precisely ; You are right on the point (2) ; I m right cauz for prove something , it need simply to prove it with proof. The point (2) is missing if u show this proof on the Moon , from the Moon or everywhere your logic will be irrefutable like say the point 4 ) " Truth need proof on the moon and everywhere" Your logic prove also the point 2 wasn t necessary XD, then thank you Shinobi Prince*Jedi You Sir, are trying to play mind tricks on me Your logic prove also the point 2 wasn t necessary XD, then thank you Shinobi ^^As far as I understand it. . . you don't prove this nor explain this, you only assume it. Let me know if I am misunderstanding the point here ... Why should you make a mistake in sequence, even if the point was unnecessary as you claim it to be ? Although you do explain why my logic is irrefutable. . . thanks P.s.: I have nothing to do with the discussion about the ET match in the previous posts., nor is it up to me to say anything about it. So. . . I am willing to discuss the logic and reasoning in the argumentation, but not the Et match . . . I hope you understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_Reincarnated Posted July 14, 2013 Share Posted July 14, 2013 Have a read of this --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum Galileo was correct, but, for a set of restrictions. Linear movement is, in its core, based on irrelativistic physics...i.e. classical physics. If you were to apply relativistic physics to this experiment then things would look totally different based on the reference point. Once you begin applying time and relativity, particularly to objects of similar and minute mass, things get tricky...CERN and subatomic particles is the perfect example. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince*Jedi Posted July 17, 2013 Author Share Posted July 17, 2013 (edited) Have a read of this --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum Galileo was correct, but, for a set of restrictions. Linear movement is, in its core, based on irrelativistic physics...i.e. classical physics. If you were to apply relativistic physics to this experiment then things would look totally different based on the reference point. Once you begin applying time and relativity, particularly to objects of similar and minute mass, things get tricky...CERN and subatomic particles is the perfect example. Einstein's special relativity theory, which says that energy equals mass times the speed of light squared will be precisely proved by the CERN this year . But ...like say the CERN institut "a theory need proof precisely " . Put a feather and a hammer particules in a particle accelarator it will don t change the theory of Mr Galileo Galilei but precisely the theory of Mr Einstein wich can be precisely verified only with a particle accelerator. The question will be not : " particles failed at the same time? " but " particles travelling faster than light ? if yes , theory of Mr Einstein will be broken by proof precisely in classical physics like in quantum physics ofc, by the CERN and his particle accelerator . Watch this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/8782895/CERN-scientists-break-the-speed-of-light.html Prince*Jedi Edited July 17, 2013 by Prince*Jedi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_Reincarnated Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 Einstein's special relativity theory, which says that energy equals mass times the speed of light squared will be precisely proved by the CERN this year . But ...like say the CERN institut "a theory need proof precisely " . Put a feather and a hammer particules in a particle accelarator it will don t change the theory of Mr Galileo Galilei but precisely the theory of Mr Einstein wich can be precisely verified only with a particle accelerator. The question will be not : " particles failed at the same time? " but " particles travelling faster than light ? if yes , theory of Mr Einstein will be broken by proof precisely in classical physics like in quantum physics ofc, by the CERN and his particle accelerator . Watch this: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/8782895/CERN-scientists-break-the-speed-of-light.html Prince*Jedi I've seen that ages ago:) and unfortunatelly it was a false alarm. The scientists at CERN thought they created a muon-neutrino particle traveling faster than speed of light but it was incorrectly measured...LOL FAIL! The point I was trying to make is that with Mr Galileo assumes non relativistic quantities - i.e. speed instead of velocity, scalar instead of vector etc. etc. etc.. Once you add relativity then the frame of reference (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_reference) is important as it will effectively change the properties of that something (in this case the feather or the hammer). You also need to consider Newton's law of universal gravitation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_law_of_universal_gravitation). Trust me, once you factor in relativity to the equation (excuse the pun), things get very tricky. D_R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince*Jedi Posted July 17, 2013 Author Share Posted July 17, 2013 (edited) I've seen that ages ago:) and unfortunatelly it was a false alarm. The scientists at CERN thought they created a muon-neutrino particle traveling faster than speed of light but it was incorrectly measured...LOL FAIL! The point I was trying to make is that with Mr Galileo assumes non relativistic quantities - i.e. speed instead of velocity, scalar instead of vector etc. etc. etc.. Once you add relativity then the frame of reference (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_reference) is important as it will effectively change the properties of that something (in this case the feather or the hammer). You also need to consider Newton's law of universal gravitation Don forget " if" . " If" yes , theory of Mr Einstein will be broken by proof precisely in classical physics like in quantum physics ofc, by the CERN and his particle accelerator " and i know too: the CERN experience was incorrectly mesured. i Try to stay objective and honest also i trust you but... If you think really the CERN has stopped experiences with precisely this particle accelerator because only one experience inccorectly mesured failed ; Stay with this idea , i don t think it will be the only one experience and the last experience in this way . Then i trust you but .... it need to be proved like precisely the CERN experience prove wich u can say : "it was incorrectly mesured" but incorrectly mesured by the CERN and correctly mesured by the CERN too ( dont forget this too ) with only 1 experience . It mean simply a theory need to be proved with experience , this experience failed or not , this experience is correct or not . it seems it is the sense of this topic and i don t say to you : you are or not correct or right . I say just : Put a hammer and feather particles in a particle accelerator , it will only accelerate artificially this particles and at this time , the only way for know if Mr Galileo was right or correct is to do an experience in space then on the moon or later on mars or artificially without external factors like wind, rain etc ... , on earth . Dont forget what experience of Mr Galileo mean : "And yet ... it moves." said Galileo after signing a recantation of the Copernican theory that the sun was the center of the solar system, and accepting the church’s claim that the Earth was unmoving. Prince*Jedi Edited July 17, 2013 by Prince*Jedi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death_Reincarnated Posted July 17, 2013 Share Posted July 17, 2013 (edited) Yes, I agree with what you are saying - theory can only hold true untill it is tested thoroughly. The problem is, there are countless experiments/situations where the theory needs to be tested in order for it to be true. Motion of small masses in proximity of excessivly large mass(es) can be approximated by many classical equations/theories - once you move away from this approximation (i.e. classical to relativistic) theories can break down. Going back to Einstein and moving faster than speed of light: Have a read of this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2215177/Could-travel-faster-light-speeds-Researchers-Einsteins-theories-used-travel-speeds-previously-thought-impossible.html What you should understand is that real world motion of matter through time is approximated by mathematics in the form of equations. A theory can only hold true IF its interpretation (i.e. mathematical equation) holds true. With classical mechanics/physics these equations are fine, BUT, only hold true to generalised systems - anything more compelx, especially when taking into account the fourth dimension (time), usually breaks down those theories and they need to be revised - Relativistic physics is a revision of classical physics. Here is a nice list of 100 scientists who changed/shaped the world for us today - http://www.adherents.com/people/100_scientists.html Edited July 17, 2013 by Death_Reincarnated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Mosquito - Alex Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 wow feathers are heavier on the moon =) lol jk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detoren Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 I think they just took a fast feather of a hawk to prove they where right know for sure a feather of a pigeon will drop slower on the moon .. Prove me wrong . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajnl Posted July 18, 2013 Share Posted July 18, 2013 I think they just took a fast feather of a hawk to prove they where right know for sure a feather of a pigeon will drop slower on the moon .. Prove me wrong . No, gravity accelerates everything at the same amount (on Earth it is around 9.81m/s^2) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince*Jedi Posted July 18, 2013 Author Share Posted July 18, 2013 (edited) No, gravity accelerates everything at the same amount (on Earth it is around 9.81m/s^2) Correct !!! and it is up ( Prince*Jedi to Death reincarnated :1) This is " all relative" yes. yes but ...because precisely the gravitational put on the moon is 1/6 th that of earth and don t change precisely the fact that the hammer and the feather failed exactly at the same time on the moon ( with a different acceleration like it will be on Mars ) . Now i think some people watch this experience and don t hear the Commander David Scott ! then i decided to contact the Nasa wich it send me immediatly the conversation on the moon by telecopy : 167:20:52 Allen: Dave, this is Houston. 167:20:58 Scott: Go ahead. 167:20:59 Allen: Roger. We're wondering if you could use that to mail home an ounce of rocks, please. 167:21:06 Scott: An ounce? All right; I'll do that. I'll bet we could. (Pause) And I'll stick this in the ETB. If you'll hold your camera right there. I'll be right back. [Dave hops toward the Rover with the Post Office bag. Apparently, the ETB is still on the CDR seat. Fendell starts to follow him but quickly stops and re-aims the TV at the MESA.] 167:21:20 Scott: (To Houston) There's something I think you'll find rather interesting. Which will only take a minute. (Pause) 167:21:29 Irwin: I'll put this penetrometer drum in the ETB, Dave. 167:21:33 Scott: Okay. 167:21:34 Irwin: As well as the Solar Wind. 167:21:42 Allen: Jim, we copied both Solar Wind and penetrometer drum in the ETB. 167:21:52 Irwin: Not quite yet. I haven't put the Solar Wind in yet; but I will, shortly. I want to watch this. [Dave has returned to the MESA and stands facing the TV with his hands at chest height. 167:21:58 Scott: Joe, I hope you have a good picture there. I've got... 167:22:02 Allen: Beautiful picture there, Dave. 167:22:06 Scott: Well, in my left hand, I have a feather; in my right hand, a hammer. And I guess one of the reasons we got here today was because of a gentleman named Galileo, a long time ago, who made a rather significant discovery about falling objects in gravity fields. And we thought where would be a better place to confirm his findings than on the Moon. [Fendell zooms in on the hammer and feather but then pulls back to watch the action.] 167:22:28 Scott: And so we thought we'd try it here for you. The feather happens to be, appropriately, a falcon feather for our Falcon. And I'll drop the two of them here and, hopefully, they'll hit the ground at the same time. (Pause) [Dave is holding the feather and hammer between the thumb and forefinger of his left and right hands, respectively, and has his elbows up and out the side. He releases the hammer and feather simultaneously and pulls his hands out of the way. The hammer and feather fall side by side and hit the ground at virtually the same time.] 167:22:43 Scott: How about that! 167:22:45 Allen: How about that! (Applause in Houston) 167:22:46 Scott: Which proves that Mr. Galileo was correct in his findings. (Pause) 167:22:58 Allen: Superb ! [Jones - "That is a beautiful piece of theater. What can you tell me about the origins of the experiment?"] [scott - "The basic idea was Joe Allen's. It was another thing from sitting in the crew quarters at night, trying to figure out interesting things to do - that were useful, too. And I guess we had a lot of ideas. But Joe came up with the hammer and feather idea, and we decided where to get a feather. I had a friend who was a professor at the Air Force Academy. Their mascot's the Falcon. And we had the (LM) Falcon. So that was indeed, a falcon feather from an Air Force Academy bird. In fact, I had two of them. I was going to try it, first, to see if it worked - because of static charge and all that stuff it might have stuck to my glove. Didn't have time (for the trial run), so we just winged it. And it worked!"] Prince*Jedi P.S A special thanks for the NASA wich offer this conversation not only for me , but ofc for you and your and my community , and it is not because i have a conflict with 2 guys from this community like it can happend everywhere and in all families , i don t love you all . A clan is not a gang ! In clear it is not because i don t agree always with all what say my father , that i dont love him and my family . A family is not a gang too . And i will end it with this : Galileo Galilei - "Mathematics is the language with which God has written the universe." Edited July 18, 2013 by Prince*Jedi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.