cameron marical

hey, i want to be an aeronauticall engineer, and im just wondering if any one would be nice enough to type down any formulas i should know to help me out. i know theyll teach me it then, but i dont want to wait, im curios and i want to play with these formulas once i learn them. get a head start too. when i say formulas i should know, i mean things like newtons f=ma and equations showing how to, say, determine how much fuel would be needed to accelerate to x amount of speed. please, and thanks. should i have posted this on the engineering thing or the astronomy?

that makes sense to me. would it just be like a thicker than other parts of the station outer layer? or something else like some special metal or allow. id guess that its the first. but if radiation in space is just photons, wouldnt anything thats not see through stop it? like any rock or metal out there thats not really thin?

ok, that makes sense, mostly. what about us on earth? what speed are we travelling and what declares that? is it the earths speed? does the earth have a speed? or is it every single different person varies judging by how their own bodys{referance frames} speed through space? i know this isnt really testable because no one here goes any where near the speed of light, but just curios. i guess this is kind of a crappily worded queston, but i cant think of any other way to ask it. and if earth does have a speed and thats what we are judged by{if that makes sense} then if whe lived on a faster traveling planet would we age slower?

how big is ceres?i thought that eros is biggest. the discription i read stated it was like 5227 miles in diameter. also. how did the appolo block out the radiation?

well. the title is kind of my q. and, how does earth stop space radiation? also, hmm, what exactly is space radiation? and how do spacecraft block out that radiation?

this time dilation stuff is just so hard to wrap my head around. i get what the twins paradox says it would do, but i dont understand why it happens. i just dont see how something can age different if its moving at a different speed. please, any help? thanks.

ya, i do. i was just wondering because ive read about how on the iss{international space station} they purify used water and then turn that into the oxygen they breath. why dont they just keep that water as water and just recycle that by itself using these nano tubes their using for water recyclment here? and then have something that recycles the carbon monoxide we breath out to oxygen{like algae}? arent gases way easiser to store than liquids? you can compress gases and their not as heavy.

ive ben wondering how they can take hydrogen out of water. i know this is highschool science, but, im in high school so its ok. please, and thanks.

then whats with the twins paradox? i thought that the guy is .576 or whatever seconds younger than his twin? doesnt that mean that traveling faster than normal does have an aging effect on seperate moving referance frames? at least thats the impression i got from it.

hmm. well that sucks.

ive never really heard of the idea of an electric tractor, but i love it. as for you q about carbon credits, of course, you will drop in carbon output substantially compared to normal gas hog tractors.

ok, this may sound like a stupid question, but i dont know. say you efficently stopped time by going at the speed of light. well, would we still age? my first guess is no, no time, of course no age. but im not sure when i really think about it. having no time on a referance frame sounds like that referance frame shouldnt age, but would it be affected by things like other timeless referance frames? also, that brings up the question, what would it be like with no time? just like now?

i agree, with mathmaticall proof of this existance or at least a possibility of its esence along with maybe some tests i think you could come up with your own theory of on this. id beleive it, so long as it showed possible scientific evidence of its existance.

the universe isnt perfect for us, were perfect for the universe. we evolved to fit the universe, not the other way around. people say, oh the universe is perfect for us, everything is just the way it should be, well ya, to a degree, but weve also evolved into the universe, so it seems to us that the universe fits us, but instead, we fit the universe. i think its kind of a yin-yang thing going on here.just my thoughts. though i dont doubt the existence of a creator, i prefer the science side a little more, just because it seems a little more..... sciencey, i guess.and exciting.

wow, i actually have no more questions here, thanks guys. really.

i ment slowing down to speed up, not the vice versa. moving negatively, i geuss that is kind of badly worded, but that was all i could think of becuase like baby astronaut said, i cant really think of a way to move slower than a person whos just standing there, other than somehow moving "negatively", which i have no idea where to start there.

the faster you move through space the slower you move through time, ok, does this mean that the slower you move through space the faster you move through time? i know its hard to move as fast or remotely near the speed of light, but can we move something "negatively" somehow? so a referance points ages faster than another referance point moving at normal speeds?

ah, heres another. you have 2 things in space, they ram into each other, i know theres no sound in space because theirs nothing for it to travel through, but where would the sound energy go? would it just have more collision force in space becuase theres no sound, it instead is converted into more of the collision itselfs energy?

oh, cool. thanks guys. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedwait, what about black holes? i know no one really knows where the energy goes in those, but ill just ask you, {anyone who reads this and wants to reply} what do you think happens to the stuff that goes into them? didnt stephen hawking come up with the idea that it just gets converted to nothingness? or something along those lines?

im interested. please, details about this plant would be great. thanks.

what kind of energy exactly?

i see. well i wont ask were energy came from, but i will ask you one more question if you dont mind. 1 can energy be destroyed? like say you launched a rocket on its side, and the rocket is against alot of concrete, would the energy from the rocket just diminish since it has no where to go? or heres another. say you have a photon, beaming out in space, i know that a photon is energy in the form of light. {at least i think} so, dosnt that photons light/energy quantity die off after a while? p.s. thanks for explaining this all to me man.

ok, then that makes me wonder. what creates energy? is energy just a thing that gets infinitely recycled as other forms of itself? can you create energy?

if so, doesnt that mean that earths, or any planets gravitational pull will gradually diminish after a long period of time, as the energy is realeased as gravity? surely, gravity doesnt really upon meteors to make gravity. or does it all just get recycled?

hmm. so it seems that everything is always fueled off of something else. what about gravity? gravity creaties energy off of just the planets mass, so arent planets examples of how you can make energy from nothing. i know that it takes energy to create anything, naturally or artificially, but after a long period of time you could even make up for the energy it took to make a planet and create more energy out of nothing but the planets gravitational motion or bent space.