Help RonG

[Todd]

Ok I got what you said in my other thread sort of, let me try and repeat in simple terms for my uneducated brain to comprehend then pose a couple of thoughts.


1> Space is not frictionless, very low friction but friction nontheless.

2> if an object breaks off a spinning object when the spinning object suddenly stops spinning will follow a straight line.
->example for my small mind. A short arm trebuche{sp}spins to produce a force to fire a rock off, the trebuche stops its movement at its zenith, the rock breaks free but goes straight forward towrd the target where it was aimed instead of continuing the spin directly into the ground?

3> if an object breaks off a spinning object while the the spinning object continues to spin will follow the same spin as the spinning obect
->example for my small mind. the earth spins a space ship launches, the space ship breaks free it continues in the same spin cycle as the earth?

Did I get everything right so far? Let me know then I will go into the next part of my question/theory.

 

[Weird Harold]

3> if an object breaks off a spinning object while the the spinning object continues to spin will follow the same spin as the spinning obect

Did I get everything right so far? Let me know then I will go into the next part of my question/theory.

You got this one wrong. Once an object "breaks off" a spinning object, it acts just as if the spinner had stopped and continues in a straight line unless acted on by another force -- like gravity in your example of a spaceship leaving earth.

 

[Todd]

3> if an object breaks off a spinning object while the the spinning object continues to spin will follow the same spin as the spinning obect

Did I get everything right so far? Let me know then I will go into the next part of my question/theory.

You got this one wrong. Once an object "breaks off" a spinning object, it acts just as if the spinner had stopped and continues in a straight line unless acted on by another force -- like gravity in your example of a spaceship leaving earth.

Ok, Thank you Wierd Harold, what if the origninal object its producing a gravitational force. i.e all the mass in the universe in the pinpoint spot prior to the bigbang.

I guess what I am interested in isn't really the trjectory of the object but how the object hete there. like a baseball when through it isn't stationary in the air in is spinning of some sort.

What I am asking will the object that breaks off the spinning object maintain the smae spin as the spinning object regradless of wheter it it goes in a straight line trjectory or a aaarc tragejectory?

 

[RonG]

Ok I got what you said in my other thread sort of, let me try and repeat in simple terms for my uneducated brain to comprehend then pose a couple of thoughts.


1> Space is not frictionless, very low friction but friction nontheless.

2> if an object breaks off a spinning object when the spinning object suddenly stops spinning will follow a straight line.
->example for my small mind. A short arm trebuche{sp}spins to produce a force to fire a rock off, the trebuche stops its movement at its zenith, the rock breaks free but goes straight forward towrd the target where it was aimed instead of continuing the spin directly into the ground?

3> if an object breaks off a spinning object while the the spinning object continues to spin will follow the same spin as the spinning obect
->example for my small mind. the earth spins a space ship launches, the space ship breaks free it continues in the same spin cycle as the earth?

Did I get everything right so far? Let me know then I will go into the next part of my question/theory.

1) Yeah, you got it right.
2) A trebuchet arm rotates up, stops at its zenith, rock leaves the bucket in a straight line* from the bucket due to inertia. Its velocity at the moment it leaves the bucket will be in the direction that is immediately tangent to the point where contact is lost. The * is to remind you that in the case of the trebuchet there is a force acting on the payload, namely gravity. So the object starts off perfectly straight and hurls to the ground eventually in a curved path as gravity consumes the original height.
3) When we launch a space ship, the ship actually needs tremendous velocity (known as escape velocity) angled away from the earth. This velocity dwarfs the small amount of inertia that the ship carries with it. So yes, the ship does have inertia from its spinning with the earth, but in a practical sense it is extremely small.

Now to point you in the right direction on your next question (if I can anticipate right), you really ought to research the concept of geosynchronous orbits. This is where we send a satellite up and get its initial velocity right enough that it orbits at the same rotational speed as the earth's surface. This way, we can bounce signals off it with great control since it travels directly overhead the same spot all the time (handy for spying or beaming signals into heads of abductees so we all need to wear our tinfoil hats). Also, a trebuchet is a tough way to launch a space ship

 

[Todd]

Actually getting to an orbit or maintaining an orbit is not quite what I was geeting at

What i was trying to get at is the actual obects that break off i.e big bang when everything in the miniscule point of the head of a pin explodes and founds its place.

my presumtion is that that mass before the explosion was spinning in a direction either counter clockwise or clockwise, doesn't really matterto me the direction. but as it exploded into what is now the still growing universe. if everything should maintain the same direction spin

 

[RonG]

Actually getting to an orbit or maintaining an orbit is not quite what I was geeting at

What i was trying to get at is the actual obects that break off i.e big bang when everything in the miniscule point of the head of a pin explodes and founds its place.

my presumtion is that that mass before the explosion was spinning in a direction either counter clockwise or clockwise, doesn't really matterto me the direction. but as it exploded into what is now the still growing universe. if everything should maintain the same direction spin

Oh, a horse of a different color. Well, we really have no idea what sort of motion individual bits of matter would maintain in the theoretical source of the Big Bang. The only things we know of approaching the density of this are Black Holes and we are pretty much clueless as to what occurs there. The most common accepted belief is a total cessation of motion as the gravitational pull towards the center of mass pulls the matter into a state of steric compression (atoms piled on top of each other to the point of touching nuclei and electron behavior approaching static solid rather than the statistical mechanics models we like to imagine). So, there probably ain't any spinning going on.

Now, what happens in an explosion is pretty well understood in our traditional physics. Assuming some sense of what we call radial symmetry (ball shaped), the source of the universe will explode outward with bits of matter shooting in all directions. This is where conservation of momentum matters - for every slug of stardust going in one direction, another slug of equal momentum goes the other. Fireworks displays show this on a crude level and there are some wonderful stop action photographs available . But the stuff is projected in straight rays originating at the source and going outward. This is the reason that the universe is expanding all around us - everything is moving away from the origin. That is why you hear of the Doppler or Blue Shift of the universe - everything is going away from us.

The rotation or spinning of celestial objects is most often considered a post-Big Bang phenomenon due to gravitational attraction of bodies. Before you ask me more on that one, recognize that this is treading real close to the Unified Field Theory that eluded Einstein. The concept of motion, light, radiation, magnetism, and gravity being related and interchangeable is high-powered theoretical stuff but a lot of colleges and universities put on seminars or publish neat papers about it. This also gets into some levels of math that defy standard English.

 

[Todd]

i wish I could draw what I am trig to explain its is hard to put into words exactly.

Can drop me and email I will try and draw it on a bmp on paint brush maybe that might help. I dunno it can't put into words what I am trying to get at.