Moon pics static shadows and moving stars.

[JayUtah]

Quit whining, Icarus1.  You haven't been treated inappropriately, but you are sure trying so very hard to make it seem as if you have been.  What are your goals here?

[Icarus1]

bknight, in theory, if you were to jump high enough OR stay in the air long enough, would it be correct to assume that it would likely occur that you would NOT land on the same spot?

As long as the vehicle (train, plane, bus, whatever) doesn't accelerate while you're in mid-air, you will land in the same spot regardless of how high you jump (at least up to the limit of the ceiling, anyway) or how long you stay in the air. 

If the vehicle accelerates¹ while you're in mid-air, you won't land in the same spot. 

1.  Which can mean speeding up, slowing down, or changing direction.

I'm trying to fucking learn...but my poor adolescent musings can't cope with my negative poor self image and delicate sensibilities conflicting with the constant attacks at either my character, intelligence of poor poor barely fundamental knowledge of fucking Space, Science and the entire fucking Universe.

Icarus, do you know what is the difference between science and pursuits like law, politics or advertising? In nonscientific pursuits it's usually who makes the most compelling case wins. But in science facts and evidence rule and trump everything. This forum is scientifically oriented and frequented by professional scientist and engineers and hobbyists. So here the language spoken is language of science.

Why that distinction is important? Because if we would be in bar having couple of beers after hard day at work and you said you like sushi or like heavy metal music or vote for republicans and we would answer that you are wrong and ignorant, that would be offensive and personal attack because those things are subjective and everyone has his right for opinions. Why language of science isn't that courteous? Because you are talking about hard facts which have real consequences in real life. Either that pressure vessel, support column, medical molecule or orbit is properly designed  and executed. Otherwise money will be wasted and lives lost.

Why that rigor is important in casual conversation about our movement of our solar system? Because how else you would learn anything (what you claim to want to) or make informed decisions in life? An example from my homeland is one antinuclear activist gave this reason for her stance: "Because in nuclear plant they hone the uranium rock with water and then discharge that poisonous waste water into nature".

Your lack of self esteem is regretable thing and I commiserate you because of that. But attempting to boost self esteem by pretending to have scientific knowledge you don't have on science board won't go well. If you are sincere in your willingness to learn you find many knowledgeable and friendly persons willing to teach. Otherwise please go away because you won't find you esteem boost here and you don't at the moment you don't add much to discussion here.

Lurky

Northern Lurker, have you read the entirety of this thread?

[Icarus1]

....

bknight, in theory, if you were to jump high enough OR stay in the air long enough, would it be correct to assume that it would likely occur that you would NOT land on the same spot?

EDIT....If FACT, bknight, Zakalwe Abaddon, Kiwi.  I don't require any more input from you.  Feel free to entertain yourselves with another post.  It's seems your assumptions and rhetoric are mostly what is keeping this thread alive.  Surely you all have better things to do than spend time in here ridiculing me?

That is one of the problems your perceptions/thoughts are incorrect.  It makes no difference how high you jump in a train, as both you and the train are moving forward at the same speed.  There is nothing to impede your forward speed, so you will land on the same spot you jumped.
Zakalwe and I are indeed different people, check our posts carefully, besides Lunar Orbit does NOT like socks and bans them.

I have not ridiculed you, but your adolescent thoughts, learn some physics and you won't make them.

EDIT:  Changed word launched to jumped.

I'm trying to fucking learn...but my poor adolescent musings can't cope with my negative poor self image and delicate sensibilities conflicting with the constant attacks at either my character, intelligence of poor poor barely fundamental knowledge of fucking Space, Science and the entire fucking Universe.

Perhaps the first thing to learn is that adults communicate thoughts in public without swearing. It doesn't add anything to the persuasive power of your statement, and shows disrespect towards those you are addressing. Multiple exclamation points also weaken, rather than strengthen, your argument.

Second, learn that someone saying "you are wrong about that conclusion" isn't an attack on your character. It's an attack on your conclusion, and in science no one is required to coddle a conclusion. If you admit you have a "barely fundamental" knowledge of space, you should not only be prepared for, but welcome, correction by those who have a deep and extensive knowledge of that topic.

Re Read the entire thread Twik.  Pick out the many times I've argued with anyone about anything.

Do some Math against the  amount of posts in here, and the amount of accusations, assumptions and attack on my general character.

Then question me on my use of language and exclamation marks uses, more in my last posts (25 pages on here!!!)

[Icarus1]

Quit whining, Icarus1.  You haven't been treated inappropriately, but you are sure trying so very hard to make it seem as if you have been.  What are your goals here?

Try no to be so dismissive or Rude.  You're better than that.

[gillianren]

Zakalwe......Are you Bi-Polar or suffer multiple personalities?  Maybe you and bknight are the same person??

Actually, I am bipolar, and we can clearly add psychiatry to the list of things you don't know about.  Leaving aside that Dissociative Identity Disorder cannot conclusively be proven to exist (regardless of the garbage James McAvoy spewed on The Daily Show last night), it's certainly not a condition that one would confuse with bipolar disorder.  I believe your intent is to indicate that Zakalwe's posting style is erratic?  I don't find that to be true, but even if I did, I certainly would not phrase it in a way that indicated that describing a medical condition is an insult.  Further, your posts come across as much closer to bipolar, in that one of the symptoms of the condition can be irrational anger.

[Icarus1]

Zakalwe......Are you Bi-Polar or suffer multiple personalities?  Maybe you and bknight are the same person??

Actually, I am bipolar, and we can clearly add psychiatry to the list of things you don't know about.  Leaving aside that Dissociative Identity Disorder cannot conclusively be proven to exist (regardless of the garbage James McAvoy spewed on The Daily Show last night), it's certainly not a condition that one would confuse with bipolar disorder.  I believe your intent is to indicate that Zakalwe's posting style is erratic?  I don't find that to be true, but even if I did, I certainly would not phrase it in a way that indicated that describing a medical condition is an insult.  Further, your posts come across as much closer to bipolar, in that one of the symptoms of the condition can be irrational anger.

A fair assumption and makes sense.

Allow me to do what you and everyone else has not:

I apologise if I have offended you gillianren.  It was never my intention.  As I do not know you, but can only interpret your words based upon my own life experiences and literal knowledge, at times It may seem abrupt, condescending or angry.

Do me the courtesy if you dare, to re-read the entirety of this thread to find accusation or insult directed at me.

[ka9q]

Jason it was me that mentioned the Bus as it's my question to ask.  The answers need to be relative to my questions.  The moving bus was to further explore the Bat and Ball on elastic effect to understand gravity.  This question is in relation to the speeding up and slowing down of an elliptical orbit.

I detect in here the rudiments of an actual question.

All you have to know to understand an elliptical orbit is one absolutely fundamental law of nature: mass/energy is conserved.

When a satellite in an elliptical orbit moves to a higher altitude, its gravitational potential energy increases. Its kinetic energy and therefore its velocity must decrease to keep their sum a constant. It will remain constant unless some other mechanism acts to dissipate or remove or add to this energy.

In the "dissipation" category would be atmospheric drag, if the satellite gets too low in the atmosphere. In the "remove or add to" category would be a third gravitational body perturbing the orbit.

Without those perturbing mechanisms, in a simple 2-body system, the satellite's total energy will remain constant forever and so will the orbit.
 

[Halcyon Dayz, FCD]

Guess Icarus1 doesn't want to talk about Apollo anymore...

[twik]

Re Read the entire thread Twik.  Pick out the many times I've argued with anyone about anything.

Do some Math against the  amount of posts in here, and the amount of accusations, assumptions and attack on my general character.

Then question me on my use of language and exclamation marks uses, more in my last posts (25 pages on here!!!)

Sorry, I don't see many "accusations" or "attacks on your general character".

I do see a lot of people telling you that you are incorrect in your conclusions. Telling you that you are wrong about science isn't an attack on you. Suggesting that your logic is faulty isn't assassinating your character. It's just saying you that you are wrong. Facts don't care if you're a beginner, or if you have low self-esteem. They simply exist. If you can't handle them, that's your problem.

[Northern Lurker]

Northern Lurker, have you read the entirety of this thread?

Yes I have.

You came in like so many conspiracy theorists before you; you promoted scientifically unsound ideas to boost your ego. You dismissed corrections and resorted to complaining about your treatment and moving to new subjects without coming to conclusion with previous subjects. Still you don't seem to fathom the difference between attacking you personally and attacking your false premises and debating tactics suited to winning the argument instead of finding the truth.

You can learn about science, space and universe here and let the increased knowledge rightfully boost your self esteem. Or you can continue promoting pseudoscience in effort to boost your ego by having special knowledge. In that case, I again ask you to move on.

Lurky

[JayUtah]

Try no to be so dismissive or Rude.  You're better than that.

Your ongoing complaints and your assessment of my character are irrelevant.  What are you actually hoping to accomplish by posting in this forum?

[Icarus1]

Guess Icarus1 doesn't want to talk about Apollo anymore...

We're 25 pages in.  The Apollo debate ended on the 1st page.

[Icarus1]

Try no to be so dismissive or Rude.  You're better than that.

Your ongoing complaints and your assessment of my character are irrelevant.  What are you actually hoping to accomplish by posting in this forum?

A knowledge of the truth, which I attained in the very first pages.

[Icarus1]

Northern Lurker, have you read the entirety of this thread?

Yes I have.

You came in like so many conspiracy theorists before you; you promoted scientifically unsound ideas to boost your ego. You dismissed corrections and resorted to complaining about your treatment and moving to new subjects without coming to conclusion with previous subjects. Still you don't seem to fathom the difference between attacking you personally and attacking your false premises and debating tactics suited to winning the argument instead of finding the truth.

You can learn about science, space and universe here and let the increased knowledge rightfully boost your self esteem. Or you can continue promoting pseudoscience in effort to boost your ego by having special knowledge. In that case, I again ask you to move on.

Lurky

There's no way you read this entire thread yet still come up with that conclusion!

I never NEVER argued or disagreed with ANY information put forward, on either the Apollo pics OR the Vortex vid.

This is my thread.

I suggest YOU Move on!

[Icarus1]

Jason it was me that mentioned the Bus as it's my question to ask.  The answers need to be relative to my questions.  The moving bus was to further explore the Bat and Ball on elastic effect to understand gravity.  This question is in relation to the speeding up and slowing down of an elliptical orbit.

I detect in here the rudiments of an actual question.

All you have to know to understand an elliptical orbit is one absolutely fundamental law of nature: mass/energy is conserved.

When a satellite in an elliptical orbit moves to a higher altitude, its gravitational potential energy increases. Its kinetic energy and therefore its velocity must decrease to keep their sum a constant. It will remain constant unless some other mechanism acts to dissipate or remove or add to this energy.

In the "dissipation" category would be atmospheric drag, if the satellite gets too low in the atmosphere. In the "remove or add to" category would be a third gravitational body perturbing the orbit.

Without those perturbing mechanisms, in a simple 2-body system, the satellite's total energy will remain constant forever and so will the orbit.

Thank you for your answer.  This is in agreement with what I have come to understand.