Feathers and Cannonballs

No. Live with it.

Next question?

Thanks for the interest, we'll see soon. Dark Matter? Rankinstein

"It caused tensions in science class years ago"

Causes tensions here, too.!

"A cannonball does weigh many times a feather"?

Is the above statement true if both are "identical sheres"?

Identical size, extreme mass differential. Rankinstein.

Feel free to add more words they are free to everyone to use here.

A picture is worth a 1000 words so when you are lacking the picture don't get cheap, go ahead and use those 1000 words in place of it.

Excuse me but what in the world are you talking about. If you drop anything from the open doors of the Times Square Shuttle, nobody will notice unless the doors won't close. A loom shuttle typically has no doors. A badminton shuttle also has no doors but it does have an interesting trajectory in the game. I'm afraid to ask who or what is a Rankinstein? Mixing a Rankine cycle engine with a beer stein sounds like a moving violation, at best.

You managed to mention every type of shuttle, except the space Shuttle. Rankinstein.

The shuttles I listed are shuttles that are still in operation somewhere. The only thing any of the space shuttles are doing is resting at a museum, or did you not know that the space shuttle program is done. Now if you really meant that you were in orbit in the space shuttle around the Earth and you thought that releasing two objects will cause one to accelerate faster to the Earth, I have a question for you? Assuming that no object was given a push or pull when released, why doesn't the space shuttle fall to Earth?

I'll give you a hint, it's related to why a feather and a hammer fall at the same speed on the moon.

Orbitals harbor angular momemtum. If the planets were stationary in alignment it would demonstrate Newtonian physics, or would it. Didn't know about the hammer and the feather, I subscribe to all the consumer grade scientific magazines, plus all Scientific American magazines since the sixties, missed that one. Rankinstein.

I am not sure what to postulate on exactly. Your barely comprehensible sentence structure has been ponderous enough to deal with.

" but the earth is over six sextrillion tons"

This statement doesn't make any sense...

It might be sextillion, don't have dictionary handy, didn't ever use that word in calculas. My point was the feather and the cannonball weigh virtually the same in comparision to the earth. Rankinstein.

The only area where they won't separate is in zero gravity situation since their gravities would be holding them together. But that won't be anywhere near the shuttle since the gravity due to shuttle would be much more stronger than the gravimetric pull of the two.

The OP is incoherent; it doesn't even really ask what these spheres do (or don't). Photonic interference is essentially irrelevant. It isn't specified whether the shuttle is passing through atmosphere at the time of the drop, versus approaching the ISS.

But when one don't know nuthin' about physics or engineering or language composition, it is hard to compose a technically valid query.

Thanks for thinking outside the box, when scientists who are trainend in all your stipulations, call the vacuum of space Dark Matter, I worry about the standards of education. Rankinstein.

Um, perhaps you should do a little more research as the vacuum of space has proven to not be a vacuum at all.

Although scam artists, crazys and hollywood have danced around waving the 'dark matter' flag and misusing it in all sorts of ways it is a real proven effect (and one step closer to a deeper understanding of the fundamental nature of Gravity)

Link

NASA LINK

Lets perhaps stay away from this advanced concept (dark matter gravatational interaction of objects in a vacuum) until you firmly understand the basics and have proven to yourself that these basic concepts are indeed valid.

Thermal energy, which can be measured but not accurately quantified, and the photons you see from the stars, and neutrinos ect., all sparsely fill the void of space. The effects giving rise to the term Dark Matter can be attributed to these known parameters. Rankinstein

This would be a special mission for the shuttle, you would need to accelerate the spheres from the shuttle, or tether them some distance away to neutralize the mass effect of the shuttle, even the moon might effect the results. Thinking requires no special education. Rankinstein.

"Thinking requires no special education"

True 'Dat

"Thinking requires no special education"

Rational thinking doesn't require an education either. Having a little common sense helps, though.

Ignoring the fact the space shuttle program has been put on hold for a few years, this is still an elementary thought experiment of simple physics. Minimising the variables and maximising the gravity effect won't change the outcome.

Thinking requires no special education.

Neither does practical proof of concept in this case.

If you still have any doubts try the standard school experiment testing constant gravity acceleration on objects by dropping them out a second story window (or higher for better accuracy) and watching them fall at the same rate (where air resistance is the only factor and is easily solved by placing the test objects in identically shaped spheres or similar). This is a two person job.

Have you measured this to an angstrom yet, Has ANYONE over any significant distance in a vacuum? Maybe an elevator shaft sealed, several stories high, in a vacuum. I dont accept unproven theories. Rankinstein

Am I truly missing some points?

What is going on with the spheres and what questions are being asked of CR4 members?

Apparently when the OP went to school with Newton (when the theory caused tensions in science class) he was unsure of the causes and effects of gravity.

By using a space shuttle he was attempting to throw us a gravitational curve, if you will.

Have you read Einstein's attempt to quantify gravity? They didnt teach something that cannot yet be unified with other Physics. Rankinstein.

I think this is the thought experiment regarding whether a lead sphere will fall faster than an equally sized aluminium one, or more simply will earth's constant acceleration (ignoring localised earth-based gravity variations) be different due purely to the different materials used.

The answer is still obviously no, no matter how extreme you scale the experiment (and is easily proven on earth even in an atmosphere).

Where did you hear about localized gravimetric variations, is this the sci-fi channel education I'm afraid is pervading our society today. I stand to be corrected. I'm well aware of the magnetic anamolies. Rankinstein.

I could make any number of comments for and against arguments (yours, mine, others) but the fact you don't realise that gravity varies slightly depending on where you are on planet earth (which is what I meant when I wrote 'localised earth-based gravity variations') leads me to conclude I would probably be wasting my time.

Link

What is the point of a theoretical discussion on advanced physics principles where all you are putting forward are personal ideas with no facts, and indicating you don't understand current proven theory on gravity and dark matter, and leaving us to fill in the blanks.

It ends up being plain guess work and personal faith, and that just wastes peoples time and annoys all but those that want a verbal fight. I hope you can see that.

Perhaps you could re-state the question including your theories (along with your evidence - personal belief or factual) to help bring this CR4 thread back on track and allow others to better answer your personal questions on the subject (rather than us, well guessing what you want us to say) so we all might learn something.

So far nobody has more than Newtons primitive,now, versus a concrete evidence of this acclaimed fact. I was hoping for support, intellectually or otherwise to fortify or modify his claim. It's an open forum, shoot me down with concrete evidence. Precise and true reproducible evidence. I was hoping you could refine and improve this theory. If you miss your trajectory by an angstrom unit over one light year, How far would that be, maybe the wrong planet. Are we ready for interstellar travel. This is my spare time also, quite Valuable, I don't mean to waste anyones time, only you can do that. Rankinstein.

Now you are mentioning interstellar travel and refining and improving Newtons theory.

<sigh>

Perhaps a good place to start is to clearly explain your question for this open forum, many (like myself) are probably still a little unclear as to what it is since it appears to have changed from your original posted question.

Please provide more information.

Sorry for changing, don't know if you see all comments, but I'm trying to address all. You seem to command some respect, if only from me. How can you measure this theory accurately. Newton was extremely limited by technology of the time. I'm an electromechanical technician, I believe his theory can be refined. Rankinstein.

Rankinstein, you cannot recognize when you've been given proof nor will you engage in a reasoned dialog to clarify your misunderstandings. You are not just ignorant of the physical laws, you are so proud of your ignorance that you cannot hear, see or think of anything else. You are likely a burden to society. Go away and take your fantasies elsewhere.

You personify a non sequitur argument. You clearly do not understand binary.

I will make one last attempt at a conversation with you but to succeed you must try to answer my question. I asked the question earlier because I do not understand at all what your original question was asking. Allow me to repeat my question in more details.

What do you propose will happen if you were in orbit around the Earth in the space shuttle and you released two spheres of two dramatically different mass? For the sake of accuracy the lead sphere has a mass of 60 kilograms and the aluminum sphere has a mass of 2 kilograms. I specify that the shuttle will be in Earth orbit because I believe that this is a critical condition and the spheres will act differently during reentry, launch and while resting on Earth. Oh, one last critical clarification, all motion will be in respect to the inertial reference frame of the shuttle. What do you believe will happen when the two spheres are released?

I really appreciate your mass calculations. For an Ideal experiment the shuttle would have to obtain geosynchronious orbit and release the objects under scrutiny beyond its own influence. My suspicion, yet to be proven, is that with laser precision, there would be a slight but significant difference in acceleration. I would accept the proven theorem. Has anyone even tried to prove this accepted 'Fact'. Rankinstein.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere, cogent coherent conversation. I presume you accept the idea that a mass will remain in motion until acted upon by an outside force. Now for these two masses there must be a force acting on one sphere, the other sphere or both for there to be different accelerations for the spheres. Can you be more specific why you believe that there will be a difference in acceleration?

I hope that you realize that any change from moving in a straight line is a form of acceleration. So these two sphere's by being in an elliptical orbit are both under a constant acceleration from the gravitational pull of the Earth. Now there are a variety of random factors that will guarantee that eventually a sphere will be moving in a different trajectory than the other. These random factors are why all geostationary satellites must bring spare fuel for adjustments and for satellite removal at obsolesence. But I don't believe random factors are the core of your belief. Then again random factors maybe the root of your belief, because you haven't stated the root of your belief. You see I don't even know if you think the heavier or the lighter sphere will gradually slip into a lower orbit.

I think you need to direct your questions to an orbital scientist. They really seem to know how to put satellites of differing masses into stable orbits (without having them fall on your head).

The forces would be different (Gm₁m₂/r²) but the acceleration (F/m₁) would be same unless some other effect of mass is there that you propose.

Exactly the point that I was heading towards but I'm not the one thinking that there would be a difference in these two masses motion. If I cannot engage Rankinstein in a coherent conversation, I cannot determine if this belief is a delusion or a poorly worded insight.

I was asking you for the reference material you are using that measured gravitational fluctions on the earth. I would suppose the earth is not perfectly spherically symetrical. Just guessing, intuition, I would stipulate the highest gravitation along the vertice of the greater perpendicular axis of the earth. This is common sense. Rankinstein.

The word Link in blue (both here and in my previous post) is the link to the evidence in its most basic form.

More detailed studies and analysis can be obtained with a simple internet search.

You're awesome, hav'nt read and understood it all yet, but this will help me to convince more people of the need to verify newtons theory. Throughout this entire discussion nobody named him, Rankinstein.

Well once you have a good understanding you can move on to these very basic overall subject primers (increasing in complexity). Gravity is surprisingly important to our understanding of the universe and the subject matter does tend to get a bit overwhelming once quantum theory is included (see my previous threads on CR4 regarding current real-world experiments and developments in the field of quantum teleportation).

Newtons Law

General Relativity

Quantum Mechanics

Quantum Gravity

Be warned, the end of the story after learning all about what we humans know about gravity is that we are still learning, and are in fact only starting to understand one of the last (and possibly greatest) scientific fields - Gravity.

What this all means is neither Lyn or myself have a full answer for you, so I guess no GA for a full proof of an all encompassing universal gravity theory taking into account the quantum realm (unless Lyn considers this a homework question and is in fact sitting on the answer to one of the greatest mysteries in life).

I really appreciate this answer. This will not embolden me, but surely I will investigate. Will complexity take all enthuaism. God bless you, wanted or not. Rankinstein.

I heard an interesting proposed concept on gravity from an interview with Brian Greene the other day. This might be one of the proposed ideas of quantum gravity but I had not heard of it before. (I hope that I don't muddle this too much.)

He proposed that gravity might not be a fundamental force at all. It might be a residual force of some combination of the other forces (strong, weak, electromagnetic) that can only be observed at a distance far enough that the other forces have either attenuated and/or nearly cancelled. He made the analogy to the perception of the temperature of an object. Temperature is not a fundamental force or property in the tiny quantum mechanic world. But nobody would claim that temperature is not an important attribute in the macroscopic world of classical mechanics. It might be that gravity has only some lumped aggregate effect in the macroscopic world like the average kinetic energy that is temperature.

Now before anyone here leaps to accept or rebut this concept, this is just an avenue for further research. I am not an expert on this theory or have (knowingly) worked with an expert of this theory. I only heard this as part of an interview with one physicist. This can easily be just an interesting concept that doesn't work like phlogiston.

I have heard of that theoretical concept also.

One thing I am fairly sure on is that current thinking, theories and experiments (including Quantum) seem to indicate gravity is not just a separate phenomenon that can be considered purely by itself (such as a mass of a large body exerting gravity only by itself and interacting only with the gravity's of other large bodies), for example it must be considered as part of an interaction or 'side effect reaction' (for example - all mass reacting to an existing gravity field at the quantum level).

Just brief concepts with simplified examples to help paint a mental picture, anything more is too heavy for a lazy Friday morning.

I really appreciate your insight, and patience. Rankinstein.

Being an electronics tech from nearly birth, I've always wonderd about the waste heat a resistor produces when resisting electron flow. Obviously every form of energy decays to a lower form, thermodynamically speaking. I believe the background temperature in open space is 4 Kelvin, is this the destiny of the ultraverse. Does it repel matter due to the excitation. I admit I'm not even a novice at quantum physics, but am very interested in the investigated properties. One of your peers wants to exclude me from my own search for knowledge. Thanks for thinking. Rankinstein.

I actually donate to this organization, Wikipedia. In my brief of the subject they also stipulate the uncertainties of the absolute measurement of gravitation. Read for yourself. I appreciate your comments, have no ulterior motive other than one upping the accepting of my high school teachers ultimatim of acceptance. I would like to prove this theorm with the latest scientific practice, but the forum is self acclamating. Thanks for your patience, Rankinstein.

Wikipedia is (as you probably know) a useful tool (read tool, not 'absolute first and last source of answers'), but so is the internet and there is plenty of information available there to assist in further study on the subject (most notably quantum theory and practical experiments being used to prove quantum theories).

It depends on which Shuttle you are referring to.

The one on USS Intrepid will produce a large splash.

The one in Houston, The cannon ball will be used in the War of Southern Independence.

As for the California Shuttle the OWS crowd has occupied it. The lead cannon ball was confiscated by CARB as it contains a substance "known to have caused cancer in OWS people." The homeless grabbed the Aluminum ball and sold it for a bottle of Ripple. The test was canceled as for lack of test materials.

What is your point for coming here?

Perhaps I should say, what is your motivation for coming here?

Are you searching for intellectual stimulation, or, do you just want to argue?

I have the highest degree of skills and only believe in blessing. Take your luck and, well, you'll see. I believe in the finality of knowledge and wisdom, it's not produced by LUCK. Rankinstein.

You seem to have a high opinion of yourself, too.

I grow weary of this mindless banter.

Good Bye.

I have an album, and a job, both blessed, am weary also, opinion stands. Rankinstein.

I've seen mindless, and banter? Is that a chicken, good luck, I mean it . Rankinstein.

.... What is this, a free energy pseudoscience thread? Don't tell me I have been wasting my time here.

Can you please clearly explain your question as your responses are getting more and more cryptic, off topic, and well......less than scientific and impartial (a polite way of saying crazy).

You've been wasting your time here!

_{Sorry, I couldn't resist.}

Nah Huh

Huh Nan is actually good. I reddommend it. Misspelling complete. Rankinstein.

I believe Ivy is poison, isn't that why it thrives? Rankinstein???

Boy, if that was the worst critisism Newton faced, he might have invented Pseudoscience. That is very inventive, Rankinstein.

Your skill does not lie in your reply! Rankinstein.

Shurely motivational, Dr. Watson, surely. Are you motivated by nothing. Give me more fuel. Rankinstein.

Give me more fuel.

Ok, how's this.

There are some who believe that Newton's original theory of gravity is in fact a LIE. The famous falling apple incident which Newton was quoted as saying it inspired his drive to formulate a theory of gravity did in fact happen, but it was NOT an apple tree, it was in fact a.............LEMON.

The truth was not discovered until 1979, at which point it was suppressed by none other than Apple Computer, Inc. (who we now know and love as Apple) and they have been suppressing the truth ever since, because after naming their company after Newton's inspiration was a great marketing tool when it was an apple, no one would want to buy a computer marketed as a LEMON!!!

_{Jack - Took a while for that joke to play out, thanks for staying for the end.}

I told my wife this, she was tickled, is it true, am dying to tell everyone, I deal with20 or 30 people daily, who appreciate my wisdom. Rankinstein

is it true

No, I made the whole joke up on the spot for you and the rest of the CR4 readers. Feel free to use or improve at your leisure.

I appreciate intellectual stimulation, you also. Rankinstein.

You are posittivaly, nneggaative. Bye also, except you didn' bye. Bye . Rankinstein.

I have asked for this individual's removal.

why?

no more of a "personality", than many other members

It depends on the personality. Talking trash can be fun, but only if it's the right kind.

If I met you, how would personality be defined? You didn't like Will Rodgers did you, or? I have only replied to trash, not submitted it. Rankinstein.

Has Richard Dunn been resurrected as Rankinstein?

Nothing more, nothing less, in spite of situation, complete duress. Rankinstein.

_{I apologise in advance....}

Hasn't anyone realised there's no F in Rankinstein....?

_{I'll get my coat....}

Your question would be of greater interest if there were more information. You leave too much to be imagined or guessed at. Too many variables. Sounds as if you may have a good question hidden somewhere in there but it can't find its way out due to a complete lack of an exit point. This is basic high school physics, unless you are speaking metaphorically?

What came first, the chicken or the egg? Well what type of egg are we referring to...?

What weighs more - a pound of gold or a pound of feathers?

Get the point? No insult intended but you need to be more verbose.

It's obvious, everyone missed the details. A feather and a cannonball are far more gravitimetrically different than the two spheres I concocted. Who, if anyone has a better experiment. Electrostatic influence would degreade the outcome. Aluminum would probably resonate at some frequency. You should probably ground both spheres to cancel out electromotive forces, and both should be made of the same element, one hollow, with a hole to absorb space, to neutralize. I appreciate all of the applicable intellectual work exerted upon this stipulation, Thanx, Rankinstein.

I had hoped that my attempt at a rational conversation would produce useful, cogent results. It clearly has not.

I suggest that you should reevaluate your medications.

How do you propose to ground a sphere in orbit???

I meant to each other, you are correct, it would be technically unfeaseable to provide an earth ground. Rankinstein.

How do you propose to ground them to each other, without some physical influence?

How in fact, how do you propose to eject, or free, or abandon, the spheres without some difference in the range of influences?

The egg, of course, now my wife and I are discussing, fighting. Rankinstein.

At last! I've found a cure for my insomnia. Reading this has had the same effect as temazepam.