RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/bpp/ComnErr.html look under Gyroscopic Antigravity JEFF Original Message Follows From: Guag Meister [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:37:29 -0700 (PDT) Hi Z ; It might be related to the square root of one over the square root of two pi times e to the minus x squared over 2. (In other words, I have no idea). Over to you Jeff.. Best Regards, Peter G, Thailand --- Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any chance this centripetal force is behind the Laithwaite Effect which is the levitation-antigravity effect of a gyroscope? Z http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Citizens for the inherent dignity and worth of the human person Quoted words from UDHR/CAT On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Jeff Welter wrote: Centrifugal force is an illusion... this many have mentioned on this site. I thought I'd add that centrifugal force is the illusion that water in a bucket, when spun around in a circle wants to stay on the bottom of the bucket (or away from center) and we think that the force is moving that way. Centripetal force is a force applied toward the center of the circle. The water in the bucket wants to travel in a straight line, but the bottom of the bucket acts on the water to keep it in the circle. The force is not the water on the bucket, but rather the bucket on the water. As far as angular velocity and how it is stronger at the equator... Yes, it is, but I'm guessing that since the mass of the earth is so huge, and that gravity is a function of mass, the angular momentum is neglegible... perhaps this explains the slight bulge in the equator... instead of having the earth pressed into a giant spinning disk... Original Message Follows From: John Mullan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:24:33 -0400 Believe it or not, this all makes sense. And what's more, I'm getting an education from a fine gentleman in Thailand!! Now then, just who the heck came up with the term 'centrifugal force' if it non-existant? John Niagara Falls -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 27, 2004 8:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash snip ___ Do you Yahoo!? Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
its real eassy, when u run out offf any atmosphere, when u are completely outside ofthe armoaphwew shell,, then u are at the point where centrifuigal and gravitational forces are relatively balanced, _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! hthttp://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Hi Z ; It might be related to the square root of one over the square root of two pi times e to the minus x squared over 2. (In other words, I have no idea). Over to you Jeff.. Best Regards, Peter G, Thailand --- Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any chance this centripetal force is behind the Laithwaite Effect which is the levitation-antigravity effect of a gyroscope? Z http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Citizens for the inherent dignity and worth of the human person Quoted words from UDHR/CAT On Wed, 27 Oct 2004, Jeff Welter wrote: Centrifugal force is an illusion... this many have mentioned on this site. I thought I'd add that centrifugal force is the illusion that water in a bucket, when spun around in a circle wants to stay on the bottom of the bucket (or away from center) and we think that the force is moving that way. Centripetal force is a force applied toward the center of the circle. The water in the bucket wants to travel in a straight line, but the bottom of the bucket acts on the water to keep it in the circle. The force is not the water on the bucket, but rather the bucket on the water. As far as angular velocity and how it is stronger at the equator... Yes, it is, but I'm guessing that since the mass of the earth is so huge, and that gravity is a function of mass, the angular momentum is neglegible... perhaps this explains the slight bulge in the equator... instead of having the earth pressed into a giant spinning disk... Original Message Follows From: John Mullan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:24:33 -0400 Believe it or not, this all makes sense. And what's more, I'm getting an education from a fine gentleman in Thailand!! Now then, just who the heck came up with the term 'centrifugal force' if it non-existant? John Niagara Falls -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 27, 2004 8:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash snip ___ Do you Yahoo!? Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Believe it or not, this all makes sense. And what's more, I'm getting an education from a fine gentleman in Thailand!! Now then, just who the heck came up with the term 'centrifugal force' if it non-existant? John Niagara Falls -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 27, 2004 8:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi John ; John Mullan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cool. This is the first time I've heard these things explained this way. Can I ask: Just what is the equivilent description of centrifugal force? Does it apply to me spinning a pail of water such that the water doesn't fall out? Just satifying my thirst for knowledge :-) Ask away. No problem. I usually ponder things like this until they make sense. Makes some people crazy. Hmm. Let's see. Let's say you contruct a metal frame with a bucket of water hanging like a swing in the center. The bucket is free to swing any way it wants to. Now we mount this frame and swinging bucket of water on a rocket sled. If we accelerate the rocket sled at g (9.8m/sec2), the bucket will swing towards the back of the sled at a 45 degree angle. If we do it smoothly, no water will spill out. Other rates of acceleration will produce other angles of swing, higher acceleration will swing more, lower accelertations will swing less. The amount of swing would be proportional to the ratio of sled acceleration to g. If we really accelerate the sled at a very high rate, the bucket will swing out almost to a horizontal position and no water will spill. No one would call this centrifugal force, right? But the bucket wants to remain stationary, and so resists the acceleration caused by the rocket sled. No one would call this centifugal force. Now if we swing the bucket around us in a circle and we accelerate the bucket at a rate of g (same 9.8m/sec2), the same thing will happen, ie. the bucket will swing out at a 45 degree angle and no water will spill. The string is putting a force on the bucket towards the center of the circle in the same way as the rocket sled was putting a force on the bucket towards the front of the sled The bucket in turn is putting a force on the water, exactly as in the rocket sled example. The only difference is that the force of circular acceleration is at RIGHT ANGLES to the direction of motion. The bucket wants to continue in a straight line, and the string is putting a force on the bucket at right angle to its direction. This results in changing direction rather than changing speed. The force of acceleration in the rocket sled example is ALONG (parallel to) the direction of motion. This results in changing speed rather than changing direction. However, both are accelerations. If there was such a thing as centrifugal force, it would also describe the rocket sled example. There is no such thing. Hope we haven't gotten too far off topic. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 26, 2004 1:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. not the other way around. Your hand by itself couldn't do it anyway. Your hand is connected to your body which is connected to your feet which are hopefully stationary on the ground due to friction of your shoes. When you push the ball, the force you are suppling to the ball is transmitted in the opposite direction to your feet and ultimately to the earth. The earth will move slightly in the opposaite direction (like 1e-20 meters, depending on the acceleration of the ball). I have yet another way to describe this. Let's say you are standing on the earth and you fire a bullet horizontally. What happens? The bullet wants to go straight, but it is acted on by gravity. So it begins to fall toward the surface of the earth while moving at high speed horizontally. Now the surface of the earth is curved, so as the bullet moves horizontally a lot and falls a liittle, the surface of the earth is falling away from the bullet due to the surface curvature. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. What is happening for an object in orbit is that the object is falling towards the earth exactly as fast as the surface of the earth is falling away. The object moves horizontally and falls a little. The surface of the earth has fallen a little
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Centrifugal force is an illusion... this many have mentioned on this site. I thought I'd add that centrifugal force is the illusion that water in a bucket, when spun around in a circle wants to stay on the bottom of the bucket (or away from center) and we think that the force is moving that way. Centripetal force is a force applied toward the center of the circle. The water in the bucket wants to travel in a straight line, but the bottom of the bucket acts on the water to keep it in the circle. The force is not the water on the bucket, but rather the bucket on the water. As far as angular velocity and how it is stronger at the equator... Yes, it is, but I'm guessing that since the mass of the earth is so huge, and that gravity is a function of mass, the angular momentum is neglegible... perhaps this explains the slight bulge in the equator... instead of having the earth pressed into a giant spinning disk... Original Message Follows From: John Mullan [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:24:33 -0400 Believe it or not, this all makes sense. And what's more, I'm getting an education from a fine gentleman in Thailand!! Now then, just who the heck came up with the term 'centrifugal force' if it non-existant? John Niagara Falls -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 27, 2004 8:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi John ; John Mullan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cool. This is the first time I've heard these things explained this way. Can I ask: Just what is the equivilent description of centrifugal force? Does it apply to me spinning a pail of water such that the water doesn't fall out? Just satifying my thirst for knowledge :-) Ask away. No problem. I usually ponder things like this until they make sense. Makes some people crazy. Hmm. Let's see. Let's say you contruct a metal frame with a bucket of water hanging like a swing in the center. The bucket is free to swing any way it wants to. Now we mount this frame and swinging bucket of water on a rocket sled. If we accelerate the rocket sled at g (9.8m/sec2), the bucket will swing towards the back of the sled at a 45 degree angle. If we do it smoothly, no water will spill out. Other rates of acceleration will produce other angles of swing, higher acceleration will swing more, lower accelertations will swing less. The amount of swing would be proportional to the ratio of sled acceleration to g. If we really accelerate the sled at a very high rate, the bucket will swing out almost to a horizontal position and no water will spill. No one would call this centrifugal force, right? But the bucket wants to remain stationary, and so resists the acceleration caused by the rocket sled. No one would call this centifugal force. Now if we swing the bucket around us in a circle and we accelerate the bucket at a rate of g (same 9.8m/sec2), the same thing will happen, ie. the bucket will swing out at a 45 degree angle and no water will spill. The string is putting a force on the bucket towards the center of the circle in the same way as the rocket sled was putting a force on the bucket towards the front of the sled The bucket in turn is putting a force on the water, exactly as in the rocket sled example. The only difference is that the force of circular acceleration is at RIGHT ANGLES to the direction of motion. The bucket wants to continue in a straight line, and the string is putting a force on the bucket at right angle to its direction. This results in changing direction rather than changing speed. The force of acceleration in the rocket sled example is ALONG (parallel to) the direction of motion. This results in changing speed rather than changing direction. However, both are accelerations. If there was such a thing as centrifugal force, it would also describe the rocket sled example. There is no such thing. Hope we haven't gotten too far off topic. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 26, 2004 1:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. not the other way around. Your hand by itself couldn't do it anyway. Your hand is connected to your body which is connected to your
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Hi John ; John wrote : Now then, just who the heck came up with the term 'centrifugal force' if it is non-existant? Not sure. I grew up with centrifugal force. In college physics I had a mental block for centripetal force. Took a long time to get it resolved. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Cool. This is the first time I've heard these things explained this way. Can I ask: Just what is the equivilent description of centrifugal force? Does it apply to me spinning a pail of water such that the water doesn't fall out? Just satifying my thirst for knowledge :-) John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 26, 2004 1:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. not the other way around. Your hand by itself couldn't do it anyway. Your hand is connected to your body which is connected to your feet which are hopefully stationary on the ground due to friction of your shoes. When you push the ball, the force you are suppling to the ball is transmitted in the opposite direction to your feet and ultimately to the earth. The earth will move slightly in the opposaite direction (like 1e-20 meters, depending on the acceleration of the ball). I have yet another way to describe this. Let's say you are standing on the earth and you fire a bullet horizontally. What happens? The bullet wants to go straight, but it is acted on by gravity. So it begins to fall toward the surface of the earth while moving at high speed horizontally. Now the surface of the earth is curved, so as the bullet moves horizontally a lot and falls a liittle, the surface of the earth is falling away from the bullet due to the surface curvature. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. What is happening for an object in orbit is that the object is falling towards the earth exactly as fast as the surface of the earth is falling away. The object moves horizontally and falls a little. The surface of the earth has fallen a little. When these two rates are exactly equal, the object is in orbit. If someone went up to 100 miles and dropped a stone. It would fall straight down due to gravity. If you threw it horizontally at 100 mph it would fall in a curved path and land a few hundred miles from you. If you threw it at 1,000 mph it would land much further from you. If you threw it at 16,500 mph it would almost make it around the earth before landing. If you threw it at exactly the right speed (approximately 17,500 mph for near earth orbit), it would be falling at exactly the same rate as the surface of the earth is Falling. If will never land, ie. it is in orbit.. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. Only centripital force of gravity, directed toward the center of the earth, which is causing the curved path. If you threw it faster than 17,500 mph, say 18,500 mph, the centripital force of gravity would not be enough to curve the objects path fast enough to stay along the curvature of the earth, and the object would move further into space. This is NOT centrifugal force. It is insufficient centripital force. Autronauts in orbit are weightless because they are continuously Falling (ie. accellerating towards the earth due to gravity). They feel just as you would feel if you were in an elevator and someone cut the rope. When you accelerate at g towards the earth you become weightless. The astronauts are falling ALL THE TIME. They just happen to be moving horizontally fast enough so that the surface of the earth curves away from them so the never hit it. Whew! Hope this helps. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Hi John ; John Mullan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cool. This is the first time I've heard these things explained this way. Can I ask: Just what is the equivilent description of centrifugal force? Does it apply to me spinning a pail of water such that the water doesn't fall out? Just satifying my thirst for knowledge :-) Ask away. No problem. I usually ponder things like this until they make sense. Makes some people crazy. Hmm. Let's see. Let's say you contruct a metal frame with a bucket of water hanging like a swing in the center. The bucket is free to swing any way it wants to. Now we mount this frame and swinging bucket of water on a rocket sled. If we accelerate the rocket sled at g (9.8m/sec2), the bucket will swing towards the back of the sled at a 45 degree angle. If we do it smoothly, no water will spill out. Other rates of acceleration will produce other angles of swing, higher acceleration will swing more, lower accelertations will swing less. The amount of swing would be proportional to the ratio of sled acceleration to g. If we really accelerate the sled at a very high rate, the bucket will swing out almost to a horizontal position and no water will spill. No one would call this centrifugal force, right? But the bucket wants to remain stationary, and so resists the acceleration caused by the rocket sled. No one would call this centifugal force. Now if we swing the bucket around us in a circle and we accelerate the bucket at a rate of g (same 9.8m/sec2), the same thing will happen, ie. the bucket will swing out at a 45 degree angle and no water will spill. The string is putting a force on the bucket towards the center of the circle in the same way as the rocket sled was putting a force on the bucket towards the front of the sled The bucket in turn is putting a force on the water, exactly as in the rocket sled example. The only difference is that the force of circular acceleration is at RIGHT ANGLES to the direction of motion. The bucket wants to continue in a straight line, and the string is putting a force on the bucket at right angle to its direction. This results in changing direction rather than changing speed. The force of acceleration in the rocket sled example is ALONG (parallel to) the direction of motion. This results in changing speed rather than changing direction. However, both are accelerations. If there was such a thing as centrifugal force, it would also describe the rocket sled example. There is no such thing. Hope we haven't gotten too far off topic. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 26, 2004 1:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. not the other way around. Your hand by itself couldn't do it anyway. Your hand is connected to your body which is connected to your feet which are hopefully stationary on the ground due to friction of your shoes. When you push the ball, the force you are suppling to the ball is transmitted in the opposite direction to your feet and ultimately to the earth. The earth will move slightly in the opposaite direction (like 1e-20 meters, depending on the acceleration of the ball). I have yet another way to describe this. Let's say you are standing on the earth and you fire a bullet horizontally. What happens? The bullet wants to go straight, but it is acted on by gravity. So it begins to fall toward the surface of the earth while moving at high speed horizontally. Now the surface of the earth is curved, so as the bullet moves horizontally a lot and falls a liittle, the surface of the earth is falling away from the bullet due to the surface curvature. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. What is happening for an object in orbit is that the object is falling towards the earth exactly as fast as the surface of the earth is falling away. The object moves horizontally and falls a little. The surface of the earth has fallen a little. When these two rates are exactly equal, the object is in orbit. If someone went up to 100 miles and dropped a stone. It would fall straight down due to gravity. If you threw it horizontally at 100 mph it would fall in a curved path and land a few hundred miles from you. If you threw it at 1,000 mph it would land much further from you. If you threw it at 16,500 mph it would almost make
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Yes ... best explanation I've heard yet on how weightlessness in orbit works. Thanks! Z Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: John Mullan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2004 4:03 PM Subject: RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Cool. This is the first time I've heard these things explained this way. Can I ask: Just what is the equivilent description of centrifugal force? Does it apply to me spinning a pail of water such that the water doesn't fall out? Just satifying my thirst for knowledge :-) John -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Guag Meister Sent: October 26, 2004 1:19 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. not the other way around. Your hand by itself couldn't do it anyway. Your hand is connected to your body which is connected to your feet which are hopefully stationary on the ground due to friction of your shoes. When you push the ball, the force you are suppling to the ball is transmitted in the opposite direction to your feet and ultimately to the earth. The earth will move slightly in the opposaite direction (like 1e-20 meters, depending on the acceleration of the ball). I have yet another way to describe this. Let's say you are standing on the earth and you fire a bullet horizontally. What happens? The bullet wants to go straight, but it is acted on by gravity. So it begins to fall toward the surface of the earth while moving at high speed horizontally. Now the surface of the earth is curved, so as the bullet moves horizontally a lot and falls a liittle, the surface of the earth is falling away from the bullet due to the surface curvature. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. What is happening for an object in orbit is that the object is falling towards the earth exactly as fast as the surface of the earth is falling away. The object moves horizontally and falls a little. The surface of the earth has fallen a little. When these two rates are exactly equal, the object is in orbit. If someone went up to 100 miles and dropped a stone. It would fall straight down due to gravity. If you threw it horizontally at 100 mph it would fall in a curved path and land a few hundred miles from you. If you threw it at 1,000 mph it would land much further from you. If you threw it at 16,500 mph it would almost make it around the earth before landing. If you threw it at exactly the right speed (approximately 17,500 mph for near earth orbit), it would be falling at exactly the same rate as the surface of the earth is Falling. If will never land, ie. it is in orbit.. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. Only centripital force of gravity, directed toward the center of the earth, which is causing the curved path. If you threw it faster than 17,500 mph, say 18,500 mph, the centripital force of gravity would not be enough to curve the objects path fast enough to stay along the curvature of the earth, and the object would move further into space. This is NOT centrifugal force. It is insufficient centripital force. Autronauts in orbit are weightless because they are continuously Falling (ie. accellerating towards the earth due to gravity). They feel just as you would feel if you were in an elevator and someone cut the rope. When you accelerate at g towards the earth you become weightless. The astronauts are falling ALL THE TIME. They just happen to be moving horizontally fast enough so that the surface of the earth curves away from them so the never hit it. Whew! Hope this helps. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
I think I remember reading that Moana Kea in Hawaii (sp?) in Hawaii is the tallest mountain in the world if you measure from the ocean floor. Peggy Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi Z and All ; The tallest mountains on the earth are in the ocean. This is because the seawater helps support their weight. There exists a maximum height for mountains on the earth and not in the ocean. It is about 40,000 feet (going from memory here). Higher than that and the pressure at the base liquifies the rock and the mountanin sinks back down. 40,000 feet is about 8 miles. It is COLD up there and there is little oxygen. Going to a height of 60 miles is an absurdity. Lot's of energy would be expended to raise the material to that height. Or maybe use giant helium balloons. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand --- Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks interesting alright but the nice thing about the Tar Sands of Alberta is that the sand tailings over the next few centuries could easily make a sand pile that high and they have to go somewhere. So why not up? Z Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: Doug Younker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash While I'm sure that there are many factors involved in selecting a launch site but, Kodiak Island http://www.akaerospace.com/klc/ has to be pretty far from the equator. Doug - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:13 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash : Correct. It's why sites near the Equator are the most favourable for : launching rockets into orbit. : : Doug Woodard : St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.779 / Virus Database: 526 - Release Date: 10/19/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. not the other way around. Your hand by itself couldn't do it anyway. Your hand is connected to your body which is connected to your feet which are hopefully stationary on the ground due to friction of your shoes. When you push the ball, the force you are suppling to the ball is transmitted in the opposite direction to your feet and ultimately to the earth. The earth will move slightly in the opposaite direction (like 1e-20 meters, depending on the acceleration of the ball). I have yet another way to describe this. Let's say you are standing on the earth and you fire a bullet horizontally. What happens? The bullet wants to go straight, but it is acted on by gravity. So it begins to fall toward the surface of the earth while moving at high speed horizontally. Now the surface of the earth is curved, so as the bullet moves horizontally a lot and falls a liittle, the surface of the earth is falling away from the bullet due to the surface curvature. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. What is happening for an object in orbit is that the object is falling towards the earth exactly as fast as the surface of the earth is falling away. The object moves horizontally and falls a little. The surface of the earth has fallen a little. When these two rates are exactly equal, the object is in orbit. If someone went up to 100 miles and dropped a stone. It would fall straight down due to gravity. If you threw it horizontally at 100 mph it would fall in a curved path and land a few hundred miles from you. If you threw it at 1,000 mph it would land much further from you. If you threw it at 16,500 mph it would almost make it around the earth before landing. If you threw it at exactly the right speed (approximately 17,500 mph for near earth orbit), it would be falling at exactly the same rate as the surface of the earth is Falling. If will never land, ie. it is in orbit.. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. Only centripital force of gravity, directed toward the center of the earth, which is causing the curved path. If you threw it faster than 17,500 mph, say 18,500 mph, the centripital force of gravity would not be enough to curve the objects path fast enough to stay along the curvature of the earth, and the object would move further into space. This is NOT centrifugal force. It is insufficient centripital force. Autronauts in orbit are weightless because they are continuously Falling (ie. accellerating towards the earth due to gravity). They feel just as you would feel if you were in an elevator and someone cut the rope. When you accelerate at g towards the earth you become weightless. The astronauts are falling ALL THE TIME. They just happen to be moving horizontally fast enough so that the surface of the earth curves away from them so the never hit it. Whew! Hope this helps. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
The term is action-reaction force pairs. From: Guag Meister [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 22:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. not the other way around. Your hand by itself couldn't do it anyway. Your hand is connected to your body which is connected to your feet which are hopefully stationary on the ground due to friction of your shoes. When you push the ball, the force you are suppling to the ball is transmitted in the opposite direction to your feet and ultimately to the earth. The earth will move slightly in the opposaite direction (like 1e-20 meters, depending on the acceleration of the ball). I have yet another way to describe this. Let's say you are standing on the earth and you fire a bullet horizontally. What happens? The bullet wants to go straight, but it is acted on by gravity. So it begins to fall toward the surface of the earth while moving at high speed horizontally. Now the surface of the earth is curved, so as the bullet moves horizontally a lot and falls a liittle, the surface of the earth is falling away from the bullet due to the surface curvature. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. What is happening for an object in orbit is that the object is falling towards the earth exactly as fast as the surface of the earth is falling away. The object moves horizontally and falls a little. The surface of the earth has fallen a little. When these two rates are exactly equal, the object is in orbit. If someone went up to 100 miles and dropped a stone. It would fall straight down due to gravity. If you threw it horizontally at 100 mph it would fall in a curved path and land a few hundred miles from you. If you threw it at 1,000 mph it would land much further from you. If you threw it at 16,500 mph it would almost make it around the earth before landing. If you threw it at exactly the right speed (approximately 17,500 mph for near earth orbit), it would be falling at exactly the same rate as the surface of the earth is Falling. If will never land, ie. it is in orbit.. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. Only centripital force of gravity, directed toward the center of the earth, which is causing the curved path. If you threw it faster than 17,500 mph, say 18,500 mph, the centripital force of gravity would not be enough to curve the objects path fast enough to stay along the curvature of the earth, and the object would move further into space. This is NOT centrifugal force. It is insufficient centripital force. Autronauts in orbit are weightless because they are continuously Falling (ie. accellerating towards the earth due to gravity). They feel just as you would feel if you were in an elevator and someone cut the rope. When you accelerate at g towards the earth you become weightless. The astronauts are falling ALL THE TIME. They just happen to be moving horizontally fast enough so that the surface of the earth curves away from them so the never hit it. Whew! Hope this helps. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Yes, 17,500 is LEO speed and it is about the speed that Goddard thought a rocket train in a vacuum tube could attain across America when he took out his patent on it. Is it Holoman AFB where they do the rocket train tests and have achieved about 1/2 that speed ... without the benefit of a vacuum or near-vacuum? We should consider a Sphinx and Ramp instead of a pyramid at Fort McMurray Tar Sands. The structure would be made of silica aerogel for lightness so as to not crush the earth's crust. All that sand has to go somewhere as the oil, which is greater than the reserves of Saudi Arabia is extracted over the next few centuries. Just think of it ... the image of King Zandu on a Sphinx facing toward Washington DC. But they will be able to see it all the way to Mexico City. Rocket trains will be launched up the ramp and will hit 17,500 mph at the top, ir V1. Then an extra boost and V2 and off to Moonshine City to enjoy a Mint Julip with Mayor George Bush, Junior. Now what could be better to kick start Canada's joint contribution to Star Wars which DC keeps insisting on? A helium-filled tube up the Zandu Sphinx would top the Gerald Bull Supergun feats. King Zandu Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: Guag Meister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 10:19 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. not the other way around. Your hand by itself couldn't do it anyway. Your hand is connected to your body which is connected to your feet which are hopefully stationary on the ground due to friction of your shoes. When you push the ball, the force you are suppling to the ball is transmitted in the opposite direction to your feet and ultimately to the earth. The earth will move slightly in the opposaite direction (like 1e-20 meters, depending on the acceleration of the ball). I have yet another way to describe this. Let's say you are standing on the earth and you fire a bullet horizontally. What happens? The bullet wants to go straight, but it is acted on by gravity. So it begins to fall toward the surface of the earth while moving at high speed horizontally. Now the surface of the earth is curved, so as the bullet moves horizontally a lot and falls a liittle, the surface of the earth is falling away from the bullet due to the surface curvature. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. What is happening for an object in orbit is that the object is falling towards the earth exactly as fast as the surface of the earth is falling away. The object moves horizontally and falls a little. The surface of the earth has fallen a little. When these two rates are exactly equal, the object is in orbit. If someone went up to 100 miles and dropped a stone. It would fall straight down due to gravity. If you threw it horizontally at 100 mph it would fall in a curved path and land a few hundred miles from you. If you threw it at 1,000 mph it would land much further from you. If you threw it at 16,500 mph it would almost make it around the earth before landing. If you threw it at exactly the right speed (approximately 17,500 mph for near earth orbit), it would be falling at exactly the same rate as the surface of the earth is Falling. If will never land, ie. it is in orbit.. There is NEVER any centrifugal force. Only centripital force of gravity, directed toward the center of the earth, which is causing the curved path. If you threw it faster than 17,500 mph, say 18,500 mph, the centripital force of gravity would not be enough to curve the objects path fast enough to stay along the curvature of the earth, and the object would move further into space. This is NOT centrifugal force. It is insufficient centripital force. Autronauts in orbit are weightless because they are continuously Falling (ie. accellerating towards the earth due to gravity). They feel just as you would feel if you were in an elevator and someone cut the rope. When you accelerate at g towards the earth you become weightless. The astronauts
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
rocket train in a vacuum tube could attain across America when he took out his patent on it. Is it Holoman AFB where they do the rocket train tests and have achieved about 1/2 that speed ... without the benefit of a vacuum or near-vacuum? We should consider a Sphinx and Ramp instead of a pyramid at Fort McMurray Tar Sands. The structure would be made of silica aerogel for lightness so as to not crush the earth's crust. All that sand has to go somewhere as the oil, which is greater than the reserves of Saudi Arabia is extracted over the next few centuries. Just think of it ... the image of King Zandu on a Sphinx facing toward Washington DC. Or Ozymandias perhaps? Best Keith But they will be able to see it all the way to Mexico City. Rocket trains will be launched up the ramp and will hit 17,500 mph at the top, ir V1. Then an extra boost and V2 and off to Moonshine City to enjoy a Mint Julip with Mayor George Bush, Junior. Now what could be better to kick start Canada's joint contribution to Star Wars which DC keeps insisting on? A helium-filled tube up the Zandu Sphinx would top the Gerald Bull Supergun feats. King Zandu Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: Guag Meister [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 10:19 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Hi Eric ; Eric wrote : I really don't understand this assertion. (And I saw it on the web pages from scientists as well.) Saying that the force is an illusion. If you put a spring between my hand and the ball it would compress. A spring needs a force pushing it from both ends to do that. No exceptions. This is a good question. I guess that the word illusion is maybe not a good choice, in that you feel it. But your hand is supplying the force to the ball. snip ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Hi Eric ; Yes centrifugal and centripetal are confusing. Let me try. Let's say you set a bowling ball down on the bowling lane so it is stationary. Now you push the ball down the lane with your hand. Your hand feels a force pushing back from the ball, but is it really a force? No it isn't. It is just the ball's tendency to remain motionless. Your hand must push the ball to get it moving, and the ball pushes back because it wants to remain stationary. The force of your hand on the ball is the force needed for acceleration. The force of the ball back on your hand is an illusion. Now let's say the ball is moving down the lane, and you want to change it's direction slightly because it is headed for the gutter. You need to run down the land and push with your hand on the side of the ball to change it's direction. The ball pushes back on your hand because it wants to continue in a straight line. An object traveling in a circle is undergoing continuous direction changes (acceleration). There is a force necessary to change it's direction. This is centripetal force. Centripetal force is directed towards the center of the circle. That's what curves the path of the object towards the center. The object want to shoot out of the circle in a straight line. This is the so called centrifugal force, but it is not a real force. If it was real, the object would follow a curved path AWAY from the center of the circle. Yes the centripetal force is greatest at the equator because objects at the equator are undergoing maximum acceleration. Objects at the poles are undergoing almost no acceleration. By acceleration I mean direction changing, like the bowling ball moving down the lane. The mountain idea is nonsense. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand --- Erik Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Pardon my physics, but wouldn't the centripetal force be greatest at the equator? I had to look it up. Which was a good thing cause it's one of those things I always questioned - what the difference between centripetal and centrifugal was. I had just never sat down and looked it up before. Whenever I thought of it I wasn't near a computer or dictionary. Centripetal is the pulling of something inward in a circular or elliptical path. So that would be the force of gravity pulling us towards the center of the earth. It should be the same no matter where on earth you are. (Assuming the whole earth was equidistant from the center, which I know isn't really true, but close enough.) Some people seem to claim that centrifugal isn't a real force cause it's really just inertia pushing outwards against the centripetal inwards force. But that centrifugal effect would be what is greatest at the equator because of the much higher angular velocity. Sorry for being nit-picky. I was just curious about it when I read your reply and figured I'd share with everyone else. Here's a few links: http://soconnell.web.wesleyan.edu/ees106/lecture_notes/lecture-tides/HTML%20Presentation%20folder/sld075.htm http://www.permanent.com/s-c-forc.htm http://www.regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys06/bcentrif/default.htm What I liked best was the explanation on that final link of centripetal meaning 'center seeking' in Latin, and centrifugal meaning 'center fleeing.' I won't have a problem confusing them in the future, I don't think. Thanks! Erik ___ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
I defer to the physicists on this but my guess would be that the sheer weight of the pile of trash or sand (eg from Tar Sands, Alberta) would be the limiting factor. It might crush the earth's crust or move it and cause eathquakes. However, in the case of Tar Sands, we are moving the sand anyway so there really is a question of what to do with it in decades and centuries to come. Silica aerogel might give us building blocks of saand which are light and strong. Z Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: Erik Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 12:36 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash --- Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Pardon my physics, but wouldn't the centripetal force be greatest at the equator? I had to look it up. Which was a good thing cause it's one of those things I always questioned - what the difference between centripetal and centrifugal was. I had just never sat down and looked it up before. Whenever I thought of it I wasn't near a computer or dictionary. Centripetal is the pulling of something inward in a circular or elliptical path. So that would be the force of gravity pulling us towards the center of the earth. It should be the same no matter where on earth you are. (Assuming the whole earth was equidistant from the center, which I know isn't really true, but close enough.) Some people seem to claim that centrifugal isn't a real force cause it's really just inertia pushing outwards against the centripetal inwards force. But that centrifugal effect would be what is greatest at the equator because of the much higher angular velocity. Sorry for being nit-picky. I was just curious about it when I read your reply and figured I'd share with everyone else. Here's a few links: http://soconnell.web.wesleyan.edu/ees106/lecture_notes/lecture-tides/HTML%20Presentation%20folder/sld075.htm http://www.permanent.com/s-c-forc.htm http://www.regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys06/bcentrif/default.htm What I liked best was the explanation on that final link of centripetal meaning 'center seeking' in Latin, and centrifugal meaning 'center fleeing.' I won't have a problem confusing them in the future, I don't think. Thanks! Erik ___ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Correct. It's why sites near the Equator are the most favourable for launching rockets into orbit. Doug Woodard St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Darryl McMahon wrote: Erik Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] [snip] So, to rephrase my earlier question. Wouldn't the inertial force caused by the earth's rotation be greatest at the equator, where the earth bulges out relative to the poles, and where the apparent rotational speed would be greatest? Woudn't that make the equator the worst place to build such a trash heap (if the inertial effect is a cause for concern in the first place?) ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
While I'm sure that there are many factors involved in selecting a launch site but, Kodiak Island http://www.akaerospace.com/klc/ has to be pretty far from the equator. Doug - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:13 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash : Correct. It's why sites near the Equator are the most favourable for : launching rockets into orbit. : : Doug Woodard : St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.779 / Virus Database: 526 - Release Date: 10/19/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Looks interesting alright but the nice thing about the Tar Sands of Alberta is that the sand tailings over the next few centuries could easily make a sand pile that high and they have to go somewhere. So why not up? Z Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: Doug Younker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash While I'm sure that there are many factors involved in selecting a launch site but, Kodiak Island http://www.akaerospace.com/klc/ has to be pretty far from the equator. Doug - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:13 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash : Correct. It's why sites near the Equator are the most favourable for : launching rockets into orbit. : : Doug Woodard : St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.779 / Virus Database: 526 - Release Date: 10/19/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
why don't we inject our trash into the earth's core and collect the pyrolyzed gases? Ok, so I threw this out there just for fun... JEFF Original Message Follows From: Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:50:49 -0700 I defer to the physicists on this but my guess would be that the sheer weight of the pile of trash or sand (eg from Tar Sands, Alberta) would be the limiting factor. It might crush the earth's crust or move it and cause eathquakes. However, in the case of Tar Sands, we are moving the sand anyway so there really is a question of what to do with it in decades and centuries to come. Silica aerogel might give us building blocks of saand which are light and strong. Z Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: Erik Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 12:36 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash --- Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Pardon my physics, but wouldn't the centripetal force be greatest at the equator? I had to look it up. Which was a good thing cause it's one of those things I always questioned - what the difference between centripetal and centrifugal was. I had just never sat down and looked it up before. Whenever I thought of it I wasn't near a computer or dictionary. Centripetal is the pulling of something inward in a circular or elliptical path. So that would be the force of gravity pulling us towards the center of the earth. It should be the same no matter where on earth you are. (Assuming the whole earth was equidistant from the center, which I know isn't really true, but close enough.) Some people seem to claim that centrifugal isn't a real force cause it's really just inertia pushing outwards against the centripetal inwards force. But that centrifugal effect would be what is greatest at the equator because of the much higher angular velocity. Sorry for being nit-picky. I was just curious about it when I read your reply and figured I'd share with everyone else. Here's a few links: http://soconnell.web.wesleyan.edu/ees106/lecture_notes/lecture-tides/HTML%20Presentation%20folder/sld075.htm http://www.permanent.com/s-c-forc.htm http://www.regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys06/bcentrif/default.htm What I liked best was the explanation on that final link of centripetal meaning 'center seeking' in Latin, and centrifugal meaning 'center fleeing.' I won't have a problem confusing them in the future, I don't think. Thanks! Erik ___ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Hi Z and All ; The tallest mountains on the earth are in the ocean. This is because the seawater helps support their weight. There exists a maximum height for mountains on the earth and not in the ocean. It is about 40,000 feet (going from memory here). Higher than that and the pressure at the base liquifies the rock and the mountanin sinks back down. 40,000 feet is about 8 miles. It is COLD up there and there is little oxygen. Going to a height of 60 miles is an absurdity. Lot's of energy would be expended to raise the material to that height. Or maybe use giant helium balloons. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand --- Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks interesting alright but the nice thing about the Tar Sands of Alberta is that the sand tailings over the next few centuries could easily make a sand pile that high and they have to go somewhere. So why not up? Z Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: Doug Younker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash While I'm sure that there are many factors involved in selecting a launch site but, Kodiak Island http://www.akaerospace.com/klc/ has to be pretty far from the equator. Doug - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:13 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash : Correct. It's why sites near the Equator are the most favourable for : launching rockets into orbit. : : Doug Woodard : St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.779 / Virus Database: 526 - Release Date: 10/19/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
That is why I had suggested blocks made of silica aerogel. Z http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Citizens for the inherent dignity and worth of the human person Quoted words from UDHR/CAT On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Guag Meister wrote: Hi Z and All ; The tallest mountains on the earth are in the ocean. This is because the seawater helps support their weight. There exists a maximum height for mountains on the earth and not in the ocean. It is about 40,000 feet (going from memory here). Higher than that and the pressure at the base liquifies the rock and the mountanin sinks back down. 40,000 feet is about 8 miles. It is COLD up there and there is little oxygen. Going to a height of 60 miles is an absurdity. Lot's of energy would be expended to raise the material to that height. Or maybe use giant helium balloons. Best Regards, Peter G. Thailand --- Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks interesting alright but the nice thing about the Tar Sands of Alberta is that the sand tailings over the next few centuries could easily make a sand pile that high and they have to go somewhere. So why not up? Z Zandu Goldbar King Loges-de-Corbeaux Alberta-BC Border Loges-de-Corbeaux BC-Alberta Z6Z 6Z6 CANADA 666-666- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Add this card to your address book - Original Message - From: Doug Younker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:47 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash While I'm sure that there are many factors involved in selecting a launch site but, Kodiak Island http://www.akaerospace.com/klc/ has to be pretty far from the equator. Doug - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 6:13 PM Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash : Correct. It's why sites near the Equator are the most favourable for : launching rockets into orbit. : : Doug Woodard : St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.779 / Virus Database: 526 - Release Date: 10/19/2004 ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Centrifuges force is greater at the equator, even then it depends on how everything is held together. 60 miles high?Never happen,You would need an area, at least 60 miles square, if you are lucky and can get away with an Angle of Repose of 45* ( which is very doubtful, and I have my math right ).I doubt that Canada would be willing to give up 60 sq miles, just to pile trash on it. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 14:01 Subject: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash There's a guy on Canada-L who says that if we built a very high Mount Trashmore in Canada, say 60 miles high, it will get blown away by centrifugal force but not if it is built at the equator. Is that correct? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Putting a pile of trash 60 miles high would put it higher than the ozone layer. I'm not sure how high something has to get before the pull of gravity is too low, but I'd assume that if there was a piece of paper 60 miles high, and the Jet Stream happened to be passing through, there'd be one hell of a mess to clean up. Jeff Original Message Follows From: Greg Harbican [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:10:43 -0600 Centrifuges force is greater at the equator, even then it depends on how everything is held together. 60 miles high?Never happen,You would need an area, at least 60 miles square, if you are lucky and can get away with an Angle of Repose of 45* ( which is very doubtful, and I have my math right ).I doubt that Canada would be willing to give up 60 sq miles, just to pile trash on it. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 14:01 Subject: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash There's a guy on Canada-L who says that if we built a very high Mount Trashmore in Canada, say 60 miles high, it will get blown away by centrifugal force but not if it is built at the equator. Is that correct? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
And why does it have to be 60 miles high? In our praries, 60 square miles in nothing. Forget the 60 mile hieght. Imagine the methane / nat.gas that could be drawn off a waste dump that size. Yeah, yeah. OK. So the fuel used to transport all that stuff to a huge central dump might negate all that. But it's a wonderful thought! Ooops, just rambling thought. Sorry. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jeff Welter Sent: October 24, 2004 1:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Putting a pile of trash 60 miles high would put it higher than the ozone layer. I'm not sure how high something has to get before the pull of gravity is too low, but I'd assume that if there was a piece of paper 60 miles high, and the Jet Stream happened to be passing through, there'd be one hell of a mess to clean up. Jeff Original Message Follows From: Greg Harbican [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:10:43 -0600 Centrifuges force is greater at the equator, even then it depends on how everything is held together. 60 miles high?Never happen,You would need an area, at least 60 miles square, if you are lucky and can get away with an Angle of Repose of 45* ( which is very doubtful, and I have my math right ).I doubt that Canada would be willing to give up 60 sq miles, just to pile trash on it. Greg H. - Original Message - From: Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 14:01 Subject: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash There's a guy on Canada-L who says that if we built a very high Mount Trashmore in Canada, say 60 miles high, it will get blown away by centrifugal force but not if it is built at the equator. Is that correct? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Party of Citizens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Speaking of land fills, any opinions on Mount Trashmore in Michigan? It is a very nice ski hill we hear, built up thanks to a lot of Canadian trash exported from Ontario. The liners are supposed to prevent leaching. Do they work? Liners do work, at least for limited periods of time. They have been in use for about 30 years in landfills. They are not perfect, but they do reduce leaching from landfills. If so, here's your trivial pursuit question for the day: Since the prairies of Canada are short on ski hills, what if ALL the trash of North America were sent there? How high a ski hill could we build there? It's been done. Located in the Prairie Schooner region of Saskatchewan, Blackstrap Provincial Park has one of Canada's rarest geographical formations - a mountain comprised of tons of fill, created with mammoth man-operated earthmovers. The hill was built to accommodate some events of the 1971 Canada Winter Games. http://interactive.usask.ca/ski/tourism/sask_parks/blackstrap.html I expect it's a LOT of trash, especially if we continue our current practices (e.g. Ottawa is currently reducing what they permit into their recycling program, which is throwing previous projections for their landfill life expectancy out the window). Clearly, our initial emphasis has to be on reducing the current mountains (even if they are initially holes) rather than where to build new and bigger ones. There's a guy on Canada-L who says that if we built a very high Mount Trashmore in Canada, say 60 miles high, it will get blown away by centrifugal force but not if it is built at the equator. Is that correct? Pardon my physics, but wouldn't the centripetal force be greatest at the equator? If it is, maybe all of the world's trash should be sent to the equator. Z http://www.geocities.com/partyofcitizens Citizens for the inherent dignity and worth of the human person Quoted words from UDHR/CAT snip previous what are the on about thread -- Darryl McMahon http://www.econogics.com/ It's your planet. If you won't look after it, who will? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
RE: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Is that correct? Nope. He is talking trash :) Pardon the pun but I couldn't resist Kirk --- John Mullan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And why does it have to be 60 miles high? In our praries, 60 square miles in nothing. Forget the 60 mile hieght. Imagine the methane / nat.gas that could be drawn off a waste dump that size. Yeah, yeah. OK. So the fuel used to transport all that stuff to a huge central dump might negate all that. But it's a wonderful thought! Ooops, just rambling thought. Sorry. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jeff Welter Sent: October 24, 2004 1:00 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
--- Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Pardon my physics, but wouldn't the centripetal force be greatest at the equator? I had to look it up. Which was a good thing cause it's one of those things I always questioned - what the difference between centripetal and centrifugal was. I had just never sat down and looked it up before. Whenever I thought of it I wasn't near a computer or dictionary. Centripetal is the pulling of something inward in a circular or elliptical path. So that would be the force of gravity pulling us towards the center of the earth. It should be the same no matter where on earth you are. (Assuming the whole earth was equidistant from the center, which I know isn't really true, but close enough.) Some people seem to claim that centrifugal isn't a real force cause it's really just inertia pushing outwards against the centripetal inwards force. But that centrifugal effect would be what is greatest at the equator because of the much higher angular velocity. Sorry for being nit-picky. I was just curious about it when I read your reply and figured I'd share with everyone else. Here's a few links: http://soconnell.web.wesleyan.edu/ees106/lecture_notes/lecture-tides/HTML%20Presentation%20folder/sld075.htm http://www.permanent.com/s-c-forc.htm http://www.regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys06/bcentrif/default.htm What I liked best was the explanation on that final link of centripetal meaning 'center seeking' in Latin, and centrifugal meaning 'center fleeing.' I won't have a problem confusing them in the future, I don't think. Thanks! Erik ___ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
Re: [Biofuel] Canadian Trash
Erik Lane [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Darryl McMahon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Pardon my physics, but wouldn't the centripetal force be greatest at the equator? I had to look it up. Which was a good thing cause it's one of those things I always questioned - what the difference between centripetal and centrifugal was. I had just never sat down and looked it up before. Whenever I thought of it I wasn't near a computer or dictionary. Centripetal is the pulling of something inward in a circular or elliptical path. So that would be the force of gravity pulling us towards the center of the earth. It should be the same no matter where on earth you are. (Assuming the whole earth was equidistant from the center, which I know isn't really true, but close enough.) Some people seem to claim that centrifugal isn't a real force cause it's really just inertia pushing outwards against the centripetal inwards force. But that centrifugal effect would be what is greatest at the equator because of the much higher angular velocity. Sorry for being nit-picky. I was just curious about it when I read your reply and figured I'd share with everyone else. Here's a few links: http://soconnell.web.wesleyan.edu/ees106/lecture_notes/lecture-tides/HTML%20Presenta tion%20folder/sld075.htm http://www.permanent.com/s-c-forc.htm http://www.regentsprep.org/Regents/physics/phys06/bcentrif/default.htm What I liked best was the explanation on that final link of centripetal meaning 'center seeking' in Latin, and centrifugal meaning 'center fleeing.' I won't have a problem confusing them in the future, I don't think. Thanks! Erik My high school physics teacher was one of those that taught there is no such thing as centrifugal force. The force is centripetal. Apparently I'm scarred for life. So, given that pieces of the planet are not being launched into space from the equator (or elsewhere), I am assuming that the centripetal force (gravity) is equivalent to the force of inertia at the earth's surface at the equator (centrifugal effect), as the equator is not being pulled in either. It is my understanding that the earth is not exactly round, but bulges a bit at the equator, presumably due to the inertial force resulting from the planet's rotation. So, to rephrase my earlier question. Wouldn't the inertial force caused by the earth's rotation be greatest at the equator, where the earth bulges out relative to the poles, and where the apparent rotational speed would be greatest? Woudn't that make the equator the worst place to build such a trash heap (if the inertial effect is a cause for concern in the first place?) (Original post for thread at http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/BIOFUEL/40104/) -- Darryl McMahon http://www.econogics.com/ It's your planet. If you won't look after it, who will? ___ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
