Science and Technology news... :: View topic

Painius · Guest

"oldcoot" <oldcoot7074@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message...
news:7388c406-41c3-45c6-a0c2-6c87b04250f6@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
[quote]
This is a bit off-topic to the thread subject, but it>s one dude>s
delightful diatribe against the Primacy of Math in contemporary
physics. He>s spot-on in describing the institutional mandate which
denies the mechanics (mechanisms of causation) of what The Math is
describing.

http://milesmathis.com/death.html

One utterly poignant excerpt from the text is this :

"If time and distance are not behaving in normal ways, the equations
have no way of correcting for it, since they don>t have any way to
express it."

Does this fit the Pioneer anomaly to a tee or what?!

The author is a radical political Left-winger but i guess that can be
forgiven in light of his scientific insight. :-)
[/quote]
No, sorry oc, it cannot be forgiven in light of his
"scientific insight". He>s a dickhead, and were he
posting to alt.astronomy, you>d probably either be
ignoring him or plonking him outright.

His diatribe can be weighed by his other facets.
The primacy of math is a fact of life we all have to
learn to live with. It isn>t science if it cannot be
measured, or at the very least, deduced using the
appropriate equations.

Big pictures are fine. Quantum mechanics is all
based upon "big picture" deductions. Most of the
theories and ideas of cosmology are "big picture"
deductions (granted, some of the pictures are very
distorted). But if a working mathematical model
cannot be programmed into a computer, analyzed,
and deductions made from it, then an idea is left
to philosophical solutions.

And sorry, that ain>t science. That>s philosophy.
I>m not and i won>t belittle philosophy. The big
picture is and always will be an important part of
finding the truth about reality.

But it ain>t science. And therefore, without this
important foundation, it may always be frought
with controversy.

And thank goodness! I can>t imagine how boring
life would be without all of our controversies!

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

Timberwoof · Guest

In article <F_Oik.136170$102.77971@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote:

[quote]"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-10E32E.11174226072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <xlFik.135569$102.38705@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-AC978A.18304724072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <k19i84dpl1pfjvqup0ggjsn4v5dk1ch30o@4ax.com>,
Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:45:01 GMT, "Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com
wrote:
"Saul Levy" <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote in message...
news:l5ih8410vntvu30b8p8n079jrca9d4uhua@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:17:46 GMT, "Painius"
starswirlernosp@maol.com
wrote:

Why does the Sun, which possesses the vast majority
of the mass in the Solar System, possess such a very
small ration of the angular momentum?

Because, compared to the rest of the solar system, its radius is very
small. The planets are far away and move along at a pretty good clip:
much more angular momentum in that.

Well, sure, TW. Yet it still doesn>t explain how the
angular momentum was imparted to all the far away
planets. I want to know the mechanism by which the
the Sun ended up with relatively little AM while the
rest of the Solar System enjoys the vast majority of
the AM.

And i feel that the presently accepted model for Solar
System construction is very wanting in this respect.

That>s an interesting question, and now that you put it that way, I
investigated. A casual Google on angular momentum solar system formation
yielded, amon other things, this link:
http://www.astronomy.org/astronomy-survival/solform.html

3. Transfer of angular momentum
1. Duration: Perhaps as short as a few thousand years
2. Magnetohydrodynamic effect transfers the sun>s spin away from the
inner to the outer solar system (Alfven-1954).
1. Early contracting sun had a strong magnetic field.
2. Area immediately surrounding the sun was composed of ionized
particles. Charged particles interacted with the magnetic field so that
they spiraled outward along the magnetic lines of force. These magnetic
lines returned to the sun, trapping the ions.
3. The sun was rotating faster than the ions in its vicinity.
4. The magnetic field lines of the sun, sweeping through the ions
tended to accelerate the cloud, increasing its rotational velocity at
the expense of the sun>s spin. Angular momentum was transferred away
from the sun.
5. The drag effect of the cloud against the sun also tended to
decrease the rotational velocity of the sun.
6. Differences in composition between the inner and outer planets can
be accounted for.
1. The magnetic field of the sun tended to cause more positively
charged ions (especially the volatiles) to orbit around the forming
star, thus helping to segregate the volatiles from the more refractory
materials which condensed first in the cooling nebula. The condensed
refractories such as iron, nickel, and silicate grains would no longer
have been affected by the solar magnetic field, because they would have
been neutral. This matter would have collected into the more refractory
terrestrial planets, i.e., the inner solar system.
2. The volatiles would have remained charged and thus they would have
been affected by the sun>s magnetic field. These materials would have
spiraled away from the sun along the sun>s magnetic field lines and
condensed much farther away in the cooler regions where the Jovian
planets orbit the sun today.
7. The basic problem of the Magnetohydrodynamic Effect lies with the
assumption that the sun>s magnetic field strength would have had to have
been 150,000 times stronger than it is today. Presently the field
strength of the sun is approximately two gauss, four to six times that
of the earth>s field strength.

And that>s a big problem, that last one. Even if we ignore
that problem and assume the Sun had a tremendously much
more powerful magnetic field than today (remember, today>s
magnetic field reaches out beyond the orbit of Pluto!),
[/quote]
What does that mean? Magnetic fields don>t suddenly stop; they fade away
through an inverse-square law.

[quote]then
we still have to deal with the fact that the MHE could account
for *some* transfer of angular momentum, but not nearly all
of it that we see today.

It>s a stab in the dark by astronomers that doesn>t fill the bill,
not even close! You like to do Googles, so Google the MHE.
[/quote]
Better yet, you point me at specifically the article you have in mind.
I>m not keen on doing your research for you.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
Official naysayer of the DARPA kind, who knows only of what¹s accepted by
the Old Testament of the Zionist/Nazi New World Order
which refuses to accept or allow deductive reasoning.

Painius · Guest

"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote in message...
news:timberwoof.spam-E813AD.20205026072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
[quote]In article <F_Oik.136170$102.77971@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-10E32E.11174226072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <xlFik.135569$102.38705@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-AC978A.18304724072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <k19i84dpl1pfjvqup0ggjsn4v5dk1ch30o@4ax.com>,
Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:45:01 GMT, "Painius"
starswirlernosp@maol.com
wrote:
"Saul Levy" <saullevy1@cox.net> wrote in message...
news:l5ih8410vntvu30b8p8n079jrca9d4uhua@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:17:46 GMT, "Painius"
starswirlernosp@maol.com
wrote:

Why does the Sun, which possesses the vast majority
of the mass in the Solar System, possess such a very
small ration of the angular momentum?

Because, compared to the rest of the solar system, its radius is
very
small. The planets are far away and move along at a pretty good
clip:
much more angular momentum in that.

Well, sure, TW. Yet it still doesn>t explain how the
angular momentum was imparted to all the far away
planets. I want to know the mechanism by which the
the Sun ended up with relatively little AM while the
rest of the Solar System enjoys the vast majority of
the AM.

And i feel that the presently accepted model for Solar
System construction is very wanting in this respect.

That>s an interesting question, and now that you put it that way, I
investigated. A casual Google on angular momentum solar system
formation
yielded, amon other things, this link:
http://www.astronomy.org/astronomy-survival/solform.html

3. Transfer of angular momentum
1. Duration: Perhaps as short as a few thousand years
2. Magnetohydrodynamic effect transfers the sun>s spin away from the
inner to the outer solar system (Alfven-1954).
1. Early contracting sun had a strong magnetic field.
2. Area immediately surrounding the sun was composed of ionized
particles. Charged particles interacted with the magnetic field so that
they spiraled outward along the magnetic lines of force. These magnetic
lines returned to the sun, trapping the ions.
3. The sun was rotating faster than the ions in its vicinity.
4. The magnetic field lines of the sun, sweeping through the ions
tended to accelerate the cloud, increasing its rotational velocity at
the expense of the sun>s spin. Angular momentum was transferred away
from the sun.
5. The drag effect of the cloud against the sun also tended to
decrease the rotational velocity of the sun.
6. Differences in composition between the inner and outer planets can
be accounted for.
1. The magnetic field of the sun tended to cause more positively
charged ions (especially the volatiles) to orbit around the forming
star, thus helping to segregate the volatiles from the more refractory
materials which condensed first in the cooling nebula. The condensed
refractories such as iron, nickel, and silicate grains would no longer
have been affected by the solar magnetic field, because they would have
been neutral. This matter would have collected into the more refractory
terrestrial planets, i.e., the inner solar system.
2. The volatiles would have remained charged and thus they would have
been affected by the sun>s magnetic field. These materials would have
spiraled away from the sun along the sun>s magnetic field lines and
condensed much farther away in the cooler regions where the Jovian
planets orbit the sun today.
7. The basic problem of the Magnetohydrodynamic Effect lies with the
assumption that the sun>s magnetic field strength would have had to
have
been 150,000 times stronger than it is today. Presently the field
strength of the sun is approximately two gauss, four to six times that
of the earth>s field strength.

And that>s a big problem, that last one. Even if we ignore
that problem and assume the Sun had a tremendously much
more powerful magnetic field than today (remember, today>s
magnetic field reaches out beyond the orbit of Pluto!),

What does that mean? Magnetic fields don>t suddenly stop; they fade away
through an inverse-square law.
[/quote]
Where did i indicate that the Sun>s magnetic field
suddenly stopped? Read it again, if you must.

[quote]then
we still have to deal with the fact that the MHE could account
for *some* transfer of angular momentum, but not nearly all
of it that we see today.

It>s a stab in the dark by astronomers that doesn>t fill the bill,
not even close! You like to do Googles, so Google the MHE.

Better yet, you point me at specifically the article you have in mind.
I>m not keen on doing your research for you.
[/quote]
Though it>s true that my search for answers to
interesting questions is ongoing, this particular
research is something i>ve already done. You
made a pretty good show of interest in the
subject. Forgive me for being so wrong about
thinking that you were curious enough to look
into it further on your own.

BTW, TW, if you>re so dormant about looking
into it on your own, why did you show so much
interest in the first place? And why do you seem
to accuse me of being a wannabee who wants
you to do my homework? I>ve shown you some
links to various stuff i>ve read, just as you asked.
You have no basis on which to mistreat me so.

AAARrrgggHHHHggghHH !!!! I am so abused!!!!

<g>

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

BradGuth · Guest

On Jul 26, 9:02 pm, "Painius" <starswirlern...@maol.com> wrote:
[quote]"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote in message...

news:timberwoof.spam-E813AD.20205026072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...

In article <F_Oik.136170$102.77...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlern...@maol.com> wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-10E32E.11174226072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <xlFik.135569$102.38...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlern...@maol.com> wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-AC978A.18304724072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <k19i84dpl1pfjvqup0ggjsn4v5dk1ch...@4ax.com>,
Saul Levy <saulle...@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:45:01 GMT, "Painius"
starswirlern...@maol.com
wrote:
"Saul Levy" <saulle...@cox.net> wrote in message...
news:l5ih8410vntvu30b8p8n079jrca9d4uhua@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:17:46 GMT, "Painius"
starswirlern...@maol.com
wrote:

Why does the Sun, which possesses the vast majority
of the mass in the Solar System, possess such a very
small ration of the angular momentum?

Because, compared to the rest of the solar system, its radius is
very
small. The planets are far away and move along at a pretty good
clip:
much more angular momentum in that.

Well, sure, TW. Yet it still doesn>t explain how the
angular momentum was imparted to all the far away
planets. I want to know the mechanism by which the
the Sun ended up with relatively little AM while the
rest of the Solar System enjoys the vast majority of
the AM.

And i feel that the presently accepted model for Solar
System construction is very wanting in this respect.

That>s an interesting question, and now that you put it that way, I
investigated. A casual Google on angular momentum solar system
formation
yielded, amon other things, this link:
http://www.astronomy.org/astronomy-survival/solform.html

3. Transfer of angular momentum
1. Duration: Perhaps as short as a few thousand years
2. Magnetohydrodynamic effect transfers the sun>s spin away from the
inner to the outer solar system (Alfven-1954).
1. Early contracting sun had a strong magnetic field.
2. Area immediately surrounding the sun was composed of ionized
particles. Charged particles interacted with the magnetic field so that
they spiraled outward along the magnetic lines of force. These magnetic
lines returned to the sun, trapping the ions.
3. The sun was rotating faster than the ions in its vicinity.
4. The magnetic field lines of the sun, sweeping through the ions
tended to accelerate the cloud, increasing its rotational velocity at
the expense of the sun>s spin. Angular momentum was transferred away
from the sun.
5. The drag effect of the cloud against the sun also tended to
decrease the rotational velocity of the sun.
6. Differences in composition between the inner and outer planets can
be accounted for.
1. The magnetic field of the sun tended to cause more positively
charged ions (especially the volatiles) to orbit around the forming
star, thus helping to segregate the volatiles from the more refractory
materials which condensed first in the cooling nebula. The condensed
refractories such as iron, nickel, and silicate grains would no longer
have been affected by the solar magnetic field, because they would have
been neutral. This matter would have collected into the more refractory
terrestrial planets, i.e., the inner solar system.
2. The volatiles would have remained charged and thus they would have
been affected by the sun>s magnetic field. These materials would have
spiraled away from the sun along the sun>s magnetic field lines and
condensed much farther away in the cooler regions where the Jovian
planets orbit the sun today.
7. The basic problem of the Magnetohydrodynamic Effect lies with the
assumption that the sun>s magnetic field strength would have had to
have
been 150,000 times stronger than it is today. Presently the field
strength of the sun is approximately two gauss, four to six times that
of the earth>s field strength.

And that>s a big problem, that last one. Even if we ignore
that problem and assume the Sun had a tremendously much
more powerful magnetic field than today (remember, today>s
magnetic field reaches out beyond the orbit of Pluto!),

What does that mean? Magnetic fields don>t suddenly stop; they fade away
through an inverse-square law.

Where did i indicate that the Sun>s magnetic field
suddenly stopped? Read it again, if you must.

then
we still have to deal with the fact that the MHE could account
for *some* transfer of angular momentum, but not nearly all
of it that we see today.

It>s a stab in the dark by astronomers that doesn>t fill the bill,
not even close! You like to do Googles, so Google the MHE.

Better yet, you point me at specifically the article you have in mind.
I>m not keen on doing your research for you.

Though it>s true that my search for answers to
interesting questions is ongoing, this particular
research is something i>ve already done. You
made a pretty good show of interest in the
subject. Forgive me for being so wrong about
thinking that you were curious enough to look
into it further on your own.

BTW, TW, if you>re so dormant about looking
into it on your own, why did you show so much
interest in the first place? And why do you seem
to accuse me of being a wannabee who wants
you to do my homework? I>ve shown you some
links to various stuff i>ve read, just as you asked.
You have no basis on which to mistreat me so.

AAARrrgggHHHHggghHH !!!! I am so abused!!!!

g

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net
[/quote]
Our "Timberwoof" is simply another cloaked Zionist/Nazi of the pretend-
Atheist kind, as another certified brown-nosed card carrying member of
our DARPA, performing as their minions and clowns in charge of
mainstream damage-control, as will as for otherwise polishing up
everything that>s Old Testament, plus otherwise in charge of topic/
author stalking and trashing others at most every possible
opportunity.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth

Double-A · Guest

On Jul 27, 11:17 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
[quote]Painius I use angular momentum to make the world best Margarita Its
all in the wrist Bert
[/quote]

Angular momentum becomes clear after you meditate on it awhile. You
see, it all goes round and round!

Double-A

G=EMC^2 Glazier · Guest

Painius I use angular momentum to make the world best Margarita Its
all in the wrist Bert

Painius · Guest

"BradGuth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message...
news:cb3db4d6-fe3d-4bfc-a13b-ea4a0d8e61bd@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
[quote]On Jul 26, 9:02 pm, "Painius" <starswirlern...@maol.com> wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote in message...
news:timberwoof.spam-E813AD.20205026072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <F_Oik.136170$102.77...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlern...@maol.com> wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-10E32E.11174226072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article
xlFik.135569$102.38...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Painius" <starswirlern...@maol.com> wrote:
"Timberwoof" <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-AC978A.18304724072008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...
In article <k19i84dpl1pfjvqup0ggjsn4v5dk1ch...@4ax.com>,
Saul Levy <saulle...@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:45:01 GMT, "Painius"
starswirlern...@maol.com
wrote:
"Saul Levy" <saulle...@cox.net> wrote in message...
news:l5ih8410vntvu30b8p8n079jrca9d4uhua@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:17:46 GMT, "Painius"
starswirlern...@maol.com
wrote:

Why does the Sun, which possesses the vast majority
of the mass in the Solar System, possess such a very
small ration of the angular momentum?

Because, compared to the rest of the solar system, its radius is
very
small. The planets are far away and move along at a pretty good
clip:
much more angular momentum in that.

Well, sure, TW. Yet it still doesn>t explain how the
angular momentum was imparted to all the far away
planets. I want to know the mechanism by which the
the Sun ended up with relatively little AM while the
rest of the Solar System enjoys the vast majority of
the AM.

And i feel that the presently accepted model for Solar
System construction is very wanting in this respect.

That>s an interesting question, and now that you put it that way, I
investigated. A casual Google on angular momentum solar system
formation
yielded, amon other things, this link:
http://www.astronomy.org/astronomy-survival/solform.html

3. Transfer of angular momentum
1. Duration: Perhaps as short as a few thousand years
2. Magnetohydrodynamic effect transfers the sun>s spin away from
the
inner to the outer solar system (Alfven-1954).
1. Early contracting sun had a strong magnetic field.
2. Area immediately surrounding the sun was composed of ionized
particles. Charged particles interacted with the magnetic field so
that
they spiraled outward along the magnetic lines of force. These
magnetic
lines returned to the sun, trapping the ions.
3. The sun was rotating faster than the ions in its vicinity.
4. The magnetic field lines of the sun, sweeping through the ions
tended to accelerate the cloud, increasing its rotational velocity
at
the expense of the sun>s spin. Angular momentum was transferred away
from the sun.
5. The drag effect of the cloud against the sun also tended to
decrease the rotational velocity of the sun.
6. Differences in composition between the inner and outer planets
can
be accounted for.
1. The magnetic field of the sun tended to cause more positively
charged ions (especially the volatiles) to orbit around the forming
star, thus helping to segregate the volatiles from the more
refractory
materials which condensed first in the cooling nebula. The condensed
refractories such as iron, nickel, and silicate grains would no
longer
have been affected by the solar magnetic field, because they would
have
been neutral. This matter would have collected into the more
refractory
terrestrial planets, i.e., the inner solar system.
2. The volatiles would have remained charged and thus they would
have
been affected by the sun>s magnetic field. These materials would
have
spiraled away from the sun along the sun>s magnetic field lines and
condensed much farther away in the cooler regions where the Jovian
planets orbit the sun today.
7. The basic problem of the Magnetohydrodynamic Effect lies with
the
assumption that the sun>s magnetic field strength would have had to
have
been 150,000 times stronger than it is today. Presently the field
strength of the sun is approximately two gauss, four to six times
that
of the earth>s field strength.

And that>s a big problem, that last one. Even if we ignore
that problem and assume the Sun had a tremendously much
more powerful magnetic field than today (remember, today>s
magnetic field reaches out beyond the orbit of Pluto!),

What does that mean? Magnetic fields don>t suddenly stop; they fade
away
through an inverse-square law.

Where did i indicate that the Sun>s magnetic field
suddenly stopped? Read it again, if you must.

then
we still have to deal with the fact that the MHE could account
for *some* transfer of angular momentum, but not nearly all
of it that we see today.

It>s a stab in the dark by astronomers that doesn>t fill the bill,
not even close! You like to do Googles, so Google the MHE.

Better yet, you point me at specifically the article you have in mind.
I>m not keen on doing your research for you.

Though it>s true that my search for answers to
interesting questions is ongoing, this particular
research is something i>ve already done. You
made a pretty good show of interest in the
subject. Forgive me for being so wrong about
thinking that you were curious enough to look
into it further on your own.

BTW, TW, if you>re so dormant about looking
into it on your own, why did you show so much
interest in the first place? And why do you seem
to accuse me of being a wannabee who wants
you to do my homework? I>ve shown you some
links to various stuff i>ve read, just as you asked.
You have no basis on which to mistreat me so.

AAARrrgggHHHHggghHH !!!! I am so abused!!!!

g

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

Our "Timberwoof" is simply another cloaked Zionist/Nazi of the pretend-
Atheist kind, as another certified brown-nosed card carrying member of
our DARPA, performing as their minions and clowns in charge of
mainstream damage-control, as will as for otherwise polishing up
everything that>s Old Testament, plus otherwise in charge of topic/
author stalking and trashing others at most every possible
opportunity.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
[/quote]
Well, yeah Brad, but other than that he seems ok. <g>

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

Painius · Guest

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" <herbertglazier@webtv.net> wrote...
in message news:25-488CBBC9-628@storefull-3337.bay.webtv.net...
[quote]
Painius I use angular momentum to make the world best Margarita Its
all in the wrist Bert
[/quote]
Wastin' away again in Margaritaville,
Searchin' for your lost shaker of salt,
Some people claim that there>s a woman to blame,
But I know spin is in, 'n that>s your own damn fault.

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Parrot Head

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

Timberwoof · Guest

In article
<cb3db4d6-fe3d-4bfc-a13b-ea4a0d8e61bd@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
BradGuth <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote:

[quote]Our "Timberwoof" is simply another cloaked Zionist/Nazi of the pretend-
Atheist kind, as another certified brown-nosed card carrying member of
our DARPA, performing as their minions and clowns in charge of
mainstream damage-control, as will as for otherwise polishing up
everything that>s Old Testament, plus otherwise in charge of topic/
author stalking and trashing others at most every possible
opportunity.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth
[/quote]
Trying to discredit me, Brad? I don>t think that your post will have the
result you intend.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don>t blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

Painius · Guest

"Double-A" <double-a2@hush.com> wrote in message...
news:395dacc5-570f-4b8b-b6ba-1eeadc8e9c75@h17g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
[quote]On Jul 27, 11:17 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Painius I use angular momentum to make the world best Margarita Its
all in the wrist Bert

Angular momentum becomes clear after you meditate on it awhile. You
see, it all goes round and round!

Double-A
[/quote]
So what>re ya tryin' ta say, AA?

What goes around comes around? <g>

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net

Saul Levy · Guest

Woofie>s a great resource, BradBoi! lmfjao!

I>d buy him a drink if I ever meet him!

Saul Levy

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 10:15:52 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
<bradguth@gmail.com> wrote:

[quote]Our "Timberwoof" is simply another cloaked Zionist/Nazi of the pretend-
Atheist kind, as another certified brown-nosed card carrying member of
our DARPA, performing as their minions and clowns in charge of
mainstream damage-control, as will as for otherwise polishing up
everything that>s Old Testament, plus otherwise in charge of topic/
author stalking and trashing others at most every possible
opportunity.

- Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth[/quote]

Double-A · Guest

On Jul 27, 2:43 pm, "Painius" <starswirlern...@maol.com> wrote:
[quote]"Double-A" <double...@hush.com> wrote in message...

news:395dacc5-570f-4b8b-b6ba-1eeadc8e9c75@h17g2000prg.googlegroups.com...

On Jul 27, 11:17 am, herbertglaz...@webtv.net (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Painius I use angular momentum to make the world best Margarita Its
all in the wrist Bert

Angular momentum becomes clear after you meditate on it awhile. You
see, it all goes round and round!

Double-A

So what>re ya tryin' ta say, AA?

What goes around comes around? <g
[/quote]

And that>s when the momentum hits you!

Double-A

Rock Brentwood · Guest

On Jul 21, 9:55 am, Hugh Clary <badin...@netzero.ZAPTHISnet> wrote:
[quote]I am looking for an understandable definition
of angular momentum.
[/quote]
The angular momentum of a 1 kilogram object 3 meters to the north
moving west at 2 meters/second is 1 x 3 x 2 kilogram square-meters/
second counter clockwise in the horizontal plane.

By convention, a counter-clockwise orientation horizontally is treated
as upward-pointing. What>s pointing upward is the axis of motion. The
axis for counter-clockwise seen from above, north-to-west-to-south-to-
east-to-north is treated as upward pointing.

The angular momentum of the object is conserved. After it>s moved,
say, 4 meters to the west; one STILL takes only that part distance
PERPENDICULAR to the object>s motion, which continues to remain 3
meters northward, even though it>s 5 meters away in a generally north-
westerly direction at that instant. So, the angular momentum remains 1
x 3 x 2 in the same units.

The quantity described is called the 'orbital part" of angular
momentum. It>s dependent on what reference point is used. Had the
reference point used been 1 meter further to the south, the object
would have been 4 meters distant from it, and its angular momentum
would be 1 x 4 x 2 with the same units and orientation.

Normally, the angular momentum is taken as the totality of the angular
momenta of the parts making up an object, rather than of individual
objects moving freely through space. Then, the reference point is
normally chosen as the object>s center of mass as the reference point.
This makes the designation "orbital" more relevant, since the parts of
the object are in a kind of orbital motion around the object>s center
of mass.

Angular momentum, in this sense, is also conserved. It is generally
NOT co-axial with the object>s rotation. That is, of the object is
rotating primarily along the horizontal plane, counter-clockwise, the
angular momentum is NOT necessarily counter-clockwise on the
horizontal plane. However, the angular momentum remains constant. So,
if it>s not aligned with the angular motion of the object, then it>s
the object>s angular motion that will vary, not the angular momentum.
So, it will wobble, the angular speed>s axis fluctuating around the
angular momentum axis.

All of the description above, however, is not actually the DEFINITION
of angular momentum. The definition of the angular momentum of a
system is that it is the conserved quantity associated with the
symmetry that space has with respect to orientation. It>s a basic
propery (called Noether>s Theorem) that every symmetry entails a
conserved quantity (e.g., linear momentum for symmetry with respect to
spatial translation; energy for symmetry with respect to time
translation; mass moment for symmetrty with respect to the relativity
of speed).

Working off the basic definition, one finds (in fact) that a
fundamental system (no matter how composed) can possess an "intrinsic"
angular momentum (a.k.a. "spin"). This was first surmised in
relativistic theory and was long believed to be a consequence of
relativity (and many texts still incorrectly state so). But it>s also
present in non-relativistic theory (i.e. Newtonian physics and
Galilean relativity) and is equally much a consequence of this basic
definition. ("Fundamental systems" are also known as "irreducible
representations", and their classification was first done for
relativity by Wigner, and later for Galilean relativity and Newtonian
physics, probably also by Wigner ... all this is relatively recent, c.
1950>s).

Intrinsic angular momentum, unlike orbital angular momentum, has
nothing to do with angular motion of any kind and is INDEPENDENT of
the reference point chosen. However, it affects and can be affected by
orbital angular momentum, so there can be an exchange between the two
-- this is especially important in atomic physics. In fact, there is
no consensus at all on what geometric form (if any) spin manifests
itself as. Among other things, fundamental systems (irreducible
representations) are, by definition, not composed of anything more
basic, so there>s nothing to go "spinning around" anything. It>s
simply intrinsic, in the same way that "rest energy" would be
intrinsic to a fundamental system, or "rest mass".

Hugh Clary · Guest

"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote:

[quote]Please explain angular momentum.

In the simplest terms, Hugh, think of "momentum" and
"inertia" as meaning the same thing. These are words
that describe the *movement* of an object.

The term "angular", when applied to "momentum" just
means that the object is not moving on a straight-line
path, but instead it>s moving on a curved path, and the
object may be also be spinning.

Jupiter and Saturn are the fastest spinning planets in
the Solar System. Connect this with their huge masses
and their curved paths around the Sun, and you will
understand why these gas giants possess most of the
angular momentum in the Solar System.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotation_period

Jupiter takes nearly 12 Earth years to orbit the Sun, so
its velocity around the Sun is 13 km/sec. This comes
out to 47,000 km/hour or about 29,000 miles/hour.
(Compare this to Earth>s 67,000 miles/hour speed of
revolution around the Sun!)

When you take Jupiter>s great speed of going around
the Sun, and you factor in Jupiter>s spin/rotation, you
can see why this planet>s angular momentum is high.
This huge gas giant only takes about 8 hours to make
a full rotation. So Jupiter both spins very fast and
goes around the Sun very fast.

Saturn>s story is similar. Saturn goes around the Sun
at a speed of about 22,000 mph and one full "day" on
Saturn is about 10-1/2 hours long.

So Jupiter and Saturn possess about 90% of all the
angular momentum in the Solar System. And the vast
majority of the rest of the angular momentum is had
by all the other major planets and minor planets that
go around the Sun. This has presented science with a
very interesting puzzle...

Why does the Sun, which possesses the vast majority
of the mass in the Solar System, possess such a very
small ration of the angular momentum?
[/quote]
Well put - thanks much!

HC

Painius · Guest

"Hugh Clary" <badinage@netzero.ZAPTHISnet> wrote in message
news:488e2c20.26380468@news.individual.net...
[quote]"Painius" <starswirlernosp@maol.com> wrote:
Hugh Clary asked...

Please explain angular momentum.

In the simplest terms, Hugh, think of "momentum" and
"inertia" as meaning the same thing. These are words
that describe the *movement* of an object.

The term "angular", when applied to "momentum" just
means that the object is not moving on a straight-line
path, but instead it>s moving on a curved path, and the
object may be also be spinning.

Jupiter and Saturn are the fastest spinning planets in
the Solar System. Connect this with their huge masses
and their curved paths around the Sun, and you will
understand why these gas giants possess most of the
angular momentum in the Solar System.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotation_period

Jupiter takes nearly 12 Earth years to orbit the Sun, so
its velocity around the Sun is 13 km/sec. This comes
out to 47,000 km/hour or about 29,000 miles/hour.
(Compare this to Earth>s 67,000 miles/hour speed of
revolution around the Sun!)

When you take Jupiter>s great speed of going around
the Sun, and you factor in Jupiter>s spin/rotation, you
can see why this planet>s angular momentum is high.
This huge gas giant only takes about 8 hours to make
a full rotation. So Jupiter both spins very fast and
goes around the Sun very fast.

Saturn>s story is similar. Saturn goes around the Sun
at a speed of about 22,000 mph and one full "day" on
Saturn is about 10-1/2 hours long.

So Jupiter and Saturn possess about 90% of all the
angular momentum in the Solar System. And the vast
majority of the rest of the angular momentum is had
by all the other major planets and minor planets that
go around the Sun. This has presented science with a
very interesting puzzle...

Why does the Sun, which possesses the vast majority
of the mass in the Solar System, possess such a very
small ration of the angular momentum?

Well put - thanks much!

HC
[/quote]
Thank *you*, and you>re very welcome, Hugh!

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Astrology - Amateur Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 4 of 5