|
Post by LunarOrbit on Aug 4, 2005 11:59:52 GMT -4
And you aren't taking into account the fact that gravity is going to slow Cassini down. It won't travel at the same speed for the entire flight unless you have a rocket with enough fuel, which we don't.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Aug 4, 2005 12:01:51 GMT -4
I suggest LunarOrbit that you don't post the detailed analysis of how you determined a person to be a sock-puppet, it makes it easier for said banned poster to cover his tracks the next time he makes an appearance (and they usually will). You are absolutely right. But at the same time I don't want it to appear that I banned someone for no reason.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Aug 4, 2005 12:03:45 GMT -4
Wrong, wrong, absolutely wrong. Dear friends read carefully please: I did read very carefully and it is clear you don't know what you're talking about. This part I agree with. Hogwash, they absolutely consider Earth’s velocity. This is essentially what NASA did, though the velocities are not simply added like this. The calculations are far more complex. No, the Sun slowed Cassini down, not NASA. As Cassini moves away from the Sun it slows down; this is basic orbital mechanics. Because it was the most fuel efficient. Nothing in space flies in a straight line (you’ve been watching too much science-fiction). Once a spacecraft escapes Earth’s gravity it is in an orbit around the Sun and will follow an elliptical path. Utter nonsense. You’ve assumed a straight line trajectory, which is impossible. You’ve miscalculated the spacecraft’s initial velocity relative to Earth. And you’ve neglected to consider the changing velocity of the spacecraft in its elliptical orbit around the Sun Wrong, wrong, wrong. They must and do consider Earth’s velocity, and no they could not meet Saturn in a year. Until you’ve taken the time to study something about how orbits work you cannot discuss the topic intelligently.
|
|
|
Post by triangleman on Aug 4, 2005 12:08:49 GMT -4
I suggest LunarOrbit that you don't post the detailed analysis of how you determined a person to be a sock-puppet, it makes it easier for said banned poster to cover his tracks the next time he makes an appearance (and they usually will). You are absolutely right. But at the same time I don't want it to appear that I banned someone for no reason. Maybe you could just announce that "ABC is a sockpuppet of XYZ" then either ban him or wait for consensus here on what to do?
|
|
|
Post by gwiz on Aug 4, 2005 12:14:24 GMT -4
>>> The spacecraft's VELOCITY RELATIVE TO THE SUN is at about 26 kilometers per second (about 59,250 miles per hour). Cassini is now more than 9 million kilometers (almost 6 million miles) from Earth.
>>> Since our probe is launched from the earth, it has already a velocity of 65,000 miles per hour (earth's velocity).
>>> Why have NASA engineers steered Cassini on this trajectory?
It's all to do with orbital mechanics, and Cassini's trajectory is a particularly complicated one to start analysing. Cassini was too heavy to launch directly to Saturn, so it went via Venus, back to Earth and Jupiter to get gravity assists from those planetary encounters. Venus was the first target, and to get to Venus you need to reduce your velocity relative to the Sun.
It seems contrary, but the gain from the Venus encounter more than made up for the loss in launching in the wrong direction.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Aug 4, 2005 12:16:12 GMT -4
Maybe you could just announce that "ABC is a sockpuppet of XYZ" then either ban him or wait for consensus here on what to do? So, for example, if I were to say "I strongly suspect that WildBill is a sockpuppet of unknown and I'm probably going to ban him", what would the concensus be?
|
|
|
Post by wildbill on Aug 4, 2005 12:16:29 GMT -4
>>> No, the Sun slowed Cassini down, not NASA. As Cassini moves away from the Sun it slows down; this is basic orbital mechanics.
Wrong. Cassini has a smallest mass. The Sun can't slow down it. Study more carefully orbital mechanics.
WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO ANSWER, DO YOU BAN? ARE YOU THE LAND OF THE FREE?
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Aug 4, 2005 12:18:28 GMT -4
The Sun's gravity affects anything with mass whether it is a planet, a space probe, or a speck of dust.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Aug 4, 2005 12:20:16 GMT -4
WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT TO ANSWER, DO YOU BAN? ARE YOU THE LAND OF THE FREE? You have been banned in the past for being rude, and you continue to defy the bans which only makes it worse for you.
|
|
|
Post by wildbill on Aug 4, 2005 12:23:17 GMT -4
The Sun's gravity affects anything with mass whether it is a planet, a space probe, or a speck of dust. Wrong. The sun can't slow down Cassini in a significant way because of its smallest mass. Ask professor JayUtah.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Aug 4, 2005 12:42:14 GMT -4
By your reasoning, you'd float off the Earth because you're too small for gravity to affect you. Newton figured out the law of gravitational attraction several centuries ago. Just because you haven't learned it (F=GMm/r^2 is the formula) doesn't mean that nobody else has. Furthermore, if things worked the way you say, not a single Earth satellite would be in orbit, nor would any deep space probes reach their destinations. Please read a little bit about orbital mechanics ( here or here, for example) before repeating this claim.
|
|
|
Post by triangleman on Aug 4, 2005 12:50:39 GMT -4
So, for example, if I were to say "I strongly suspect that WildBill is a sockpuppet of unknown and I'm probably going to ban him", what would the concensus be? Why, are you implying that I brought this issue up in this thread because wildbill might be a sockpuppet of unknown? I'm shocked by that allegation!
|
|
|
Post by wildbill on Aug 4, 2005 12:55:39 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by wildbill on Aug 4, 2005 12:57:52 GMT -4
So, for example, if I were to say "I strongly suspect that WildBill is a sockpuppet of unknown and I'm probably going to ban him", what would the concensus be? Why, are you implying that I brought this issue up in this thread because wildbill might be a sockpuppet of unknown? I'm shocked by that allegation! Why would you like to ban me? Because you can't confute my statement, surely.
|
|
|
Post by ottawan on Aug 4, 2005 13:23:08 GMT -4
Confute?
|
|