I've heard this somewere

[Lillen]

I've heard that moving in space is a mechanical impossibility except using gravity... Were have i heard that?

 

[Resha Caner]

I've heard that moving in space is a mechanical impossibility except using gravity... Were have i heard that?

Maybe I don't understand your question, but it's not impossible if you have some mass that you can throw away. That's the whole idea behind rocket propulsion. Even if you didn't have "fuel", you might be able to use some other forces (such as electromagnetic) besides gravity.

But, if there is an absence of all force ... or if the forces are balanced ... and you have no way to change that, then you're not going to move. That's the whole point of Newton's First Law.

 

[oriel36]

Maybe I don't understand your question, but it's not impossible if you have some mass that you can throw away. That's the whole idea behind rocket propulsion. Even if you didn't have "fuel", you might be able to use some other forces (such as electromagnetic) besides gravity.

But, if there is an absence of all force ... or if the forces are balanced ... and you have no way to change that, then you're not going to move. That's the whole point of Newton's First Law.

Christians are going to have to get away from the idea that an Arian heretic like Newton was capable of achieving anything worthwhile in astronomy as Arians take an uninspired view of Christ and Christianity.

Few people would call you on this 'law' as they assume it came from Newton even though the analogy between cause and effect existed in a productive form decades before Isaac imposed his stupid view on it.The toxic strain of empiricism that Isaac introduced made it seem that cause and effect or the 'law' can equally be applied to celestial objects as it does to objects at a human level whereas the original empiricists were more practical when applying cause and effect as analogies.To explain this to a Christian who maybe interested,when Christ used parables to explain some spiritual attribute he required the reader to absorb the lesson while knowing the story is an analogy and the original empiricists once did maintain a healthy balance between analogy and actual cause and effect but this was lost when Newton came along .

Try the 1666 letter from Wallis to Boyle many years before this 'law' was dumped on Newton by his followers to make it appear it came from him -

The Correspondence of John Wallis ... - Google Books

Few ask what Newton actually did,they merely hear second hand accounts from people who don't have a clear idea themselves only that it gives them the freedom to denounce Christianity as superstition and empiricism as representative of a superior way of living.

 

[Resha Caner]

Few ask what Newton actually did,they merely hear second hand accounts from people who don't have a clear idea themselves only that it gives them the freedom to denounce Christianity as superstition and empiricism as representative of a superior way of living.

I've briefly glanced at your conversations with others, and I'm not sure what you think you're accomplishing. If you're willing to have a discussion free of invective, I'll respond.

 

[oriel36]

I've briefly glanced at your conversations with others, and I'm not sure what you think you're accomplishing. If you're willing to have a discussion free of invective, I'll respond.

Newton's first law indeed !.

I hear these stupid statements about how Isaac discovered the laws of gravity,what he actually did was misuse the observation of Kepler that attempts to equalize the orbital periods of planets with their distances from the Sun by making it appear that Kepler's work explains elliptical orbits.

Showing you a comparison between Kepler and Newton would be merely grandstanding on my part,the complex tangle of issues would only make sense to those willing to make the effort to get to the bottom of things and then start to rebuild the science of astronomy from almost scratch.

"The proportion existing between the periodic times of any two planets
is exactly the sesquiplicate proportion of the mean distances of the
orbits, or as generally given,the squares of the periodic times are
proportional to the cubes of the mean distances." Kepler

"That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun." Newton

 

[Resha Caner]

Well, I don't think you'll get anywhere by going after Newton. Rather, you would need to go after Einstein, or maybe Hawking. In other words, the latest theories.

But you didn't answer my question. Suppose you convinced everyone you were right about the orbits of planets. What would that accomplish?

 

[Jade Margery]

Not really sure what you're trying to say here.

Christians are going to have to get away from the idea that an Arian heretic like Newton was capable of achieving anything worthwhile in astronomy as Arians take an uninspired view of Christ and Christianity.

So since I'm an atheist, I can't be an astronomer? Since when did being a non-Arian christian become a requirement for successful mathematical and scientific investigation? All you're doing is insulting a dead guy, you're not proving him wrong.

Few people would call you on this 'law' as they assume it came from Newton even though the analogy between cause and effect existed in a productive form decades before Isaac imposed his stupid view on it.The toxic strain of empiricism that Isaac introduced made it seem that cause and effect or the 'law' can equally be applied to celestial objects as it does to objects at a human level whereas the original empiricists were more practical when applying cause and effect as analogies. To explain this to a Christian who maybe interested,when Christ used parables to explain some spiritual attribute he required the reader to absorb the lesson while knowing the story is an analogy and the original empiricists once did maintain a healthy balance between analogy and actual cause and effect but this was lost when Newton came along .

What do analogies have to do with science? I can't tell if you're actually trying to argue against Newton's First Law (that an object at rest shall remain at rest until acted upon by a force) or if you just have some kind of beef with Newton himself. For the record, lots of 'laws' of nature are named erroneously or were stolen from their original discoverers, and I know these kinds of feuds between their followers can last forever--just ask an electrical engineer if he thinks Tesla could have learned a thing or two from Edison if you want to see some real sparks fly--but I don't see what that has to do with the OP's question.

Try the 1666 letter from Wallis to Boyle many years before this 'law' was dumped on Newton by his followers to make it appear it came from him -

The Correspondence of John Wallis ... - Google Books

Few ask what Newton actually did,they merely hear second hand accounts from people who don't have a clear idea themselves only that it gives them the freedom to denounce Christianity as superstition and empiricism as representative of a superior way of living.

...what? Religion has nothing to do with this. What's your angle?

I'm with Resha on this one. I'd be happy to discuss this with you, but only if you can avoid clearly biased vitriol and childish language. Stupid, toxic, uninspired, and superior are all examples of phrasing that just make you sound like you're ranting wildly. If you actually have something worth saying, do so clearly and respectfully, and you're more likely to get a response along the same lines. Unless you're just a very old troll, in which case, troll away. Trolls gonna troll, I always say.


AS TO THE OP:

Gravity is certainly not the only way to move in space, but is -a-way to move. Once you break the atmosphere and no longer need to worry about high air friction slowing you down, a little bit of fuel goes a long way, but distances in space are so huge that even at that enviably low gas mileage, it's just not economical to carry enough fuel for a really long journey. What you can do though (and what several deep space probes have already done) is use the gravitational pull of a planet to 'slingshot' the craft, obtaining far greater momentum at a fraction of the fuel cost. Craft that have been sent into space this way are intended to leave the solar system entirely but keep sending back data until they are out of range. Due to the boost they are given by the slingshot effect, this is a one-way-trip, and we will never get them back again. This makes gravity not such a good idea for manned spacecraft... yet.

The space age is a-comin' though! Someday! I hope!

 

[sfs]

Unless you're just a very old troll. . .

Hey!

 

[Jade Margery]

Hey!

You needn't worry, I have great respect for old trolls. One of the people I love most in the world is a grumpy old troll who is constantly stirring things up and jerking people around.

 

[oriel36]

Not really sure what you're trying to say here.

So since I'm an atheist, I can't be an astronomer? Since when did being a non-Arian christian become a requirement for successful mathematical and scientific investigation? All you're doing is insulting a dead guy, you're not proving him wrong.

I shredded Newton's agenda 10 years ago and it is not really that hard to do,what is difficult is getting Christians to actually awaken to the consequences when an Arian agenda such as Newton's becomes dominant and past off as a supreme human achievement.Despite your deflection,it was Newton who tried to apply the 'experimental method' to astronomy and the distortions he introduced are not going to be understood by his followers,they will be understood by people who see genuine astronomy come alive.

Few here would ask what Newton was actually doing with these absolute/relative time ,space and motion definitions that relativists make a racket over and I assure readers that empiricists never understood the terms themselves as Newton intended and sent his followers chasing conceptual rainbows for 3 centuries.Fortunately the internet and modern imaging clears up most of the mess.

I see all these references to relativity here in the signatures of participants but relativity is really only a bigger can of worms to protect the 'scientific method' and deflect attention away from its foundations with Newton.It works great when there are no astronomers around and the wider population can be manipulated but when a genuine Christian astronomer shows up,the responses turn to reactions of trolls,personal insults and what have you.

Now back to the technical details of what went wrong and why it is catastrophic except for empiricists who make a living by promoting nonsensical and dangerous junk.

 

[postmortemjoe]

I see all these references to relativity here in the signatures of participants but relativity is really only a bigger can of worms to protect the 'scientific method' and deflect attention away from its foundations with Newton.It works great when there are no astronomers around and the wider population can be manipulated but when a genuine Christian astronomer shows up,the responses turn to reactions of trolls,personal insults and what have you.

Now back to the technical details of what went wrong and why it is catastrophic except for empiricists who make a living by promoting nonsensical and dangerous junk.

Yes, it's all a big conspiracy to hide "Christian science". You're right. What are your sources for all of this?

And what's the difference between a regular astronomer and a "genuine Christian astronomer"? To this day, neither one can seem to find god anywhere up there.

EDIT: I see some referring to Newton as an "Arian heretic". For the record, heretic comes from the Greek "heresis" which translates to "freethinker".

 

[oriel36]

You needn't worry, I have great respect for old trolls. One of the people I love most in the world is a grumpy old troll who is constantly stirring things up and jerking people around.

So,in a few posts I will present how Newton destroyed the main Christian astronomical achievement which shifted emphasis from a stationary Earth to a moving one and Christians can easily enjoy what Copernicus did,how Galileo and Kepler understood the line of reasoning he used while Newton didn't.The reader will understand what absolute/relative space and motion actually meant and eventually absolute/relative time.Readers actually have got a hint regarding the latter definition as empiricists have severe difficulties matching one day with one rotation of the Earth or an expanded version of 1461 rotations in 1461 days.

The following image is what got Galileo,Kepler and the few other astronomers excited as it is explained only one way -

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/1006/retrogrademars2010_tezel_annotated_big.jpg

For an astronomer it is the single greatest insight known and it was originally resolved 500 years ago by Copernicus.The fact that it will not be celebrated next year only supports the indication that empiricism is not astronomy nor is astronomy part of empiricism.

Christians can awaken to their astronomical heritage by matching the comments of Copernicus with the sequence of images of Mars above in a work he wrote 40 years before he dedicated his major 'De Revolutionibus' work in 1543.Especially the last two listed statements are relevant -

"6 -What appear to us as motions of the sun arise not from its motion but from the motion of the earth and our sphere, with which we revolve about the sun like any other planet. The earth has, then, more than one motion.

7 - The apparent retrograde and direct motion of the planets arises not from their motion but from the earth's. The motion of the earth alone, therefore, suffices to explain so many apparent inequalities in the heavens."Copernicus


http://dbanach.com/copernicus-commentarilous.htm

Christians should be proud of their heritage,the fact that they let it fall into the hands of useless anti-faith empiricists who couldn't interpret an observation to save their lives is a disgrace.

 

[roach]

I shredded Newton's agenda 10 years ago and it is not really that hard to do,what is difficult is getting Christians to actually awaken to the consequences when an Arian agenda such as Newton's becomes dominant and past off as a supreme human achievement.Despite your deflection,it was Newton who tried to apply the 'experimental method' to astronomy and the distortions he introduced are not going to be understood by his followers,they will be understood by people who see genuine astronomy come alive.

Few here would ask what Newton was actually doing with these absolute/relative time ,space and motion definitions that relativists make a racket over and I assure readers that empiricists never understood the terms themselves as Newton intended and sent his followers chasing conceptual rainbows for 3 centuries.Fortunately the internet and modern imaging clears up most of the mess.

I see all these references to relativity here in the signatures of participants but relativity is really only a bigger can of worms to protect the 'scientific method' and deflect attention away from its foundations with Newton.It works great when there are no astronomers around and the wider population can be manipulated but when a genuine Christian astronomer shows up,the responses turn to reactions of trolls,personal insults and what have you.

Now back to the technical details of what went wrong and why it is catastrophic except for empiricists who make a living by promoting nonsensical and dangerous junk.

What are you smoking? Seriously. I may know someone....

 

[LOCO]

I've briefly glanced at your conversations with others, and I'm not sure what you think you're accomplishing. If you're willing to have a discussion free of invective, I'll respond.

Reshna, just a heads up

Oriel is not seeking dialogue, only their monologue. You will find this poster likes to engage in unproductive arguments as St Paul warned against. I no longer respond to this poster precisely because of this.


Blessings