Explain this: ISS orbits around 17,000mph, how do they do space walks?

[durangodawood]

Actually, no.

If you were to take a cup of liquid while on a train, plane, etc and dump it out it would merely fall straight down to the floor just like it would if you were standing still on the ground. You can also test this in a less messy way by using any small harmless object.

Get on the train (or airplane), hold this object out and let go of it. It will drop straight down to the floor and behave exactly like it would if you were on the ground.

It doesn't matter how fast or slow the vehicle is moving, everything on and in the vehicle has the same forward velocity until or unless an outside force acts on it. This includes the air inside the vehicle (but not the air outside of it!). If you were able to stand on the wing of an airplane and let go of an item, it would fly backwards (depending on how heavy it is and how much air can hit it) because the air outside the plane is not moving.

However, if you stand inside the airplane, and drop an item, it'll fall straight down because the air inside the plane is moving the same speed the plane itself is.

You can repeat these same experiments with a pickup truck: sit in the passenger seat and drop a paper airplane and watch it fall harmlessly to the floor. Then, stop the truck, get in the bed of the pickup and then drop the paper airplane while travelling 20+ MPH and watch the air catch and take the paper airplane away.

I apologize for making you write that long and well considered post.
I assumed my post was so asinine that nobody could take it seriously. But clearly I underestimated the effect of this place, where earnest opinion regularly transgresses the irony boundary .

 

[Xalith]

I apologize for making you write that long and well considered post.
I assumed my post was so asinine that nobody could take it seriously. But clearly I underestimated the effect of this place, where earnest opinion regularly transgresses the irony boundary .

Nah, it's fine, no need to apologize, lol. I'm oftentimes bored and explaining things is something to do lol.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

How do the actornauts do spacewalks when the ISS is orbiting around at 17,000mph? Can you do that with a moving vehicle?

In space "once in motion an object tends to stay in motion." That's true even on earth until friction slows you down.

http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/newtlaws/Lesson-1/Newton-s-First-Law

There is no atmosphere to slow you down - nor when you step out of the space shuttle do you place your feet on a surface that is not moving at your velocity. Even on earth if you step out of the car you do not stop immediately, but continue forward until friction with the earth stops your forward motion. In space there is no stationary surface beneath your feet creating friction when you step from the ISS. Jump out of the car in the air and you will continue your forward direction until friction from air begins to slow you down and gravity forces you to the ground. Only when you make contact with that stationary surface - compared to you - does your forward motion abruptly begin to slow. Physics.

The ISS is more than 15 years old, how come there are no maintenance activity of the thousands of seals, airlocks and such? The astronauts should be covered in grease rushing to keep up and do maintenance. Even Aircraft have more maintenance...hundreds and thousands of parts need to be replaced...how come the ISS doesn't (especially without an atomsphere)?

There have been maintenance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station_maintenance

But the only supply of air is brought up during each space shuttle flight - processed air - free from the bacteria that causes decay.

But people ignore electrical activity in space - so it's no surprise they ignore how oxygen is created.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2000/ast13nov_1/

"Most of the station's oxygen will come from a process called "electrolysis," which uses electricity from the ISS solar panels to split water into hydrogen gas and oxygen gas."

How come during the Apollo missions, the astronauts fall down constantly on rocks and are never bothered to check their suits? Depressurization of their suit would be a big problem. They act like nothing is wrong.

If they sprung a leak they'd know it - they wouldn't need to check as the oxygen began rushing out of the suit. You think those suits are made of paper?????

http://www.madehow.com/Volume-5/Spacesuit.html

How does the ISS produce oxygen? Yes it uses water. How does it produce water then? No system can produce 100% effiency so they are losing massive amounts of water. Where does it come from?

From those resupply mission that only get advertised when something goes wrong.

http://www.vox.com/2015/4/28/8508569/space-station-supply-food

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2000/ast02nov_1/
""We have plenty of water on the Space Station now," says Jim Reuter, leader of the ECLSS group at the Marshall Space Flight Center. "The Russian module Zarya is packed with contingency water containers (CWCs) that were carried over from the Space Shuttle during assembly missions earlier this year. They look like duffle bags and each one holds about 90 lbs."

"But it's expensive to ferry water from Earth," he added. "We have to recycle. There's already a Russian-built water processor in orbit that collects humidity from the air. Here at Marshall we're building a regenerative system that will be able to recycle almost every drop of water on the station and support a crew of seven with minimal resupplies.""

You think water disappears when you drink it? They recycle the water from urine as well.

I can barely get satellite TV sometimes. How come there is constant communications from the ISS especially when they are on the other side of the world?

Because communication with them is more important than you getting TV signals. Specific satellites are trained upon the ISS at all times during missions to insure communication. And line of sight is completely different in orbit to each satelite compared to the earth.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...d=0ahUKEwiegpHbo6TJAhUUXIgKHdogBUoQMwgwKBMwEw

 

[Justatruthseeker]

If you were to take a cup of liquid while on a train, plane, etc and dump it out it would merely fall straight down to the floor just like it would if you were standing still on the ground. You can also test this in a less messy way by using any small harmless object.

No it won't. If it fell straight down it would end up behind you since you are traveling in a forward direction. It continues to travel in a forward direction "with you" until it contacts the floor and ends up directly below the cup which in the time it takes for the water to reach the floor has continued in it's forward motion as well - distance dependent upon speed.

http://www.pa.msu.edu/sciencet/ask_st/122194.html

Go get a friend and do indeed test that theory - let me know the results.

 

[Wgw]

No it won't. If it fell straight down it would end up behind you since you are traveling in a forward direction. It continues to travel in a forward direction "with you" until it contacts the floor and ends up directly below the cup which in the time it takes for the water to reach the floor has continued in it's forward motion as well - distance dependent upon speed.

http://www.pa.msu.edu/sciencet/ask_st/122194.html

Go get a friend and do indeed test that theory - let me know the results.

Unless the vehicle was accelerating, in which case the cup would fall behind you; if it were decelerating, the cup would fall in front of you.

I should say that a lack of understanding of gravity, atmospheric drag, and acceleration vs. speed, is responsible for this thread.

 

[Xalith]

No it won't. If it fell straight down it would end up behind you since you are traveling in a forward direction. It continues to travel in a forward direction "with you" until it contacts the floor and ends up directly below the cup which in the time it takes for the water to reach the floor has continued in it's forward motion as well - distance dependent upon speed.

http://www.pa.msu.edu/sciencet/ask_st/122194.html

Go get a friend and do indeed test that theory - let me know the results.

When I say "Straight Down", I meant in relative to you and the floor, not "straight down" in terms of a spatial position.

It appears to be straight down, because it landed on the floor underneath the cup. The vehicle (and its floor), you and the cup are all travelling forward at a constant speed, therefore the water that falls out of the cup is also travelling that same constant speed and thus arrives on the floor directly underneath the cup, even though the Floor, You, and the Cup have all travelled in the same speed/distance while the water fell.

Therefore, to your eyes, it looks like it is falling "straight down" even though it isn't.

And again, I mentioned earlier in this thread another experiment with a cart and a marble cannon. Push the cart forward, get the cannon to fire a marble perpendicular to the level surface the cart is on, and observe as the marble falls back down into the cannon.

Stop the cart while the marble is in the air and observe the marble hitting the desk in front of the cart.

Same thing, only in opposite direction.

 

[Wgw]

When I say "Straight Down", I meant in relative to you and the floor, not "straight down" in terms of a spatial position.

It appears to be straight down, because it landed on the floor underneath the cup. The vehicle (and its floor), you and the cup are all travelling forward at a constant speed, therefore the water that falls out of the cup is also travelling that same constant speed and thus arrives on the floor directly underneath the cup, even though the Floor, You, and the Cup have all travelled in the same speed/distance while the water fell.

Therefore, to your eyes, it looks like it is falling "straight down" even though it isn't.

And again, I mentioned earlier in this thread another experiment with a cart and a marble cannon. Push the cart forward, get the cannon to fire a marble perpendicular to the level surface the cart is on, and observe as the marble falls back down into the cannon.

Stop the cart while the marble is in the air and observe the marble hitting the desk in front of the cart.

Same thing, only in opposite direction.

Although, that experiment will potentially not work depending on acceleration or wind resistance. If the cannon is accelerating, the marble might well miss; if the cannon is moving fast enough, in a non vacuum, particularly if it is powered, wind resistance will interfere. If you tried this experiment using a beach ball and a convertible sports car or a car with a moon roof, travelling at speed down a high way, it would very likely fail.

It's very important people understand that the ISS is not accelerating to any noticeable degree in any direction, and it is in a vacuum, devoid of atmospheric drag, so much of what acts upon objects here on the surface of the planet does not act upon it.

 

[SkyWriting]

How do the astronauts do spacewalks when the ISS is orbiting around at 17,000mph? Can you do that with a moving vehicle?

That's a very good point. Statistically, they've decided it's worth the risk. Though there is no air at that altitude, even a small particle of rock or metal would rip right through a space suit. It's a real danger at that high of a speed.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Unless the vehicle was accelerating, in which case the cup would fall behind you; if it were decelerating, the cup would fall in front of you.

I should say that a lack of understanding of gravity, atmospheric drag, and acceleration vs. speed, is responsible for this thread.

A lack of scientific knowledge altogether is responsible for this thread - not just specific topics within science. Just shows the true state of our education system.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Although, that experiment will potentially not work depending on acceleration or wind resistance. If the cannon is accelerating, the marble might well miss; if the cannon is moving fast enough, in a non vacuum, particularly if it is powered, wind resistance will interfere. If you tried this experiment using a beach ball and a convertible sports car or a car with a moon roof, travelling at speed down a high way, it would very likely fail.

It's very important people understand that the ISS is not accelerating to any noticeable degree in any direction, and it is in a vacuum, devoid of atmospheric drag, so much of what acts upon objects here on the surface of the planet does not act upon it.

So then in explaining science to someone that needed science explained to them - you chose to use an example that wasn't really an example at all? The water did NOT fall straight down, as it would if someone was standing on the earth. Technically even then it does not fall straight down since we all posses the velocity from the earth's rotation around it's axis. Even then it continues in it's forward direction.

Is that kinda like the scientific description describing cosmological redshift as just like sound waves moving in air being resisted by the air without the air? One of those same thing but different scenarios?

 

[Wgw]

So then in explaining science to someone that needed science explained to them - you chose to use an example that wasn't really an example at all? The water did NOT fall straight down, as it would if someone was standing on the earth. Technically even then it does not fall straight down since we all posses the velocity from the earth's rotation around it's axis. Even then it continues in it's forward direction.

Is that kinda like the scientific description describing cosmological redshift as just like sound waves moving in air being resisted by the air without the air? One of those same thing but different scenarios?

The example I commented on was not one I offered. I myself am not sure how useful such examples are until one accepts that conditions in orbit are different from those on the surface due to the relative lack of external friction, and microgravity.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

I'm oftentimes bored and explaining things is something to do lol.

This is the only reason I come on this site haha

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

How do the actornauts do spacewalks when the ISS is orbiting around at 17,000mph? Can you do that with a moving vehicle?

You've obviously never had a fly or a wasp or some other bug in your car with you while driving.

I once had a wasp fly into my car while on the highway when I had the window open. It landed on my leg and I had to use every muscle in my body to stay still and not careen off the road. Then it took off my leg and started buzzing wildly around the car and dive-bombing my head.

It sure would've been nice if that wasp had tried to take off from my leg and had gotten splattered onto the back seat at 100 km/hour. So sad when reality doesn't bend to our wishes.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

The example I commented on was not one I offered. I myself am not sure how useful such examples are until one accepts that conditions in orbit are different from those on the surface due to the relative lack of external friction, and microgravity.

Agreed, but it's getting people to understand there IS a difference. That micro-gravity has virtually no effect on charged particles.

That single particles do not act like clumps of matter - nor can their charge be determined by those clumps of matter, even on the moon, let alone in space.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/10apr_moondustinthewind/

""We've had some surprising results," says Abbas "We're finding that individual dust grains do not act the same as larger amounts of moon dust put together. Existing theories based on calculations of the charge of a large amount of moondust don't apply to the moondust at the single particle level."

That in the prevailing condition of micro-gravity (the condition existing everywhere in space but on the surface of planets) - gravity is not the dominating force responsible for most of what we observe or the force responsible for bringing those single particles together which then form clumps and obey different physics.

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/building-planets-in-plastic-bags/

But most people have a hard time giving up pre-conceived beliefs - being the surface of the earth is the only experience they are familiar with. They can not conceive of anything different. And it doesn't help when the claimed experts, which should know better - continue to treat those single particles like those clumps of matter. Despite the fact those single particles make up 99% of the universe.

 

[[serious]]

Agreed, but it's getting people to understand there IS a difference. That micro-gravity has virtually no effect on charged particles.

That single particles do not act like clumps of matter - nor can their charge be determined by those clumps of matter, even on the moon, let alone in space.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/10apr_moondustinthewind/

""We've had some surprising results," says Abbas "We're finding that individual dust grains do not act the same as larger amounts of moon dust put together. Existing theories based on calculations of the charge of a large amount of moondust don't apply to the moondust at the single particle level."

That in the prevailing condition of micro-gravity (the condition existing everywhere in space but on the surface of planets) - gravity is not the dominating force responsible for most of what we observe or the force responsible for bringing those single particles together which then form clumps and obey different physics.

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/building-planets-in-plastic-bags/

But most people have a hard time giving up pre-conceived beliefs - being the surface of the earth is the only experience they are familiar with. They can not conceive of anything different. And it doesn't help when the claimed experts, which should know better - continue to treat those single particles like those clumps of matter. Despite the fact those single particles make up 99% of the universe.

Coffee also has no effect on charged particles.

In fact, nothing in this thread seems relevant to charged particles.

I know, I know, every thread is an opportunity to say "fairy dust" and pitch your EU theories, but maybe you can let a few threads be about the topic of those threads.

 

[Wgw]

How did we get into quantum mechanics exactly? Why are we even discussing this given the apparent lack of understanding of even classical physics evinced herein?

 

[katerinah1947]

Coffee also has no effect on charged particles.

In fact, nothing in this thread seems relevant to charged particles.

I know, I know, every thread is an opportunity to say "fairy dust" and pitch your EU theories, but maybe you can let a few threads be about the topic of those threads.

Hi,

In Ion Implantation, stopping of ions proceeds by electronic stopping of unshielded protons in the nucleus, that we normally call valence. Of course that is assuming that I know everything in electronic stopping of ions in Single Crystal Silicon, and I do not. LSS, Lionhard Sharf Statistics had the range and standard deviations of such, so I just had to look those up, to know what was happening.

Coffee, actually does have an effect on charged particles, even if you could get it into a state, where it did not outgass/evaporate and ruin the needed mean free path to implant ions, normally called a vacuum.

On the other hand, this OP, is a flat earther, who even when shown the camera footages from the last two rocket lauches, showing the curved earth, he has not acknowledged seeing those. Those two launches were for Orion, and the Mars Atmospheric Satellite or Probe. Both clearly showed a globe earth, one even showing a midflight course correction using the thrust Nozzles.

Rockets steer by changing the angle of the thrust nozzles. That was required learning at the Space Museum, by the resident reitired Rocket Scientist there, for me.

Seeing how resistant, Morse86 is to even what he is shown on those rockets, I am not sure that he can unerstand, that what the space station is doing, is also what every one is doing velocity wise, thus anyone there will notice no velocity effects relative to those occuring in a space station, just like when flying at 35,000 feet at 500 mph or so, it feels exactly like being at home on earth, in terms of motion.

I for instance, if I don't look out the windows, cannot tell at all, that I am flying.

LOVE,