Object in Motion tends to stay in Motion?

Tell me how this is possible on Round Earth?

Because air resistance should cause a bowling ball to roll west as the earth spins 1000 mph to the east, but Round-earth conspirators claim Gravity keeps the atmosphere moving perfectly with the Earth even though Winds blow in all directions.

If the atmosphere was somehow spinning with the earth, there would still be some air resistance from Directional winds.

Perhaps you don't understand the force that would be exerted at the base of the bowling ball with the ground moving a quarter-mile per second. That's a lot of movement. Now you claim the bowling ball is moving with the earth, but remember the ground is also curving downwards to the east at roughly 100 feet per minute.

The ground is moving a quarter-mile per second near the equator. Obviously, the earth is not moving in a straight line, but spinning, so why doesn't centrifugal force cause the bowling ball to roll at all?

If the atmosphere moves with the earth to the point where you can't feel the ground moving a quarter mile per second, then how on earth can you even sky dive in the first place? The skydiver cuts through the air like a hot knife through butter. It doesn't seem like that would be possible if the atmosphere moved perfectly with earth.

If the atmosphere moves perfectly with the earth then why does a balloon fly away? How does a balloon fly at all?

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Tell me how this is possible on Round Earth?

Because air resistance should cause a bowling ball to roll west as the earth spins 1000 mph to the east, but Round-earth conspirators claim Gravity keeps the atmosphere moving perfectly with the Earth even though Winds blow in all directions.

If the atmosphere was somehow spinning with the earth, there would still be some air resistance from Directional winds.

Perhaps you don't understand the force that would be exerted at the base of the bowling ball with the ground moving a quarter-mile per second. That's a lot of movement. Now you claim the bowling ball is moving with the earth, but remember the ground is also curving downwards to the east at roughly 100 feet per minute.

The ground is moving a quarter-mile per second near the equator. Obviously, the earth is not moving in a straight line, but spinning, so why doesn't centrifugal force cause the bowling ball to roll at all?

If the atmosphere moves with the earth to the point where you can't feel the ground moving a quarter mile per second, then how on earth can you even sky dive in the first place? The skydiver cuts through the air like a hot knife through butter. It doesn't seem like that would be possible if the atmosphere moved perfectly with earth.

If the atmosphere moves perfectly with the earth then why does a balloon fly away? How does a balloon fly at all?

How many threads are you going to start based on your same incorrect assumption?
I'll just ask the same questions. Does the liquid in a blender stand still or move when the blender is turned on?

The liquid moves, but it stays in the blender due to the Container. There is no "container" for the atmosphere. It should be spreading out further and further into space.

The liquid moves, but it stays in the blender due to the Container. There is no "container" for the atmosphere. It should be spreading out further and further into space.

No it shouldn't because gravity keeps it in place.

The liquid moves, but it stays in the blender due to the Container. There is no "container" for the atmosphere. It should be spreading out further and further into space.

Except for gravity, which keeps it close. But yes, no container, so no resistance from a container.  Makes it even easier for the atmosphere to rotate with the earth.

I would think that it stops going outwards because the force outwards scales with gravity² ( (G (6.67*10^-23*m_earth*m_{of a single air particle})/ distance²). At a certain distance from the earth, there isn't enough force pushing the gases outwards to counteract gravity

The Earth is really big, and we are really small in comparison.  The centrifugal force that you mentioned is actually why Earth is not a perfect sphere, but an oblate spheroid, which is a sphere that bolges at the equator, and also there is gravity holding us all down.

The thing about measuring rotation in miles per hour is that it's misleading.  So for goodness sake, STOP IT!  A less misleading way of measuring rotation is in revolutions per minute, in which case the Earth is rotating at 0.0007 RPM.  Doesn't sound so fast any more does it?

Tell me how this is possible on Round Earth?

Inertia is really that complicated is it?  Why else would you keep starting threads about the same basic thing?

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

Charlie septic, have a good think before you post rubbish

.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top

Before you call me a dickhead that be you, have a septic day.

iWitness why do you keep bringing up the same question again and again?

iWitness why do you keep bringing up the same question again and again?

Because he's boring?

Quote from: Cartesian on December 18, 2014, 01:05:17 AM

iWitness why do you keep bringing up the same question again and again?

Because he's boring?

I thought so as well

Quote from: Orifiel on December 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

I'm talking about Newtonian physics and why we don't feel it, not why the earth is round

Quote from: Cartesian on December 18, 2014, 01:05:17 AM

iWitness why do you keep bringing up the same question again and again?

Because he's boring?

He has a truly awful avatar too. I can think of nothing good to say about him.
BTW before a moderator smacks me down, this post is in one of the multiple threads Witness has started on the same topic, as others have pointed out, so if you hadn't failed at moderation by not stopping him, my comment here wouldn't exist. 

Quote from: Orifiel on December 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

The law of conservation of angular momentum states that the total rotational energy and net direction in an closed system always stays the same, and that is why the Earth's rotation is so stable.

Quote from: Orifiel on December 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

Umm...  You do realize that the earth's rotation does have a slight wobble to it, don't you?

Quote from: charles bloomington on December 17, 2014, 11:21:55 PM

Quote from: Orifiel on December 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

The law of conservation of angular momentum states that the total rotational energy and net direction in an closed system always stays the same, and that is why the Earth's rotation is so stable.

The earth is not a closed system. Your evolutionist friends depend on that to (try to) avoid breaking the second law of thermodynamics.

Quote from: mikeman7918 on December 18, 2014, 01:31:42 PM

Quote from: charles bloomington on December 17, 2014, 11:21:55 PM

Quote from: Orifiel on December 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

The law of conservation of angular momentum states that the total rotational energy and net direction in an closed system always stays the same, and that is why the Earth's rotation is so stable.

The earth is not a closed system. Your evolutionist friends depend on that to (try to) avoid breaking the second law of thermodynamics.

Whats evolution have to do with the second law of thermodynamics?

Quote from: legion on December 18, 2014, 02:09:45 PM

Quote from: mikeman7918 on December 18, 2014, 01:31:42 PM

Quote from: charles bloomington on December 17, 2014, 11:21:55 PM

Quote from: Orifiel on December 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

The law of conservation of angular momentum states that the total rotational energy and net direction in an closed system always stays the same, and that is why the Earth's rotation is so stable.

The earth is not a closed system. Your evolutionist friends depend on that to (try to) avoid breaking the second law of thermodynamics.

Whats evolution have to do with the second law of thermodynamics?

Look it up.

If you believe in space adventures, then the earth can't be a closed system. Once the barrier (escape velocity) is penetrated, the system opens.

Quote from: Lemmiwinks on December 18, 2014, 02:32:08 PM

Quote from: legion on December 18, 2014, 02:09:45 PM

Quote from: mikeman7918 on December 18, 2014, 01:31:42 PM

Quote from: charles bloomington on December 17, 2014, 11:21:55 PM

Quote from: Orifiel on December 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

The law of conservation of angular momentum states that the total rotational energy and net direction in an closed system always stays the same, and that is why the Earth's rotation is so stable.

The earth is not a closed system. Your evolutionist friends depend on that to (try to) avoid breaking the second law of thermodynamics.

Whats evolution have to do with the second law of thermodynamics?

Look it up.

If you believe in space adventures, then the earth can't be a closed system. Once the barrier (escape velocity) is penetrated, the system opens.

So, you're saying that if humans with our only source of light being candles, and our only source of heat fire and our only source of food being us having to hunt it down with spears carved from dead tree limbs were to ever climb into a brighter age and be able to launch a rocket into space... we would punch a hole in something and allow space into earth? Allow our energy out into space?

Quote from: legion on December 18, 2014, 02:41:01 PM

Quote from: Lemmiwinks on December 18, 2014, 02:32:08 PM

Quote from: legion on December 18, 2014, 02:09:45 PM

Quote from: mikeman7918 on December 18, 2014, 01:31:42 PM

Quote from: charles bloomington on December 17, 2014, 11:21:55 PM

Quote from: Orifiel on December 17, 2014, 07:38:16 PM

Since the earth moves at a constant speed, there is no acceleration, and because there is no acceleration the equation used to measure a physical force (F = ma) equals 0. This means that there no force acting upon an object at rest

Total rubbish the earth would have to be a perfect balanced sphere or it's momentum would be unstable & creating an additional undue force.

The law of conservation of angular momentum states that the total rotational energy and net direction in an closed system always stays the same, and that is why the Earth's rotation is so stable.

The earth is not a closed system. Your evolutionist friends depend on that to (try to) avoid breaking the second law of thermodynamics.

Whats evolution have to do with the second law of thermodynamics?

Look it up.

If you believe in space adventures, then the earth can't be a closed system. Once the barrier (escape velocity) is penetrated, the system opens.

So, you're saying that if humans with our only source of light being candles, and our only source of heat fire and our only source of food being us having to hunt it down with spears carved from dead tree limbs were to ever climb into a brighter age and be able to launch a rocket into space... we would punch a hole in something and allow space into earth? Allow our energy out into space?

No. I'm saying the earth is not a closed system.

The Earth is not a closed system but since it is spinning in a vacuum, the only way for it to significantly lose rotational energy is through radiation. Rotation of stable matter does not produce very much radiation at all.

The Earth is not a closed system but since it is spinning in a vacuum, the only way for it to significantly lose rotational energy is through radiation. Rotation of stable matter does not produce very much radiation at all.

Earth is slowing transferring some of the angular momentum of its rotation to the Moon because of tidal friction. This is causing the Earth's rotation so slow down and the Moon to speed up in its orbit, which causes it to move further away. This is a very slow process, though.

Since there's a much smaller component of tides caused by the Sun, this is probably affecting earth's orbit a little, also.

I suspect that interaction of the Earth's magnetic field with the solar wind and other magnetic fields and charged particles probably drags the Earth's rotation down a little, also, but don't know for sure or by how much. Maybe someone can look this up if they think it's an issue.

Essentially, though, earth and moon are a closed system for purposes of conservation of momentum since that's the biggest factor by far. For gross purposes, I think the Earth alone can be treated a closed system as far as conservation of momentum is concerned. Its rotation fluctuates very slightly and unpredictably due to motion of materials within and on it; otherwise it's steady day to day; the next factor is tidal braking already mentioned.

The biosphere, on the other hand, is powered by the Sun. Earth itself provides only a tiny amount of the energy required to sustain life here. All the rest comes from outside as an enormous amount of radiant energy from the Sun, so there's no way you can say life on earth is a closed system.

This may be where legion was getting confused where he brought the "not a closed system" and evolution thing into the discussion. Angular momentum and solar irradiation are totally different things.

The Earth is not a closed system but since it is spinning in a vacuum, the only way for it to significantly lose rotational energy is through radiation. Rotation of stable matter does not produce very much radiation at all.

Actually, angular momentum (rotation) is conserved and it cannot be changed in an enclosed system.  I think this paragraph from Wikipedia sums it up nicely:

Angular momentum is conserved in a system where there is no net external torque, and its conservation helps explain many diverse phenomena. For example, the increase in rotational speed of a spinning figure skater as the skater's arms are contracted is a consequence of conservation of angular momentum. The very high rotational rates of neutron stars can also be explained in terms of angular momentum conservation. Moreover, angular momentum conservation has numerous applications in physics and engineering (e.g., the gyrocompass).

Rotation does not escape as radiation, I don't know where you learned that from but it's not true.

Quote from: Rama Set on December 18, 2014, 04:19:15 PM

The Earth is not a closed system but since it is spinning in a vacuum, the only way for it to significantly lose rotational energy is through radiation. Rotation of stable matter does not produce very much radiation at all.

Actually, angular momentum (rotation) is conserved and it cannot be changed in an enclosed system.  I think this paragraph from Wikipedia sums it up nicely:

Quote

Angular momentum is conserved in a system where there is no net external torque, and its conservation helps explain many diverse phenomena. For example, the increase in rotational speed of a spinning figure skater as the skater's arms are contracted is a consequence of conservation of angular momentum. The very high rotational rates of neutron stars can also be explained in terms of angular momentum conservation. Moreover, angular momentum conservation has numerous applications in physics and engineering (e.g., the gyrocompass).

Rotation does not escape as radiation, I don't know where you learned that from but it's not true.

I am pretty sure the angular momentum of a spinning object can create gravitational waves. That is what I was referring to. Sorry if I was unclear.

Rotating electrons radiate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrotron_light_source

Quote from: Rama Set on December 18, 2014, 04:19:15 PM

The Earth is not a closed system but since it is spinning in a vacuum, the only way for it to significantly lose rotational energy is through radiation. Rotation of stable matter does not produce very much radiation at all.

Earth is slowing transferring some of the angular momentum of its rotation to the Moon because of tidal friction. This is causing the Earth's rotation so slow down and the Moon to speed up in its orbit, which causes it to move further away. This is a very slow process, though.

Since there's a much smaller component of tides caused by the Sun, this is probably affecting earth's orbit a little, also.

I suspect that interaction of the Earth's magnetic field with the solar wind and other magnetic fields and charged particles probably drags the Earth's rotation down a little, also, but don't know for sure or by how much. Maybe someone can look this up if they think it's an issue.

Essentially, though, earth and moon are a closed system for purposes of conservation of momentum since that's the biggest factor by far. For gross purposes, I think the Earth alone can be treated a closed system as far as conservation of momentum is concerned. Its rotation fluctuates very slightly and unpredictably due to motion of materials within and on it; otherwise it's steady day to day; the next factor is tidal braking already mentioned.

The biosphere, on the other hand, is powered by the Sun. Earth itself provides only a tiny amount of the energy required to sustain life here. All the rest comes from outside as an enormous amount of radiant energy from the Sun, so there's no way you can say life on earth is a closed system.

This may be where legion was getting confused where he brought the "not a closed system" and evolution thing into the discussion. Angular momentum and solar irradiation are totally different things.

Thank you for making this point much more cogently than I was capable of.

Essentially, though, earth and moon are a closed system for purposes of conservation of momentum since that's the biggest factor by far. For gross purposes, I think the Earth alone can be treated a closed system as far as conservation of momentum is concerned. Its rotation fluctuates very slightly and unpredictably due to motion of materials within and on it; otherwise it's steady day to day; the next factor is tidal braking already mentioned.

The biosphere, on the other hand, is powered by the Sun. Earth itself provides only a tiny amount of the energy required to sustain life here. All the rest comes from outside as an enormous amount of radiant energy from the Sun, so there's no way you can say life on earth is a closed system.

This may be where legion was getting confused where he brought the "not a closed system" and evolution thing into the discussion. Angular momentum and solar irradiation are totally different things.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_system:

"In nonrelativistic classical mechanics, a closed system is a physical system which doesn't exchange any matter with its surroundings, and isn't subject to any force whose source is external to the system. A closed system in classical mechanics would be considered an isolated system in thermodynamics."

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolated_system]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolated_system]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolated_system[/url]

"In physical science, an isolated system is either (1) a thermodynamic system which is completely enclosed by walls through which can pass neither matter nor energy, though they can move around inside it; or (2) a physical system so far removed from others that it does not interact with them, though it is subject to its own gravity. Usually an isolated system is free from effects of long-range external forces such as gravity. The walls of an isolated thermodynamic system are adiabatic, rigid, and impermeable to matter."

So, it seems you don't get to have earth a closed system for one argument, and open for the next.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum#Conservation

"In a closed system (one that does not exchange any matter with its surroundings and is not acted on by external forces) the total momentum is constant. This fact, known as the law of conservation of momentum, is implied by Newton's laws of motion."

I wasn't getting confused at all, was I? I think you got confused by claiming that the earth/moon relationship forms a closed system, but, the system is also open for energy from the sun.