NationStates Jolt Archive

Umm...

Clarify please.

Oh, and Time Warp. Yah.

Say what??

I can read it, but not speak it.

edit: These forums suck. They used to let you preview the poll before you submitted the thread to masses of NSG.

Anyway... I came across this site whilst I was browsing the wonders of the internet.
http://isthis4real.com/orbit.xml

It's a need little... thing... that lets you model orbits. Specifically a earth-moon type orbit.

It poses the idea that moon cannot have came into orbit from outer space because it would have spiraled and crashed into the earth many years ago. It also says that the moon cannot have entered into orbit due to a comet crashing into the earth and spitting up the moon into orbit as it would have escaped the earth's gravitational pull many years ago.

It then goes on to suggest that it must be god who put moon in orbit as it cannot have occured naturally.

Being a godless infidel I couldn't accept this explanation and pondered on the subject for while before coming up with two distinct ideas. I . (which I can't numerically prove are.

Oh, and Time Warp. Yah.

This is no mere time warp; I think the thread was going backwards.

My physics are evil.

My physics are evil.

Do they still use leeches?

Timewarps make baby Doc cry.

This site ignores the fact that the moon is drifting away from Earth at a constant rate and will eventually be lost from its gravity. Dur. Trust creationist morons to selectively ignore facts to suit their worldview.

Gravity is a push, not a pull.

THis was linked on that site

http://isthis4real.com/gospel.html

they have this test, where it asks three questions, and they are yes/no, but you can't choose no to any of them. They make it to where you have to fall into their trap...damn them

THis was linked on that site

http://isthis4real.com/gospel.html

they have this test, where it asks three questions, and they are yes/no, but you can't choose no to any of them. They make it to where you have to fall into their trap...damn them
I hate it when people have impossibly high standards. This is why I don't like religions like Christianity. They are purely for people to control others with.

The moon is going away and eventually will be gone...although the sun might engulf us first...

I think that thing is purpose built to not work. Encarta has the same thing and it works almost every time it should. This thing doesn't even let you move the starting point like Encarta does.

the model is flawed. it gives the size of the moon as too small, and the gravity of the earth is way too large.

Anyway i had a go, and i managed it. try "outer space, 180, 5"

Do they still use leeches?

Only to collect my morning's cup of blood.

Heh, I looked at that website. I conclude the pictures look nice and there is excellent use of CSS along with DHTML.

Now only if there was good content...

(http://isthis4real.com/gospel.html)

Oh dear lord. So much wrong with this thing.:headbang:


For instance, I think the moon is a bit bigger in comparison to the earth, than what the model shows. Which would give a more balancing act of the gravitational pulls of bodies. But as it is, they make it as if the earth is a giant vaccuum cleaner. Stupid creationists.

In addition to the fact that the model is not at all to scale, it also completely discounts external forces. Besides, the moon is not in a perfect orbit, it gets farther from the Earth every year.

The average distance from the Earth to the Moon is 384,399 kilometres (238,854 miles), which is about 30 times the diameter of the Earth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon

Looking at the source code I can tell it's purposely designed to fail. It's set to use 0.9m/s2 (a bad approximation) for Earth's gravitational pull and 0.5m/s2 for the Moon's, which is completely off since it's true value is closer to 1.6m/s2.

It's also flawed in assuming that angle values etc must be whole numbers. Again, the simplistic science-naive viewpoint of creationists proves only their stupidity and nothing else.

Looking at the source code I can tell it's purposely designed to fail. It's set to use 0.9m/s2 (a bad approximation) for Earth's gravitational pull and 0.5m/s2 for the Moon's, which is completely off since it's true value is closer to 1.6m/s2.

Hmm...You can put in decimal amounts for the power...Wouldn't it be so awesome if, knowing it's designed to fail, someone put it up anyways?

"See? I'm god, worship me."

Hmm...You can put in decimal amounts for the power...Wouldn't it be so awesome if, knowing it's designed to fail, someone put it up anyways?

"See? I'm god, worship me."

Yeah, but the actual value for an impact angle could practically be an irrational number.

Yeah, but the actual value for an impact angle could practically be an irrational number.

Yeah, prolly. Just sayin', it'd be cool.

the model is flawed. it gives the size of the moon as too small, and the gravity of the earth is way too large.

Anyway i had a go, and i managed it. try "outer space, 180, 5"

*tries*

ZOMG

It works!

*worships*

edit: These forums suck. They used to let you preview the poll before you submitted the thread to masses of NSG.

Anyway... I came across this site whilst I was browsing the wonders of the internet.
http://isthis4real.com/orbit.xml

It's a need little... thing... that lets you model orbits. Specifically a earth-moon type orbit.


Pfft. That people fail at everything. I was able to put the Moon into an orbit on my third try using an angle of 15 and force of 4.

Note that I said an orbit because that's all that's really required. Unlike the ridiculously close circle they put in there, in nature orbits are elliptical and they tend to be further from the main body.

Oh, well, it's an interesting game, though.

Incedentally, and ground level, launch 180, the difference between flying into space and rolling on the ground is somwhere between power 11.2666787776875 and 11.2666787776876

Incedentally, and ground level, launch 180, the difference between flying into space and rolling on the ground is somwhere between power 11.2666787776875 and 11.2666787776876

it's somewhere between 11.2666787776875940707554946129675 and 11.2666787776875940707554946129676

Hey, am I the only one too notice that if it makes it around, it will automatically go back to the starting point?

Oh, and that it's advertising Firefox 1.5, when we have 2.0.0.1.

11.2666787776875940707554946xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I bolded my discovery of it.

Hey, am I the only one too notice that if it makes it around, it will automatically go back to the starting point?

Oh, and that it's advertising Firefox 1.5, when we have 2.0.0.1.

11.2666787776875940707554946xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I bolded my discovery of it.

Those silly creationists always use old versions. Explains a lot, really.

Hehehe. Everything on the site is behind the current times, eh?

The moon is actually in a slightly elliptical orbit.

Be happy, I have discovered some more of this big number.

11.266678777687594070755494612967595

Now than, can anybody see any pattern here? I can't.

Be happy, I have discovered some more of this big number.

11.266678777687594070755494612967595

Now than, can anybody see any pattern here? I can't.

Obviously the exact value is what you need to make it orbit. My friends, this number will clearly delineate between Science and Religion. Comrades, we have found...The God Number.

It's like Pi. All we need is a program that can do this mechanically.

Than we can solve their problem, and wait for them to deny that it was only one possible way, and when we find a bunch of answers (getting rid of the one that starts from outer space, since by design, that one is suppose to be flawed I think. Notice how it always returns to the point of starting.) and they'll say that the model was wrong because the true size of Earth in comparison to the Moon, and the size between them, and a bunch of other wrong things in this model.

Hmmm... can anyone get the ball to achieve one full orbit without touching the circle in a decaying orbit?

I can get an awful lot of nice elliptical orbits :D

I also like to make the moon bounce off of the earth. That's fun too.

I managed to make it orbit fine with all 3 models :confused:

Heh, try the orbit distance, launch angle of 2, and power of 7. That seems to be the correct way.

I managed to make it orbit fine with all 3 models :confused:What? What numbers did you use for the ground launch orbit? I was under the impression that it would be impossible to achieve any sort of orbit from a ground launch...

What? What numbers did you use for the ground launch orbit? I was under the impression that it would be impossible to achieve any sort of orbit from a ground launch...
I can't remember precisely, but it was a really low launch angle (like 2degrees) and probably power of 9.

EDIT Yep, that works. People would be constantly crushed on one side of the planet, mind...

Radius of the earth = 6378.1 kilometers
Radius of the moon = 1737.4 kilometers
Average distance between the earth and the moon = 384,399 kilometers

LOL. Ell oh ell.

Process of elimination, tells me the answer is A!

Um..., I don't want to burst your bubble, but the said numbers don't work. They eventually stop.

Um..., I don't want to burst your bubble, but the said numbers don't work. They eventually stop.
Meh. So close.