meteor showers

(copied from q&a since I got no response)

Q: "What about satellites? How do they orbit the Earth?"

A: Since sustained spaceflight is not possible, satellites can't orbit the Earth. The signals we supposedly receive from them are either broadcast from towers or any number of possible pseudolites.

How come we can see satellites in the sky?


Meteor showers are a result of the "star dust" that's left behind as a trail from a comet. Comets orbit the sun on the same path, like the planets do. So when the Earth passes into the path of where a comet has been, the meteor stream, it passes through all the debris left from the comet, and that's how we see meteor showers every year around the same dates.

Account for this in FE theory.

Also, meteors appear to originate from a radiant point in the sky, and the shower gets its name from where they originate from (the constellation nearest I guess, I only know of the Perseids). When you watch a meteor shower, you see the radiant point move across the sky because the earth is turning on its own axis. The radiant point also moves each night because of the earth orbiting the sun.

Explain this, too.

The Fe's would say that satellites are like the geostationary banana over texas (I am being totally serious there).  It's an issue that's been discussed at length.

I think they would say that the source of the comets move w/ the rest of the celestial objects as they move around above the flat earth.

Stardust?

YAY Sonic!

I think they would say that the source of the comets move w/ the rest of the celestial objects as they move around above the flat earth.

over 9000 hours in ms paint


Like that? (The sun etc moves upwards with the FE, amirite?)

So the meteor streams all remain static, while the FE collides with them.

And all the streams are in place at exact distances from each other in order for them to appear periodically in our sky. They also need to be at a sort of angle to account for the movement of their radiant point.

Yes/no?

pretty much.

But the origin of meteors is from comets.

We can see comets and we can see their tails. So we know they create a stream of debris, and they orbit around the sun. In the FE sky, that could work okay I guess. I mean just assume there are comets orbiting the sun above us while it moves around and stuff.

But. The comet would still leave debris. So there would be a constant "circle" left by loads of comets in the sky, that we could be colliding into all the time. They wouldn't emerge from the radiant point because they'd appear in the shape of the orbit and they wouldn't be periodical because there would be a constant supply of this debris.

Perhaps comets are trapped in the multiple system which the Sun, Moon, and Stars are in and spend most of their lives over the uncharted tundra beyond the antarctic rim, only making their appearance once every so many years when they slingshot around the North Pole.

Perhaps comets are trapped in the multiple system which the Sun, Moon, and Stars are in and spend most of their lives over the uncharted tundra beyond the Ice wall, only making their appearance once every so many years when they slingshot around the North Pole.

So their paths are an elliptical helix?
So does that mean the UA has influence though the mass of the Earth?

Perhaps comets are trapped in the multiple system which the Sun, Moon, and Stars are in and spend most of their lives over the uncharted tundra beyond the antarctic rim, only making their appearance once every so many years when they slingshot around the North Pole.

There are a number of meteor showers that are an annual event.  Here is a guide to some of the better know ones: http://stargazing.suite101.com/article.cfm/annual_meteor_showers

How could a meteor shower be an annual event when it's associated comet may have an orbit of many years?

So their paths are an elliptical helix?

Quite possibly.

So does that mean the UA has influence though the mass of the Earth?

It's unclear what keeps the sun, moon, stars, and celestial bodies from colliding with the earth. Some say that the Dark Energy can penetrate the earth, others believe that the bodies are kept up through an entirely different mechanism such as the Photoelectric Theory.

How could a meteor shower be an annual event when it's associated comet may have an orbit of many years?

It's possible that during its passing the comet has left residual meteorites caught in the multiple system above the North Pole. Not all meteorites collide with the earth. Every year these meteorites might be gravitationally knocked out of their orbit as the sun makes its yearly adjustments of its radius. The tiny meteorites intersect with the earth's atmosphere manifesting as a light show for all to see.

When the comet comes back to our local area years later it will replenish the number of meteorites strewn throughout the multiple system.

Quote

So their paths are an elliptical helix?

Quite possibly.

Quote

So does that mean the UA has influence though the mass of the Earth?

It's unclear what keeps the sun, moon, stars, and celestial bodies from colliding with the earth. Some say that the Dark Energy can penetrate the earth, others believe that the bodies are kept up through an entirely different mechanism such as the Photoelectric Theory.

Quote

How could a meteor shower be an annual event when it's associated comet may have an orbit of many years?

It's possible that during its passing the comet has left residual meteorites strewn throughout the multiple system above the North Pole. These meteorites may get gravitationally knocked out of their orbit as the sun makes its yearly adjustments of its radius. The tiny meteorites intersect with the earth's atmosphere manifesting as a light show for all to see.

When the comet comes back decades later it will replenish the number of meteorites strewn throughout the multiple system.

So Tom, by your own admission, FET has no explanation for meteor showers or what keeps the sun and moon from crashing into the earth.  Either that, or FET has too many explanations for meteor showers or what keeps the sun and moon from crashing into the earth and nobody knows which ones are correct.

Well Tom, which is it?

So Tom, by your own admission, FET has no explanation for meteor showers or what keeps the sun and moon from crashing into the earth.  Either that, or FET has too many explanations for meteor showers or what keeps the sun and moon from crashing into the earth and nobody knows which ones are correct.

Well Tom, which is it?

Meteor showers, the sun, and moon, and all cosmic bodies can only be studied through observation. Man can only guess at what keeps the sun suspended above our heads, or what causes light shows to appear every year. Ultimate truth will forever be beyond his grasp. Astronomy is a science in which no experimentation occurs. The observer can only look and hypothesize without certainty the fundamental nature of the universe.

Perhaps one day we will have our own personal space ships with perpetual motion engines and we could see first hand where comets go after they leave our sight. For now all we can do is wonder and hypothesize in a vein attempt to guess at the clockwork of our surroundings.

Or perhaps the Earth is round
/thread

Or perhaps the Earth is round
/thread

Even in the Round Earth model, it's impossible to prove whether the earth is rotating round the sun or the sun is rotating round the earth, or where comets go after they leave our sight. True knowledge in matters of astronomy is something of an uncertain mode, constantly changing, more in line with opinion than fact. The cosmos can only be observed an interpreted. Not studied. Not put through controlled experimentation. Astronomers look into the skies and see what they were taught to see.

Quote

So Tom, by your own admission, FET has no explanation for meteor showers or what keeps the sun and moon from crashing into the earth.  Either that, or FET has too many explanations for meteor showers or what keeps the sun and moon from crashing into the earth and nobody knows which ones are correct.

Well Tom, which is it?

Meteor showers, the sun, and moon, and all cosmic bodies can only be studied through observation. Man can only guess at what keeps the sun suspended above our heads, or what causes light shows to appear every year. Ultimate truth will forever be beyond his grasp. Astronomy is a science in which no experimentation occurs. The observer can only look and hypothesize without certainty the fundamental nature of the universe.

So you have no idea and are just making this stuff up.  Just like I figured.

Perhaps one day we will have our own personal space ships with perpetual motion engines and we could see first hand where comets go after they leave our sight. For now all we can do is wonder and hypothesize in a vein attempt to guess at the clockwork of our surroundings.

Or we could use some very large, very powerful telescopes.  Or we could use some very large, very powerful rockets to carry cameras with very powerful lenses into space and take some very pretty pictures for us (even it is just for a brief flight, rockets can still go plenty high). 

So you have no idea and are just making this stuff up.  Just like I figured.

Did you expect us to have true and ultimate knowledge of the universe and the ability to conduct controlled experiments on the cosmos? 

Or we could use some very large, very powerful telescopes.  Or we could use some very large, very powerful rockets to carry cameras with very powerful lenses into space and take some very pretty pictures for us (even it is just for a brief flight, rockets can still go plenty high)

If you are interested in the matter feel free to make a check out to the Flat Earth Society's research department.

Quote

So you have no idea and are just making this stuff up.  Just like I figured.

Did you expect us to have true and ultimate knowledge of the universe and the ability to conduct controlled experiments on the cosmos? 

Maybe not ultimate knowledge of the universe, but it seems that you should at least have a pretty good idea of the solar system works. 

If you are interested in the matter feel free to make a check out to the Flat Earth Society's research department.

Sure, I'll make the check out to "The Tom Bishop Space Flight Center".

Even in the Round Earth model, it's impossible to prove whether the earth is rotating round the sun or the sun is rotating round the earth, or where comets go after they leave our sight. True knowledge in matters of astronomy is something of an uncertain mode, constantly changing, more in line with opinion than fact. The cosmos can only be observed an interpreted. Not studied. Not put through controlled experimentation. Astronomers look into the skies and see what they were taught to see.

There is something beautiful and even profound in this, which I hope is grasped by those citizens of the earth that come across this site.

The gift round earth theory provided man was to subdue his arrogance (I am man, center of the universe- no more)

Man became just one planet like any other.
Then with Darwin, man became just another species.
Then with Freud, even the mind, the "I", became just another scientific theory.

Now, man has a new religion of science and certain knowledge that must be questioned to subdue his arrogance.  Facts which are always trusted and, in our imaginations, can describe even the inner workings of the entire universe with precision.

Quantum mechanics and relativity are the first chinks in that solidity.  Our knowledge can never be certain, even theoretically (heisenburg uncertainty, wave particle duality), and our frame of reference can never be absolute.

Flat earth theory is the final nail.  It proves that Yes, the science and society are capable of grand error.  Science cannot replace religion, for even this new god is flawed.

comets... slingshot around the North Pole.

No, that's not possible. The meteor stream is in movement too. This is why the shower appears to come from a point, because of our perspective. They look like they come out in a sort of circle. If the stream is travelling, as you suggest, "horizontally" above the FE, then there wouldn't be a radiant point, the shower would travel SIDEWAYS and we would see that the shower emerged from 1 point, however, all the emergences would travel in the same direction, not in the "outward circle" way which we observe.

How could a meteor shower be an annual event when it's associated comet may have an orbit of many years?

Read my first post. The meteor stream orbits around the sun too, in the path of where the comet goes. It's true that once the comet passes the area the earth collides with, there are stronger showers, but they don't need to be 'replenished' as there's always some debris left there.

Every year these meteorites might be gravitationally knocked out of their orbit as the sun makes its yearly adjustments of its radius

But then the showers wouldn't appear in the same place in the sky each year




So. The path of the comet in FE is an elliptical helix. Why does the debris from the comet collide with the earth, but the rest of the objects in the sky don't?


(sorry for double post)

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 13, 2008, 08:03:22 PM

Quote

So you have no idea and are just making this stuff up.  Just like I figured.

Did you expect us to have true and ultimate knowledge of the universe and the ability to conduct controlled experiments on the cosmos? 

Maybe not ultimate knowledge of the universe, but it seems that you should at least have a pretty good idea of the solar system works. 

Quote

If you are interested in the matter feel free to make a check out to the Flat Earth Society's research department.

Sure, I'll make the check out to "The Tom Bishop Space Flight Center".

You're better off making the cheque out to "The Gayer (not really a) Space Flight Centre"

Quote from: markjo on May 13, 2008, 08:07:06 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 13, 2008, 08:03:22 PM

If you are interested in the matter feel free to make a check out to the Flat Earth Society's research department.

Sure, I'll make the check out to "The Tom Bishop Space Flight Center".

You're better off making the cheque out to "The Gayer (not really a) Space Flight Centre"

Why, do you think that your "(not really a) space flight centre" could get better pictures of the flat earth from space than "Tom's (not really a) space flight center"?  I think that I will need detailed proposals from both "(not really a) space flight centers" so that I know where my funds are more likely to be properly (ab)used.

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on May 14, 2008, 07:10:43 AM

Quote from: markjo on May 13, 2008, 08:07:06 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 13, 2008, 08:03:22 PM

If you are interested in the matter feel free to make a check out to the Flat Earth Society's research department.

Sure, I'll make the check out to "The Tom Bishop Space Flight Center".

You're better off making the cheque out to "The Gayer (not really a) Space Flight Centre"

Why, do you think that your "(not really a) space flight centre" could get better pictures of the flat earth from space than "Tom's (not really a) space flight center"?  I think that I will need detailed proposals from both "(not really a) space flight centers" so that I know where my funds are more likely to be properly (ab)used.

If you send me the money I'll send you a very nice thank you card, that do?

I'd send you a bunch of flowers.

Quote from: markjo on May 14, 2008, 09:07:45 AM

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on May 14, 2008, 07:10:43 AM

Quote from: markjo on May 13, 2008, 08:07:06 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 13, 2008, 08:03:22 PM

If you are interested in the matter feel free to make a check out to the Flat Earth Society's research department.

Sure, I'll make the check out to "The Tom Bishop Space Flight Center".

You're better off making the cheque out to "The Gayer (not really a) Space Flight Centre"

Why, do you think that your "(not really a) space flight centre" could get better pictures of the flat earth from space than "Tom's (not really a) space flight center"?  I think that I will need detailed proposals from both "(not really a) space flight centers" so that I know where my funds are more likely to be properly (ab)used.

If you send me the money I'll send you a very nice thank you card, that do?

Woah!! Who said anything about money?    I can send you all the cheques you want.  You never said that that they had to be any good.

Stop talking shite 'cause I wanna know about FE meteor showers. x__x

NO U

I didn't realise I'd stumbled on to /b/.

NO U  Someone has to help out with Midnight's bit.

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on May 14, 2008, 11:40:35 AM

Quote from: markjo on May 14, 2008, 09:07:45 AM

Quote from: Professor Gaypenguin on May 14, 2008, 07:10:43 AM

Quote from: markjo on May 13, 2008, 08:07:06 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on May 13, 2008, 08:03:22 PM

If you are interested in the matter feel free to make a check out to the Flat Earth Society's research department.

Sure, I'll make the check out to "The Tom Bishop Space Flight Center".

You're better off making the cheque out to "The Gayer (not really a) Space Flight Centre"

Why, do you think that your "(not really a) space flight centre" could get better pictures of the flat earth from space than "Tom's (not really a) space flight center"?  I think that I will need detailed proposals from both "(not really a) space flight centers" so that I know where my funds are more likely to be properly (ab)used.

If you send me the money I'll send you a very nice thank you card, that do?

Woah!! Who said anything about money?    I can send you all the cheques you want.  You never said that that they had to be any good.

Damn. Screw you then!