J.C.MacSwell

So...what were his new coordinates?

No, as Martin said "they would not appear". No one outside would see them being ripped apart.

They have to get rid of that excess power somewhere!

I don't see a problem other than it seems current interpretation of observations are not pointing in the "Crunch" direction. And this is a Crunch model, is it not? The only point where it seems to diverge from standard physics is at your critical point. (Some of your claims are somewhat vague or ill defined but what can you do in a post already stretching my casual reading limits) Other than that, if you claim it uses standard physics, what is there to test?

The trick is to have everone run to the nearest pole, North or South. Then, they can stop and admire their work.

So you can picture the Earth's spin clearly, but are struggling with the context of the words used to describe it?

Stoneage stuff. That was over 10 posts ago. If the kids are going to learn, they have to learn to play with guns.

Washer off a table maybe, but for a bullet and other experiments it can become a significant error. I've seen hydrodymamic test tanks long enough that the curvature of the Earth had to be taken into account, both for this reason and also for coriolis "force", even though at relatively low speeds.

I would say Niels Bohr was one of the most central figures as it developed.

Well. You did click submit reply.

Thanks DH That is what I thought. I think I now know what Janus meant by "brush the atmosphere" as well. I took it to mean matching the velocity of the atmosphere and ready for the parachute as suggested in the OP. Obviously that would take a lot of energy to accomplish.

Agree under your assumptions, however, if the slope is long enough the increased friction from the water will slow the water barrel down and the ice barrel wins!

Thanks DH, now I see what Janus meant. I was thinking a delta v around 2.5 km/s would be required to match the "speed" of the atmosphere at re-entry, getting it down around 0.5 km/sec and enabling a parachute to take over. This of course no longer being an orbit. So in the above orbit, what is the speed at pergee/re-entry? Isn't it even higher than the original 3,0747 km/sec?

A satellite in geostationary orbit is moving quite fast relative to the Earth, any point on it, or it's atmosphere. (it has to, in order to "keep up" while following a much longer path) The associated kinetic energy, along with the gravitational potential energy of it's height above the Earth, must be dealt with prior to any normal parachute being able to take over. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged This seems low?

I'm not sure what definition of mass would allow that. I think it would require photons to be considered to have mass. Perhaps you are thinking of momentum?

Any chance the tygon could be absorbing water and expanding? The glass of course would not do this and the geometry would stay consistent.

When I was a kid, grade 9, I had a teacher who claimed to be member of the Flat Earth Society. He had a number of arguments that made sense, in a superficial way. No one took him seriously, nor did he himself, but everyone enjoyed the debate, and there was no conflict with the particular course he was teaching, so I think he felt comfortable without letting on. He never admitted he knew better.

There are infinite points on a finite line, infinite lines on a finite plain, infinite plains in a finite volume, infinite volume in a finite 4 dimensional "space". etc

A genetic mutation can start from zero and multiply even if it has only negative effects, carried simply by chance and with support of all the positive genes. They are "all in the same boat" with each individual, the good genes and the bad, so there is a possibility for any gene to get established to some degree in a given population before it is really even tested.

It just seems to me it is more "string conjecture" at this point. In a scientific sense it really hasn't met the criteria that other scientific theories have, such as Relativity, Evolution, or even the Big Bang.

Why is String Theory considered a Theory in the scientific sense. Or is it? Seems premature as it has not been solved/confirmed.

Arguably they made you feel good because they were selfish.

Does this happen?

Everyone keep that in mind next time they wish to order a 3 egg cheese omelette.

Constrictions generally add drag to the flow, but at the constriction itself the molecules must speed up for the flow to stay at the same rate. If the cross sectional area gets smaller, and the flow rate is the same, the velocity must have increased. The Bernoulli effect is certainly true - as the velocity speeds up the pressure drops. It does this in a very specific way according to Bernoulli's equation, unless there are any significant shear effects, friction or turbulence, which must be accounted for.