A Proper Gander At Propaganda

TRUTH TRANSCENDS COMMUNITY

PLEASE NOTE: This is not a conspiracy theory blog.

This website exists to serve as public resource for reverse imagineering world-wide culture, one that takes a critical look at the numerous artifacts and other types of relics that represent our shared collective international heritage. This blog is dedicated to examining social engineering and the use of tax funded governmental propaganda, and the mainstream media, as international human resource management tools.

About The AA Morris Proper Gander At Propaganda Podcast: Coming to you from one of the suburban metropolitan melting pots of international culture, outside of one of the multimedia capitals of the world, New York City, the Proper Gander at Propaganda podcast is meant to be a filter free look at our shared international cultural heritage, our shared social media infused and obsessed present, and what our children and their children could be looking forward to. This link will bring you to the podcast page of this website, with embedded squarespace audio: link: http://www.aamorris.net/podcast/

Thank you for taking the time to read this,

AA "The Proper Gander" Morris

Article Index Link  •  Tip Jar Link: For those who wish to support independent media.

Web addresses: www.aamorris.net or www.aamorris.com

Orbits Do Not Exist: Newton Wrong!

 

AA+Morris+The+Proper+Gander_Newton+Wrong.gif

PRESENTS: Newton Was Wrong: Orbits Do Not Exist

Demonstrable ballistic physics and real world centrifugal effect, show why Orbits are impossible.

Gravitational pull is always towards the center of the Earth and is an accelerated process. The imagined fixed velocity of imagined Newtonian cannonball and the fixed velocity of equally imagined orbiting space station are not accelerated processes and are demonstrably independent motions from the effect of gravitation's accelerated velocity, towards Earth's center. A bullet dropped from gun barrel height strikes the Earth's surface at the same time as if it were fired. The vertical and horizontal motions are demonstrably independent of each other. An object cannot magically fall around the Earth and when you look at this claim to scale you see why Newton's imagined cannonball and the ISS can only fall after traveling but a short distance. Even at some 17,100 mph, the imagined ISS or imagined cannonball could only fall after traveling but a short relative distance, (see animated gif below) around Earth's much larger circumference.


The International Space Station or Newton's Imagined Cannonball Can Do Nothing But Fall

In five minutes time the imagined projectile or imagined space station or any other imagined physical body can do nothing but fall some 248 or so miles towards the center of the Earth. In about five minutes of time an imagined projectile would only travel some 1400 miles or so, as it fell some 248 miles towards the Earth's center. 


Mathematical Equations Are Not Reality Altering Spells: Mathematical Models Are Claims Not Evidence

Newton's mathematical equations can't alter demonstrable reality. An equal sign is not some kind of magic spell. Math is a language and has all the same limitations that language does. Math can model real world phenomena and math can be used to model fantasies. In other words: math can be used to lie as easily as a sentence can. Mathematical proofs are not evidence. Math is a tool and not the language of God or Nature. Math is a human creation.


Real World Physics Demonstrates Why Newton's Admittedly Hypothesis-less Mathematical Musings Are Nothing But Nonsense :

NEWTON+FAILS.jpg

You can use the free fall calculator for yourself: http://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224835316

WITHIN A LITTLE OVER FIVE MINUTES THE SPACE STATION WOULD FALL TO THE GROUND

The ISS is imagined to be some 250 miles up in the sky in orbit around the Earth.

This does not take atmosphere into account. The point is, what goes up comes down and all real world science clearly demonstrates why Newton's orbital musings are nothing but fantasy.

All the supposed "Outer Space" footage is nothing but (obvious) Hollywood Film and CGI style fakery and visual illusion and nothing more.

Weight is the apparent pull or push towards Earth's center, with accelerated effect, if dropped. Objects and people cannot fall around the Earth. The Moon rises and sets, just like the Sun does, for example, and neither are like the proverbial falling apple. Sir Isaac Newton's musings are nonsense. This article explains why orbits are nothing but fantasy. Bodies cannot magically defy gravity and fall in ellipses and circles around other bodies. Centrifugal effect and all demonstrable ballistic physics show us why Newton's orbital musings are nothing but nonsense. Sir Isaac Newton admits to having no hypothesis for his orbital musings. None of this was ever real science.

Math is a tool. Math is also a language and has all the same limits that language does. Math can be used to model real world phenomena and math can be used to model gibberish. The works of people like Kepler, Newton and Einstein are examples of math being used to model gibberish.

Read on to learn why I make the statements I do.

 

(Please excuse the inevitable typo, auto correct is a mischievous little monkey, AA Morris)


 

When we plug the numbers in, we can see the imagined cannonball and do nothing but fall.

At some 17,000 mph or so, the imagined cannonball or equally imaginary International Space Station would only cover about 1/16th of the supposed 24,000 miles or so circumference of the Earth. The imagined satellite would only cover some 1,400 miles before falling some 250 miles towards the Earth's surface. The space station is supposed to be in orbit some 249 or so miles above our heads. The illustrations we are usually shown are not in proportion and end up leaving us with an incorrect impression. As we can see, when we use math that actually models real world ballistic physics, what we can actually demonstrate, the imagined cannonball would only fall. The imagined satellite would have to travel some 25,000 miles in one second to begin to emulate Newton's imagined orbits.

Please note that even at some 17,170 mph, in five minutes of time such a fantastically shot cannonball would only cover something like 20 degrees of the Earth's assumed circumference.

That is too slow of an angular change to have any relevant centrifugal effect. Try that with a bucket of water swung overhead.

*Please not too, that Sir Isaac Newtons original thought experiment requires a perfect vacuum.

17,170 mph = 286.167 miles per minute

When we plug in the supposed real world values we see that Newton's thoughtful cannonball can do nothing but fall towards center of mass like any other ballistic body, even sans atmosphere.

The imagined projectile never comes close to "falling around the curve", which is itself an absurd idea that contradicts the parts of Newton's work that make sense and are logically consistent. Gravitational attraction is supposed to be towards what we would consider the center of the Earth, or center of shared mass, if we want to be technical. A future article will get into the equal and opposite fallacy of Newtonian mechanics, for now we are simply examining the fallacious use of gravity. Newton needs gravity to act as a consistent mathematical value. He cannot model the accelerated effect of gravity or he would have no theory of orbits and no means by which he could establish the ridiculous claim that a falling apple is like the rising and setting Moon in any physical way. The force that draws apple with accelerated effect towards observable Earth surface and assumed Earth center is nothing like the force that causes the Moon to rise and set like every other celestial body, including the Sun.

static1.squarespace.jpg

image source: Pop Science Presents Spaced Out Science Fiction As Scientific Fact ...

Please consider how sub-atomically small we are relative to it all.

The Earth is a marble in a seven mile wide solar system model. Consider how much smaller even the largest artificial construct would be. Consider too how far away the Moon would really be relative to even Saturn V rocket size, and how for most of the voyage the Lunar bound spacecraft would be subjected to Earth's gravitational pull. A near endless supply of fuel would seem to be needed, supposing rockets would work in such an environment, which is probably not a wise thing to do in the first place.



Orbits are a mental mirage.

"The International Space Station travels in orbit around Earth at a speed of roughly 17,150 miles per hour (that's about 5 miles per second!). This means that the Space Station orbits Earth (and sees a sunrise) once every 92 minutes!"

source: How fast does the Space Station travel? | Cool Cosmos

The Earth's gravity is thought to be at some 90% strength where the International Space Station is imagined to orbit. The link below is to a calculator you can use to see for yourself that the ISS would fall towards Earth's center. By the time it's forward motion of some 5 miles a second, a fixed or constant ballistic based motion, has allowed it to cover a distance of some 1000 miles it would have fallen over 100 miles towards the center of the Earth. At 5 miles a second it would take 200 seconds for the imagined ISS to cover the distance of 1000 miles. You can use the calculator link below. Centrifuge type effects are not part of Sir Isaac Newton's reasoning, and he does admit his idea only exists as mathematical fiction as he himself has no hypothesis to put forth to explain how the falling apple is like the rising and setting Moon. Do the experiment, drop the apple and watch the rising and setting Moon and consider if one is really like the other. Newton did no real experiment, his was a fallaciously reasoned thought experiment that contradicts obvious demonstrable natural physical principles in favor of absurd mathematical modeling that represents nothing real at all.

see: Free fall (distance and velocity) Calculator - High accuracy calculation


WITHIN A LITTLE OVER FIVE MINUTES THE SPACE STATION WOULD FALL TO THE GROUND

In five minutes time the imagined projectile or imagined space station or any other imagined physical body can do nothing but fall some 248 or so miles towards the center of the Earth. In about five minutes of time an imagined projectile would only travel some 1400 miles or so, as it fell some 248 miles towards the Earth's center.

Newton+Wrong-1.gif

Demonstrating Newton Wrong!

The illustration above and demonstrable ballistics physics show the fallacy of Newtonian Orbital musings for what they are.

 

What Is Weightlessness?  source: The Royal Institution

Newton's Flaw

There is no real experiment that shows that there is any reason to take this cartoon and childish nonsense seriously despite all the peer reviewed parroting of university and Governmental promoted religious propaganda advertising myth to the contrary. There is no real underlying science here. Gravity would pull the toy rocket, which is not to scale, to the ground. There is a good reason why the adherents of this unconscious faith tend to avoid illustrating their beliefs to scale. That would be the obvious scientific thing to do, but most fail to notice this fact.

Newton+Wrong.gif

Orbits are Nonsense: The Solar System Model Fails – The Earth is Not Like the Falling Aple

Please keep in mind, Newton is comparing the falling apple to the rising and setting Moon, which rises and sets like the Sun does.

By extension, Sir Isaac was attempting to explain not only how the Moon orbited the Earth, but also how the Earth went around the Sun.

Demonstrable Ballistic Physics Proves Newton's Orbital Musings Wrong

The bullet takes the same amount of time to strike the ground whether just dropped or fired from gun barrel height.

Newton Wrong.jpg

"The vertical force acts perpendicular to the horizontal motion and will not affect it since perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other. Thus, the projectile travels with a constant horizontal velocity and a downward vertical acceleration."

image and quote source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory

 

Sir Isaac Newton says: “We said, in a mathematical way, to avoid all questions about nature or quality of this force..."

Gravitational acceleration is towards Earth's center. This motion is independent of any apparent momentum or inertial based horizontal motion. In the case of an imaged object in orbit traveling some 17.170 mph, that object would still be subjected to the effect we term "gravity" and would be pulled with accelerated effect towards Earth's center. Newton himself (wisely) admits that there is no hypothesis for his imagined orbital explanation that compares the falling apple to the rising and setting Moon. One can read the words of this supposed "genius" for oneself over at archive.org. The next article will get into all the details.

 

Newtonian Orbital Mechanics = Cartoon Thought Balloon Physics

Free falling in outer space - Matt J. Carlson  source: TED-Ed

Do you see the problem with the explanation offered in the cartoon video above?

"Up and down" really means (in this context) towards and away from Earth's center. Gravity's accelerated effect is always towards Earth's center. The International Space programs are all fake.

 

The Falling Apple Proves Newton Wrong

Orbits are a mental mirage.

"The International Space Station travels in orbit around Earth at a speed of roughly 17,150 miles per hour (that's about 5 miles per second!). This means that the Space Station orbits Earth (and sees a sunrise) once every 92 minutes!"

source: How fast does the Space Station travel? | Cool Cosmos

Newton+Wrong-1.gif

Orbits are a mental mirage.

The Earth's gravity is thought to be at some 90% strength where the International Space Station is imagined to orbit. The link below is to a calculator you can use to see for yourself that the ISS would fall towards Earth's center. By the time it's forward motion of some 5 miles a second, a fixed or constant ballistic based motion, has allowed it to cover a distance of some 1000 miles it would have fallen over 100 miles towards the center of the Earth. At 5 miles a second it would take 200 seconds for the imagined ISS to cover the distance of 1000 miles. You can use the calculator link below. Centrifuge type effects are not part of Sir Isaac Newton's reasoning, and he does admit his idea only exists as mathematical fiction as he himself has no hypothesis to put forth to explain how the falling apple is like the rising and setting Moon. Do the experiment, drop the apple and watch the rising and setting Moon and consider if one is really like the other. Newton did no real experiment, his was a fallaciously reasoned thought experiment that contradicts obvious demonstrable natural physical principles in favor of absurd mathematical modeling that represents nothing real at all.

see: Free fall (distance and velocity) Calculator - High accuracy calculation

(For comparison the Earth's circumference is estimated to be some 24,900 miles.)

 

The Orbital Problem:

The Illogic of Objects Falling Around The Earth or The Earth Falling Around The Sun Should Be Obvious
Yet we have been indoctrinated by cult thinking to truly believe the absurd makes sense.

"So what launch speed does a satellite need in order to orbit the earth? The answer emerges from a basic fact about the curvature of the earth. For every 8000 meters measured along the horizon of the earth, the earth's surface curves downward by approximately 5 meters. So if you were to look out horizontally along the horizon of the Earth for 8000 meters, you would observe that the Earth curves downwards below this straight-line path a distance of 5 meters. For a projectile to orbit the earth, it must travel horizontally a distance of 8000 meters for every 5 meters of vertical fall. It so happens that the vertical distance that a horizontally launched projectile would fall in its first second is approximately 5 meters (0.5*g*t2). For this reason, a projectile launched horizontally with a speed of about 8000 m/s will be capable of orbiting the earth in a circular path. This assumes that it is launched above the surface of the earth and encounters negligible atmospheric drag. As the projectile travels tangentially a distance of 8000 meters in 1 second, it will drop approximately 5 meters towards the earth. Yet, the projectile will remain the same distance above the earth due to the fact that the earth curves at the same rate that the projectile falls. If shot with a speed greater than 8000 m/s, it would orbit the earth in an elliptical path."

source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/circles/Lesson-4/Circular-Motion-Principles-for-Satellites

Spaced Out Programming

Please notice how in the above description the imagined projectile impossibly only and always drops 5 meters a second. This is obviously true only for the first second of time. There is a mental bait and switch that allows the fundamentalist to cling to absurd religious faith in Newtonian orbital nonsense. The imagined international outer space program is key ego boosting myth of (post) modern times.

The above description also ignores demonstrable ballistic physics which shows us that the accelerated pull of gravitational effect is an independent motion from the forward fixed velocity momentum of any real world projectile. Imagined projectiles can fly like Superman, of course.

Total Distances - After 1 second: 5 meters • After 2 seconds: 20 meters • After 3 seconds: 45 meters

The 1:4:9 2001: Space Odyssey Mnemonic
Gravity’s accelerated effect is in proportion to 1:4:9. The first second the distance fallen is 5 meters.
After two seconds this distance is now a total of 20 meters, the projectile would have gained an additional distance of 15 meters as a result of gravity’s accelerated effect. After the third second the total distance is now 45 meters. The projectile now has gained an additional 25 meters distance. The falling projectile only covers a distance of 5 meters after the first second.

Gravity is an accelerated effect.

A dropped objects gains speed as it falls. A dropped cannonball would strike the Earth's surface in the same amount of time whether fired from the cannon or dropped from cannon barrel height.

The horizontal and vertical motions are independent from each other. One cannot effect the other. Objects cannot fall in circles around each other. Falling is towards what is supposed to be the Earth's center, and falling is an accelerated velocity. The speed of a projectile like a cannonball or imagined space station is supposed to be set at a fixed velocity, This what real world, demonstrable physical principle reveals. We have no logical reason to buy into Newtonian orbital mechanics. The accelerated falling apple proves Newton wrong.

One Second = 5 meters distance fallen (total 5 meters)

Two Seconds = 15 meters distance fallen (total 20 meters)

Three Seconds = 25 meters distance fallen (total 45 meters)*

* all numbers are rounded up

link: Free fall (distance and velocity) Calculator - High accuracy calculation

Newton Wrong.jpg

image source: Logarithmic spiral - Wikipedia

“We said, in a mathematical way, to avoid all questions about nature or quality of this forcewhich we would not be understood to determine by any hypothesis; and therefore call it by the general name of a centripetal force, as it is a force which is directed towards some centre; and as it regards more particularly a body in that centre…”

Sir Isaac Newton

source: Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of ... - Internet Archive

The centripetal force to which Sir Isaac Newton refers is gravity's accelerated pull. The centripetal force to which Newton refers is the accelerated effect of gravitation. This cannot be balanced with the fixed velocity of an imaged projectile, but an equal sign works magic on most minds. Mathematical equation can be used to model gibberish as easily as verbal language can.


Circular Reasoning (Pun Intended) is the Order of the Day:

Please note the self applied apologetics that most of us unconsciously engage in as we have been conditioned to do. The obvious is overlooked in favor of the nonsensical and fantastic, which most minds find to be "inspiring", and this "inspiration" would seem to become a very real addiction to mentally poisonous speculative nonsense long sold as fact.

VB-blackboard.jpg

image source: http://www.enterprisemission.com/Von_Braun2.htm

"In an inertial frame, if there really were two equal-but-opposite forces on the satellite as von Braun drew them, then the total force on it would be zero.  So it wouldn't accelerate; it would move in a straight line with constant speed.  Since the orbiting satellite doesn't move in a straight line, neither von Braun's picture nor his explanation can be right."

"In the 1960s, Wernher von Braun put together a series of articles about space flight, some of which were published in Popular Science Monthly.  Eventually they were collected and made into the book Space Frontier, (1st ed., Holt, Rinehart and Winston).  It's a very readable book, and talks about how rockets work, and flight and safety in space.  In one of the articles, von Braun explains why a satellite is able to stay up while in Earth orbit. He begins the article by asking what would happen if we could throw an object horizontally, but at faster and faster speeds, such as in the picture shown here.  "Eventually", he writes, "the curvature of the downward-bent trajectory would become equal to the curvature of the earth."  This is almost well and good.  (It's not quite right to say that the curvatures of the orbit and Earth's surface are the same, even for circular motion, but this is a minor error compared with what comes next.)  The important point is that as the bullet moves faster and faster, a magical speed is reached where the curved Earth drops away from the bullet precisely as fast as the bullet falls to the ground; added to which, the direction of "down" keeps changing.  As a result, the bullet never gets any closer to the ground—it's in orbit.  This is actually a marvellous special feature of an inverse square force like gravity; it would not be guaranteed to happen if gravity were not inverse square.  In general, orbits are ellipses, and one such is drawn on the left.  A picture just like this was originally included by Sir Isaac Newton in his Principia of 1687.  After this fine start, von Braun then proceeds to muddy the water.  He says that as the bullet is shot at ever faster speeds, "its trajectory will be less deflected because the centrifugal force is increased by its higher speed, and more effectively counteracts the Earth's gravitational pull."  At this point physicists baulk.  Centrifugal force?  What has that got to do with satellite motion? Next, von Braun draws a picture of a satellite in Earth orbit.  Acting on the satellite are two forces: gravity, pulling the satellite toward Earth, and this centrifugal force, pushing the satellite away.  He writes "A circular orbit occurs whenever a small mass, travelling through the gravitational field of a big one, happens to have a speed at which the centrifugal force is precisely strong enough to balance the large body's gravitational pull."  And later, "If the balance between gravitational and centrifugal force is not perfect, [...] the small body will describe an elliptical path around the large one."

"What would Newton say?  He too would draw the forces acting on the satellite, and would then proceed to apply his "force = mass × acceleration"; but first, he'd want to choose an "inertial frame" within which to do this, since his laws only work in inertial frames.  An inertial frame is one in which, if we throw a ball, it moves away from us with constant velocity (i.e. constant speed in a straight line). Since this doesn't quite happen on Earth, the frame Newton would choose would be something more all-encompassing, outside of Earth.  One good approximation would be the frame of the Solar System, within which the Sun is at rest and Earth revolves fairly accurately in a circle around it, once a year.  An inertial frame like this is presumably what von Braun is using, because anything noninertial won't tie in too well with his picture of Earth plus satellite. In an inertial frame, if there really were two equal-but-opposite forces on the satellite as von Braun drew them, then the total force on it would be zero.  So it wouldn't accelerate; it would move in a straight line with constant speed.  Since the orbiting satellite doesn't move in a straight line, neither von Braun's picture nor his explanation can be right."

source: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/Centrifugal/centri.html

 

Sir Isaac Newton says: "...which we would not be understood to determine by any hypothesis..."

“We said, in a mathematical way, to avoid all questions about nature or quality of this forcewhich we would not be understood to determine by any hypothesis; and therefore call it by the general name of a centripetal force, as it is a force which is directed towards some centre; and as it regards more particularly a body in that centre…”

Sir Isaac Newton

source: Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of ... - Internet Archive

The centripetal force to which Sir Isaac Newton refers is gravity's accelerated pull. The centripetal force to which Newton refers is the accelerated effect of gravitation. This cannot be balanced with the fixed velocity of an imaged projectile, but an equal sign works magic on most minds. Mathematical equation can be used to model gibberish as easily as verbal language can.

Read Newton for yourself:

Newton+Wrong-1 (0.00.00.00).jpg

source : pages 512 and 513 Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of ... - Internet Archive  •  https://archive.org/details/newtonspmathema00newtrich

No Hypothesis, Illogically Premised, Mathematical Fantasy, "Scientific Theory"

"We said in a mathematical way, to avoid all questions about the nature or quality of this force which we would not be understood to determine by any hypothesis; and therefore call it by the general name of a centripetal force, as it is a force which is directed towards some centre; and as it regards more particularly a body in that centre, we call it circum-solar, circum-terrestrial, circum-jovial; and in like manner in respect of other celestial bodies."

quote source: Sir Isaac Newton page 512 Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of ... - Internet Archive  •  https://

The word "hypothesis" as Sir Isaac would have meant it:

"hypothesis (n.) 1590s, "a particular statement;" 1650s, "a proposition, assumed and taken for granted, used as a premise," from Middle French hypothese and directly from Late Latin hypothesis, from Greek hypothesis "base, groundwork, foundation," hence in extended use "basis of an argument, supposition," literally "a placing under," from hypo- "under" (see hypo-) + thesis "a placing, proposition" (from reduplicated form of PIE root *dhe- "to set, put"). A term in logic; narrower scientific sense is from 1640s."

source: hypothesis | Origin and meaning of hypothesis by Online Etymology ...

Heliocentric Blinded Mental Wizardry: Mathematically Confusing Models with Reality

Sir Isaac Newton, like Kepler and all the rest that have evolved from this early Sun obsessed proverbial Apple seed are mathematical magicians who confuse the real world with one of their own imaginings and this rorschach projected reality occults the true Natural World from view. The university and governmentally imposed educational system ends up crafting generations of minds that view the Natural World through allegorical Disney - Day Glow lava lamp like glasses. These minds simply filter out the obvious and Natural and demonstrable reality in favor of imaginative storytelling that  feeds into their ego identity based images of themselves. Augmented reality is nothing new. Humanity never needed virtual 3d world goggles to end up mentally trapped in imaginative Oz like Disney Worlds with little to no relation to reality. Religious thinking is contagious and takes many forms. Modern cosmology is superstitious nonsense backed up with equal helpings of peer pressure reviewed fallacious math.

The Sun obsessed faith of heliocentric minds has mutated into a multiverse of ad hoc cartoonish silliness sold as "science" to a mass public that can't tell "a green field from a cold steel rail".


The Falling Apple is Not Like The Observable Rising and Setting Moon or Sun

Gravity's accelerated effect pulls objects towards the center of the Earth. The Moon and Sun rise and set. The Solar System model is not real it is an idea and a God like point of view that does not really exist.

Orbits are not real. Orbits do not exist. The celestial phenomena rise and set. Rocks and apples can drop and roll, what they cannot do is fly around in magical halo like circles.

Orbital Hoax.jpg

Circular Reasoned Fallacy is Sold as Established Settled Science

The Solar System model is absurd. The Big Bang is another artifact that has no relation to reality. All of these are examples of imaginative ad hoc artifacts of a very real unconscious religion.

source: EXPOSING CORRUPT SCIENCE - Page 158 - Google Books Result

The Ptolemaic Model Best Describes The World We Witness & Experience

The celestial lights appear to circle the Earth. These lights are not like apples and rocks that fall towards Earth's center. It is as simple as that. All the hype about the ptolemaic model being complicated is nothing but advertising myth. The Ptolemaic model is the one that works best.

"Ptolemy's major contribution, however, was that his model could so accurately explain the motions of heavenly bodies, it became the model for understanding the ... As an indication of exactly how good the Ptolemaic model is, modern planetariums are built using gears and motors that essentially reproduce the Ptolemaic ..."

source: The Ptolemaic Model

 

1.430 Miles Relative To Earth's Supposed Curvature

The imagined speed of 17,170 mph of equally imagined International Space Station works out to about 286.16 miles a minute or about 1,430 miles in five minutes. In that amount of time the space station would fall some 248 or so miles towards the Earth's surface. Please keep in mind that the International Space Station is supposed to be some 249 or so miles up in the sky. The International Space Station is also supposed to be subjected to about 90% of Earth's gravitational influence.

"The International Space Station orbits Earth at an altitude between 200 and 250 miles. At that altitude, Earth's gravity is about 90 percent of what it is on the planet's surface"

source: https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/.../what-is-microgravity-58.html

Compare Newton's Fallacious Illustration To The Supposed Curvature of The Earth:

1,000 and 2,000 Miles Relative To Earth's Supposed Curvature

earth-curve-calcuation+2.jpg

Newton's imagined cannonball and equally imaginative space station can do nothing but fall after only covering a small portion of the Earth's curved surface.

The projectile would need to travel at around 24,000 miles a second for Newton's artistically rendered concept to even begin to make sense; if this were even possible, there would still be other problems. 

image source: image source: Automated Calculator for Earth Curvature

ORBITS DO NOT EXIST

Real world values reveal that the imagined cannonball or equally imagined International Space Station, with equally imagined fantastic velocity of some 17,170 mph, cannot even begin to approach "falling around the Earth's curve", as advertised. Falling would be towards supposed Earth's center, and cannot be demonstrated to be a circular phenomena, but NASA and other International space agencies, and the university system claim otherwise, so it must be so. Down can be defined as up with peer reviewed accuracy. Pavlovian parroting is what passes for "genius". Absurd so-called theories that put forth contradictory concepts that need seemingly eternal ad hoc patching, are sold as the work of "genius"; too many of us buy into this kind of obvious mythology with little to no critical thought. The official explanation for so-called "weightlessness" and orbits is absurd. It also lacks any basis in the real world. It's not like Newton (or anyone else) could do an actual experiment in the actual world to demonstrate orbits. The evidence we do have to examine, comes in the form of what appears to be obviously contrived and deceptive audio and visual based propaganda. Highly edited footage of what appears to be miniature rocket special effects is evidence only of some kind of public relations campaign. It's been about 50 years since the televised Moon Walk and none of us in the public can actually wait on lines to go to that mythic place they call "Outer Space". There is no reason to accept unreason as "scientific fact".

"...the right speed so the curve of its fall matches the curve of Earth..."

"An orbiting spacecraft moves at the right speed so the curve of its fall matches the curve of Earth. Because of this, the spacecraft keeps falling toward the ground but never hits it. As a result, they fall around the planet. The moon stays in orbit around Earth for this same reason. The moon also is falling around Earth."

source: https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is-microgravity-58.html

"The International Space Station travels in orbit around Earth at a speed of roughly 17,150 miles per hour (that's about 5 miles per second!). This means that the Space Station orbits Earth (and sees a sunrise) once every 92 minutes!"

source: How fast does the Space Station travel? | Cool Cosmos

static1.squarespace.jpg

Newton's imagined cannonball and equally imaginative space station can do nothing but fall after only covering a small portion of the Earth's curved surface.

The projectile would need to travel at around 25,000 miles a second for Newton's artistically rendered concept to even begin to make sense; if this were even possible, there would still be other problems. 

The Answer Lies With "E"

When we plug in the assumed value for the Earth's circumference and the assumed gravitational values and the rest, we can see that Newton's illustration, an early version of visual propaganda, is very misleading. The imagined cannonball would fall, not getting much further than the letter "E".

NEWTON'S ORBITAL CLAIM CAN ONLY FAIL

When we plug in the real numbers. When we use the actual value for Earth's supposed circumference, and we take gravity's accelerated effect into account, like we should, we see that Newton fibbed, to say the least. The orbital work of  this so-called "Genius" mathematician, who supposedly developed the mathematics that would evolve into calculus, does not live up to its mythic reputation.

At even 17,170 mph, the imagined cannonball would only travel a small portion of the Earth's surface before hitting the ground.

The cannonball cannot be mathematically shown to follow any kind of orbit, not without fudging. One quarter of the Earth's circumference is about 6,000 miles, the cannonball would fall to the Earth's surface in the amount of time it takes the cannonball to travel about 1400 miles, or a little less than 1/4 of 6000 miles. Newton's artwork is not to scale or in proportion. The mountain itself is absurdly titanic in size. We would not be able to actually see the tallest mountain. Newtonian orbits are not real and not based in anything truly demonstrable. Orbits are mathematical fantasy.

We are sub-atomic in size compared to the supposed curvature of the Earth, and so are our largest buildings and, so is even Mt. Everest.

The cannonball would not travel past the letter "E" in the artwork below.

static1.squarespace.jpg

V = Newton's Imagined 500 Mile High Mountain

By the way, the imagined mountain is not drawn to scale and is out of proportion. This lack of scale and proper perspective is another sign that this is not real science. This is an example of early mass produced, in this case print, visual propaganda designed to deceive, intended or not.

source: page 513 Newton's Principia : the mathematical principles of ... - Internet Archive  •  https://archive.org/details/newtonspmathema00newtrich

1512009520922+(0.00.00.00).jpg

image source: https://archive-media-1.nyafuu.org/bant/image/1512/00/1512009520922.jpg

Newton's Work is Self Contradictory

Some of it is based on demonstrable real world physics and some of it is based on illogically premised metaphysical musings backed with equally illogically premised mathematics.

CAnnon+Ball+Newton+Wrong.jpg

image source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Characteristics-of-a-Projectile-s-Trajectory

"The International Space Station travels in orbit around Earth at a speed of roughly 17,150 miles per hour (that's about 5 miles per second!). This means that the Space Station orbits Earth (and sees a sunrise) once every 92 minutes!"

source: How fast does the Space Station travel? | Cool Cosmos

Math can be used to model real world, demonstrable ballistic physics.

Real world ballistic physics prove Newton wrong.

bds.gif

 

"...perpendicular components of motion are independent of each other..."

"According to Newton's law of inertia, an object in motion in a horizontal direction would continue in its horizontal motion with the same horizontal speed and direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced horizontal force. The animation above shows a green sphere moving to the right at constant speed. The horizontal distance traveled in each second is a constant value. The red sphere undergoes a vertically accelerated motion which is typical of an object upon which only the force of gravity acts. If these two motions are combined - vertical free fall motion and constant horizontal motion - then the trajectory will be that of a parabola. An object which begins with an initial horizontal velocity and is acted upon only by the force of gravity will follow the path of the blue sphere. It will travel the same horizontal distance in each consecutive second but will fall vertically a greater distance in each consecutive second. The result is a parabolic path as shown in the animation above."

image and quote source: http://www.physicsclassroom.com/mmedia/vectors/bds.cfm  •  http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/vectors/Lesson-2/Initial-Velocity-Components

Newtonian Intellectual Bait and Switch

Some of Newton's so-called "laws" make sense and some do not. Inertia is demonstrable and makes sense. Orbital "theory" is not based on real world physical principle and does not make any sense at all. In fact, it defies the actual and immutable direction of accelerated gravitational effect. Nature does not need "laws" nor math. Laws and math are human constructs and should not be confused with Natural reality.

NEWTON+WRONG.jpg

"The Inertia of Planets and Comets"

"The Birth of A New Physics" Supplement 12 Page 222

"Newton's statement that the motion of planets and of comets illustrates the principle of inertia may seem puzzling, since their motion is curved. Newton expected his readers to understand that such motion had two components: a linear inertial motion along the tangent to the curve,and a continual accelerated motion "of falling" toward the center (centripetal) that keeps the motion along the curve rather than flying off on a tangent. Since the motions of the planets and comets has continued for a very long time (undiminished by friction), and is likely to continue for a long time, the tangential component of their orbital motion provides the best example of inertial motion that continues on and on without sensible diminution. Terrestrial motions, such as those of projectiles, are not good examples because such motions are slowed down by air friction and do not last very long since all projectiles eventually fall down to the ground."

image and quote source: "The Birth of a New Physics" By I. Bernard Cohen

Unexamined Presumptions & Circular Reasoning Apologetics Are Not Real Science

The above statement shows the circular reasoning of the university indoctrinated and peer reviewed, Pavlovian conditioned mind. As we can see for ourselves, when we use all real world values, and we ignore the atmosphere and assume perfect (magical) vacuum, like Newton does, we can demonstrate that Newton's cannonball thought experiment can do nothing but prove his orbital musings wrong. What Newton does is explicitly ignore all demonstrable real world physics in favor of his heliocentric preference, which has no basis in the real world. What Newton does is pick and choose when real world physical principle applies and when it does not. The a priori assumption that Newton "proves" is that the rising and setting celestial lights are like falling apples. He proves this without any hypothesis and with illogical mathematics and we are told this is "science". As we can read for ourselves, there is no experiment to support the concept of orbits. All real world physical experiments demonstrate why orbits cannot exist.

"Newtonian principles of celestial mechanics guide our artificial satellites, our space shuttles, and every spacecraft we launch to explore the vast reaches of our solar system."

source: "The Birth of A New Physics" Chapter 7 "The Grand Design – A New Physics"  Page 148

https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Birth_of_a_New_Physics.html?id=KYChaSaReN8C&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

Following Imagined Paths

In order for the cannonball to be fired in a straight line, as the red arrow (v) path indicates, from the 12 o'clock position, the cannon would actually have to be aimed up and would not be aimed at the horizon, as this model, the model of Sir Isaac, assumes a globe shaped Earth. The "v'" path would mean the cannonball would no longer have a perfectly perpendicular relationship with gravity. If imagined projectile were fired with enough velocity to actually follow the red arrow straight line path, the path itself would mean the projectile's fixed horizontal velocity would begin to have to fight gravitational pull itself. The further it went in the direction of the red "V" arrow, the more its speed would be reduced do to gravity itself.

NEWTON+WRONG-1.jpg

Gravity's accelerated effect would be towards assumed globe shaped Earth's center.

This would be like firing a cannon at an angle greater than 90 degrees. This would be like firing a cannon that is slightly pointed up at the sky. Gravity itself would begin to resist the cannonball and would slowly begin to minutely reduce its speed. As the cannonball progressed, the effect of gravity would only increase. Would this not seem to require an incredible amount of energy? Consider how sub-atomically small we are relative to it all. Consider how small even imagined huge rockets would be relative to the size of it all.

Sir Isaac's Orbital Musings Ignore All Demonstrable Reality

Gravity would always be a problem, yet people like Sir Isaac Newton can magically use illogically premised, gibberish math to bend reality to their will, or at least to confuse peer pressured, and Pavlovian conditioned, University indoctrinated minds to believe that hypothesis-less ideas backed with only erroneous equations are somehow an examples of legitimate physics. It is obvious that math is a tool and simply means counting. Math is also a language and like language it can be used to describe things that make sense and that we can demonstrate, and apparently too, like language, math can be used to perpetuate lies on industrial scale. Intentional or not, unquestioned ideas like orbits end up mutating into mind bending international, governmental, propaganda.

Mathematicians are not physicists.

static1.squarespace-1.jpg
 
AA Morris Rainbow.jpg

Big "G" little "g' and all the hot bull gas in between.

So much more to come. The next articles will further expose the Newtonian and Royal Society promoted "scientific" propaganda for the intellectually dishonest nonsense it is. Measuring gravity with anything but falling objects is not real science. Pendulum based experiments are proof of nothing but a long standing hoax. Pendulums make for terrible measuring instruments. The Cavendish Experiment and so many other foundational "proofs" are garbage, to be blunt about it.


A Huge Clue is Disney's Cartoonish Role In Selling Space To The World in The First Place

"Mars and Beyond" is an episode of Disneyland which aired on December 4, 1957. It was directed by Ward Kimball and narrated by Paul Frees. This episode discusses the possibility of life on other planets, especially Mars. It begins with an introduction of Walt Disney and his robot friend Garco, who provide a brief overview. It continues with an animated presentation about mankind seeking to understand the world in which he lives, first noticing patterns in the stars, and developing certain beliefs regarding the celestial bodies. Theories from scientists and philosophers are discussed, including Ptolemy's inaccurate, but formerly-accepted theories, as well as those of Copernicus. Life on other planets is considered, soon focusing on Mars. Ideas from science-fiction authors H.G. Wells and Edgar Rice Burroughs are brought to life with more colorful animation. Pulp science fiction comics of the time are parodied in the same straightforward tone as everything else (this segment features Kimball's comic tone and a cameo appearance by Donald Duck)."

source: Mars and Beyond - Wikipedia

Please notice the obvious apologetics. Nature needs neither math nor "Laws".

The Ptolemaic model is the one that best represents our reality. The only reason most think otherwise is due to the relentless propaganda that is all around us. It is very easy to overlook and to take all the Outer Space marketing material we are surrounded with, for granted. Hollywood and other mass media has long made liberal use of Outer Space as subject matter, Star Wars, Star Treks, Supermen from other planets and all the rest are very much part of the fabric of a world wide cult that most people are unconscious members of. We tend to learn the textbook, Disney like version of science and history that ignores reality and common sense in favor of national and international identity building propaganda. Outer Space has always been the best Platonic Shadow Cave and one long used to get people to look up at the sky and to overlook the obvious. The Natural World we actually experience is one that is motionless. Falling apples are not like the rising and setting Moon.

Disneyland - Mars and Beyond  source: Lukas Dziatkowski

So-Called "Scientific" Laws are Actually Mental Artifacts of Culture

The Newton, Kepler and Copernicus' Commandments

Natural principles are not the same thing as laws. Laws are artificial constructs. Nature is. Scientific "Laws" are religious relics. Church sold Sun centered faith gets replaced with a University indoctrinated religious faith. One superstitious, culture building paradigm replaces another.

Modern Big Banged Evolutionary "science" is no less a miraculous myth than Biblical Creation is. Both are religious faiths designed to reinforce allegiance to the State.