| |
|
Article: <5gid9c$qtl@dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Re: LONG ELLIPSE ORBITS
Date: 17 Mar 1997 03:20:12 GMT
In article <5ga5ck$pl0@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
>> what is the difference WAY OUT IN SPACE, where the
>> comet, per your human theories, tracks SIDEWAYS across
>> the sky, for no reason, so as to return on the other side of
>> what you assume to be an ellipse!
>> ZetaTalk[TM]
>
> Just because you cannot follow the physics and math involved
> in describing exactly how the comet moves around the sun
> does not mean that it doesn't. There is no magic involved
> here - its just simple physics and math.
> jscotti@LPL.Arizona.EDU (Jim Scotti)
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
You've completely avoided the question! What is the DIFFERENCE between what you
call a hyperbolic orbit that will not return, and an elliptical orbit! They both, per you, have
a line attached from the object to the Sun, are heliocentric. They both, per you, have a
CURVE, however slight. Please address the point where the elliptical orbit makes the
mirror curve, per you, out in space so that it can return in a different place than whence it
left, and how that point differs in a hyperbolic orbit!
(End ZetaTalk[TM])
In article <5ga5ck$pl0@news.ccit.arizona.edu> Jim Scotti writes:
>> Just address why a parabolic comet, which you lose sight
>> of as its so FAR out there, on the straight-away, makes
>> the turnaround. Describe the forces moving it sideways,
>> please.
>> ZetaTalk[TM])
>
> One note, however, and I'm sure you'll not follow this
> statement and you'll probably misinterpret me again, but
> an object on an orbit that is very nearly parabolic, and is on
> an elliptical orbit with (say) a semi-major axis of 30,000
> Astronomical Units with a perihelion distance near 1.0 AU,
> will be very difficult to distinguish from a parabolic orbit.
> The example orbit I gave has an eccentricity of 0.99997 -
> only 0.00003 (0.003%) different from parabolic. If the
> set of observations of the comet is small or the arc of
> observations is short, we cannot tell the difference.
> jscotti@LPL.Arizona.EDU (Jim Scotti)
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
You've completely avoided the question, again! Is it the rule of the day, to avoid the
question? You're laws of gravity state that an object is attracted to another by an inverse
rule, and will move DIRECTLY to that object baring other forces. You have a long period
comet leaving, on the long shoot away, in what appears to be a straight line though we are
assured for the sake of YOUR argument, by you, that this is in fact a slight curve. As it
slows, why would it not return DIRECTLY to the Sun? What force is it that makes it go
into a curve, way out there in space? You can't say it's running a track out there, or drawing
geometry. Explain this in with your laws of motion and gravity.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])