Author Topic: Aurora  (Read 1317 times)

Offline Otto

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1566
      • http://www.cris.com/~ziggy2/
Aurora
« Reply #30 on: February 04, 2005, 06:38:07 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by NUKE
Has anyone ever explained what causes gravity?


Yes..., it is a distortion of Space cause by matter.  Since it require 'a lot' of matter to be noticed only large objects like the Sun, Earth and Moon ever really effect anything.

If you remove one dimension and think of Space as a flat service, say a large sheet of rubber, and you set a Bowling Ball in the middle to represent the Earth.  The depression caused by the ball is Gravity.  The Moon 'rolls' around in the depression because  it's velocity keeps it from  falling into the Earth yet it does not have enough speed to roll 'up' the side and out into space.

The same with the Sun and the Earth..

Offline NUKE

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8599
      • Arizona Greens
Aurora
« Reply #31 on: February 04, 2005, 06:40:26 PM »
Otto, that doesn't explain what causes gravity, just it's effect.

Offline Vulcan

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9915
Aurora
« Reply #32 on: February 04, 2005, 06:45:33 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by NUKE
Has anyone ever explained what causes gravity?


Anna Nichol-Smith?

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Aurora
« Reply #33 on: February 04, 2005, 07:06:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Vulcan
Anna Nichol-Smith?


She's just a description of the effects of gravity.

The short answer, Nuke, is no... nobody has ever explained what causes gravity.

Physics explains observable phenomonon... it does not fundamentally explain why it is there.

Similar to the way religion does not explain why God exists.  Dogma says He exists and has always existed.

In either case, when the child continues to ask a chain of 'whys', mortal man runs out of answers.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Aurora
« Reply #34 on: February 04, 2005, 07:07:38 PM »
ZING!


But it was einstein who did the anti gravity thing.  He couldn't get anywhere with it, but switched over to the string theory.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Aurora
« Reply #35 on: February 04, 2005, 07:24:02 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lasersailor184
But it was einstein who did the anti gravity thing.  He couldn't get anywhere with it, but switched over to the string theory.


Einstein was a string theorist?

As string theory was first voiced in the late 60's, that's news to me.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline -tronski-

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2825
Re: Aurora
« Reply #36 on: February 04, 2005, 10:02:17 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by midnight Target
Guy I work with insisted the aurora is operational. He says that on some nights it will fly into our local base for a refuel and takeoff under low light conditions. He says only a select group of AF personnel are allowed onto the tarmac when it comes in.

I think the guy is about 3 beers shy of a 12 pack, but he seems pretty intense so I just nod my head to ensure I'm not in the vicinity when he finally snaps. Plus he is a vet whos brother was killed in the Pentagon on 9-11 so I am respectful of his views... at least to his face.

Maybe he does know something???

:confused:


Wasn't this guy was it?



 Tronsky
God created Arrakis to train the faithful

Offline Raider179

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Aurora
« Reply #37 on: February 04, 2005, 10:12:17 PM »
anti-grav in planes is a joke. Anti-grav is a joke. They use magnetic levitation on the trains that "hover". Mag-Lev. anti-gravity is about as feasible right now as time travel.

Offline WilldCrd

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2565
      • http://www.wildaces.org
Aurora
« Reply #38 on: February 04, 2005, 10:16:11 PM »
Well it seems to me if they have retired the SR-71 they would have a replacement flying. They definatly need a spuer fast spy plane to cover what statalites cant see and were its to dangerous for the slower u-2.. And as far as why it would be a secret ? well the sr-71 was secret "back in the day" as was the u-2. so is the aurora.
its not just the stealth but all the other technologies in it. i heard it has in flight movies and wireless internet for them long missions. Also heard the pilots get free porn ...guess its an incentive kinda thing
Crap now I gotta redo my cool sig.....crap!!! I cant remeber how to do it all !!!!!

Offline Otto

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1566
      • http://www.cris.com/~ziggy2/
Aurora
« Reply #39 on: February 04, 2005, 10:20:22 PM »
Is there a replacement to the SR-71?   If you ever read Curtis Peeles book Dark Eagles he seems to think 'no'.  He believes, like some have said here, that a manned replacement was attempted, but failed.  My feeling is that a 'hands on' reconnaissance asset that can arrive any place at any time to photograph the situation in 'real time' is too valuable to just walk away from.  Plus, it is well within our Technology.

I'm guessing that the 'follow on' Blackbird is a rocket powered UAV that's launched from a 'Mothership' somewhere in the United States and has Mach 5+ top speed.  It starts it's missions so high that there's no chance of anyone hearing it,  and returns in darkness.  

Just one man's guess....

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Aurora
« Reply #40 on: February 04, 2005, 10:51:42 PM »
String theory as in the idea of one all encompassing equation.


I'm not saying that Einstein did major research into anti gravity either.  He just played around with the idea.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline TweetyBird

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1775
Aurora
« Reply #41 on: February 04, 2005, 11:02:15 PM »
>>Basically, the laws and rules of Gravity and Electricity use the exact same equations, so Einstein thought that since you can insulate against electricity, you can insulate against gravity.
<<

And I thought Einstein viewed gravity as warps or bends in (the fabric of) space.

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Aurora
« Reply #42 on: February 05, 2005, 09:21:45 AM »
For the last few decades of his life, Einstein tried to find a Grand Unified Theory where Electromagnetism, Gravity, and the Weak and Strong Nuclear forces could be explained with a simple single theory.

General Relativity explains gravity, and quantum explains the nuclear forces. The two theories, which are experimentally extremely efficient at explaining phenomenon, are incompatible.

Relativity breaks down when trying to explain the extremely small, and quantum is pretty much unusable when explaining the macro world.  

The GUT is still the holy grail of physics and string theory is a possible way of getting there.  GUT is what Einstein was devoted to but string theories had yet to be developed before Einstein’s death.

TweetyBird:
Einsteins general theory does explain gravity as warping of the fabric of spacetime by the effect of a large mass.  

This explains how light, which has no mass, could be effected by gravity.  Light always travels in a straight line but "straight" is relative to the space in which it defined.  

If the spacetime is curved then 'straight' turns out to be curved as it follows the warped fabric.  So the path light travels appears to be bent due to the effect of gravity.
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Aurora
« Reply #43 on: February 05, 2005, 10:34:46 AM »
I know.


But Light does have mass.  They can tell because it has momentum.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Aurora
« Reply #44 on: February 05, 2005, 10:48:35 AM »
Even before it was known that light is composed of photons it was known that light carries momentum and will exert a pressure on a surface.  This is not evidence that it has mass since momentum can exist without mass.

Photons have energy because they have frequency.  Because they have energy and E=Mc2, they have "relavistic" mass.

Relativistic mass is a measure of the energy E of a particle which changes with velocity.  By convention relativistic mass is not usually called the mass of a particle in contemporary physics so it is wrong to say the photon has mass in this way.  But you can say that the photon has relativistic mass if you really want to.  

In modern terminology the mass of an object is its invariant mass which is zero for a photon.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2005, 12:10:26 PM by Holden McGroin »
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!