THE DERAILING ROOM

[brianv]

Given that both are similarly sized - if the "ISS" is visible from Earth then every football stadium in the UK (and there are hundreds) should be visible from the ISS correct? Greater London is barely a dot from 200 km, (like Hoi I also found the Google zoom) so where are the 20-30 Premier League London Stadiums?

The marker is at Manchester, please highlight Old Trafford Football Football Stadium, one of the biggest in Europe!



You will see in the bottom right that we are only at 200km!

[ObamaSimLaden]

At night with the lights on at the stadium only you could probably see the little dot...without other light pollution.

[Flabbergasted]

You will see in the bottom right that we are only at 200km!

Isn´t that a scale for distances on the surface? The illustration looks more like 3000 km altitude.

[brianv]

Given that both are similarly sized - if the "ISS" is visible from Earth then every football stadium in the UK (and there are hundreds) should be visible from the ISS correct? Greater London is barely a dot from 200 km, (like Hoi I also found the Google zoom) so where are the 20-30 Premier League London Stadiums?

The marker is at Manchester, please highlight Old Trafford Football Football Stadium, one of the biggest in Europe!



You will see in the bottom right that we are only at 200km!

Why was this post moved to the derailing room? Is there something wrong with it?

*****
ADMIN NOTICE (simon): Well, Brian - sorry but that "we are only at 200 km" quote of yours is just silly : that 200km ruler is not an altitude indicator: it's just a scale they put on Google maps to measure the distance between any point on the map.

[brianv]

Well if that's the case it was an error, not silliness, on my part. I zoomed into 20m on the satellite view then zoomed out to 200 km.

Will somebody post the correct image from 200 km please?

[hoi.polloi]

Hey, brianv, I think that could be a very good visual point — pun intended. I'm on board. The problem for me is I don't have a system that can use Google Earth view. But I searched the issue, and I think this is how it's done if you want to give it a try:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhkIpJT_iIg

[brianv]

Hey, brianv, I think that could be a very good visual point — pun intended. I'm on board. The problem for me is I don't have a system that can use Google Earth view. But I searched the issue, and I think this is how it's done if you want to give it a try:


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhkIpJT_iIg

Sorry hoi, I'm not playing that video through my AdamA7Xs, audio is atrocious.

Yes I think someone had better because here is an image from NASA from 300 Km

Earth in daylight, from ISS in 2012. The U.S. Great Lakes shine in the sun.

You see that large boat going across Lake Ontario? No, but if it had a light on at night I'd see a little dot!

Well here's another taken from the ISS itself.



And maybe Simon can see his house from here? If only he'd left his light on in the bathroom damn. I see too that AC Milan are at home tonight!!



I'm still waiting for someone else NOT ME to post the correct images from google satellite view from 200km and tell me where I'm in error. Thank you!

You open google, Windows Key + PrtScr on the image (screen will dim for a second), you will find the image in your Pictures folder. Trim it in Gimp if you like, upload to Imgur and post here!

[Altair]

Well, if the japanese are up to things like this one... It's just a matter of scaling.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ijxe9qghRAU

EDIT: In fact this was not an hologram, just a projection in transparnent screen. However, I did a bit more of research on this topic, and it seems that already in 1969 it was possible to project holograms at 12 km...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20072480



*********
ADMIN NOTICE (Simon): Dear Altair, I moved this post of yours to the Derailing Room - because what I wrote in this post of mine has nothing to do with holograms. It is about a wholly different laser technology which 'excites' molecules in the ionosphere in order to create "artificial stars".

[Flabbergasted]

To the God Squad as I annoyed someone talking about our ancient past earlier - I mention evolution sometimes because in this world of hoaxes and disconnect I think it's essential to work out what we are. A Catholic once told me that Catholic scientists mostly believe in evolution but just think that God started it all off. Who knows, that might be right, but it shows that the two are not incompatible.

I suppose I am the "God Squad" you refer to. I don´t mind the epithet, though somewhat pejorative, but, for the record, my objection to evolutionism (transformism) is not based on religion or the Bible, but on metaphysics, biology, statistics, observation and common sense (the first of these being the most important).

The fact that many Catholics admit transformism into their belief system does not prove the two are compatible but that Catholic teaching and identity have deteriorated.

Otherwise, I have read your posts with interest.

[hoi.polloi]

Patrix, I guess Isaac Newton would be even safer then, since he lived in the 17th century.

What you claim are posts to redeem CluesForum seem to be just piling up as a useless discussion that appears like you're incapable of listening and like you are the exact problem you claim to be defending us from. Thank you for taking a break from the thread.

When you come back to it, please take Kham's advice and post something in the thread besides your ambivalence and/or denial that people are making effective points. Something closer to research or theory. I think everyone would appreciate that.

[bongostaple]

by bongostaple on March 29th, 2018, 3:25 pm.
Your dismissal of air or ground making a total of three forces and not a pair, is fundamentally wrong. Anything fired out the exhaust of a rocket will be met with resistance from any kind of matter that's in that location, whether it's solid or fluid. . . . whatever the rocket emits is effectively pushing against what's just outside, and all matter takes some effort to move. Therefore your three things are just two things.

Certainly air and ground possess the ability to resist other bodies. I dismiss air or ground only as participating in the paired objects of rocket & exhaust and the forces emanating from them. All forces of material bodies are paired. Material bodies are incapable of emitting an unpaired force.

The fact that forces are inevitably paired is important to rocketry as to everything else: The rocket's rise, a force vector, must be paired with the only other one available-- the exhaust's departure.

"Therefore your three things are just two things."
I'm not sure I understand you. If you mean something different, please say what. I think you are saying that the rocket's exhaust is pushing against either ground or air, and this is Newton's 3d, this is the pair of opposing forces which is lifting the rocket.

Your insistence on pairs and showing three factors can't work, is illogical. The 'pair' of such in the case of a rocket launching vertically, is composed of the total of all forces acting downwards (one), and the total of all forces acting upwards (two).

Also, you dismiss the suggestion that ground or air beneath the rocket exhaust will provide an amount of resistance and therefore help the rocket to develop thrust - yet you acknowledge that drag is a factor in the atmosphere. Surely air causing drag up at the top of the rocket, by resisting displacement by the rocket, suggests that the air beneath the rocket will also resist displacement by the exhaust.

If you want the second part to be false, then you'll be needing to explain why NASA are mistaken when they state air drag is a factor on a rocket launch. It's both or neither. If you keep on repeating the '3 forces can't work' argument, then would you please explain how rocket weight (1), exhaust velocity (2), and aerodynamic drag (3) seem to work just fine for you?

[hoi.polloi]

Please note that I've requested Penelope take a break from this thread so if they choose not to respond (lest they sound like a broken record) or if they choose to respond (where the conversation can continue here in the derailing room) please don't feel slighted in the conversation, bongostaple. It's just so we don't have to keep filling the rocketry thread up with the same miscommunication.

[bongostaple]

No problem Hoi - I was about to let the discussion slip away into the past. With all the other occurrences of the same discussion

[Nathan Draco]

Hey Simon:



Anyways, let me join your forum if you don't mind. I do paranormal research, but I also research all the conspiracies out there...

"paranormal research"

Interesting...

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uaTsktI5qo

I hope this isn't the type of "research" you intend to pollute the forum with

[Suspended Belief]

I hope this isn't the type of "research" you intend to pollute the forum with

No, that was just an off-theme video I made for my channel. The paranormal dimension is just as real, and deceptive, as our dimension. You shouldn't criticize that which you don't understand, for it only makes you look stupid (skip to 1:47):


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udgEEI84Rds