Corona Virus 2019-nCoV

I see both you and Sarkus trying to outdo each other with pedantic applications etc.
Again, let's be clear about what I have said....[1] The Moon rotates on its axis..FACT: The Moon orbits Earth in what can be called a synchronous orbit, hence why we see just slightly more then half of the Moon from Earth. FACT: The Earth orbits the Sun. FACT:
And finally I concluded that everything in the solar system is rotating, and that rotation is due to the angular momentum of the original accretion disk from whence the Sun, Planets, Asteroids etc formed.
https://www.space.com/24871-does-th...rth,Scientists call this synchronous rotation.
"Observers on Earth might notice that the moon essentially keeps the same side facing our planet as it passes through its orbit. This may lead to the question, does the moon rotate? The answer is yes, though it may seem contrary to what our eyes observe.

The 'dark' side of the moon

The moon orbits the Earth once every 27.322 days. It also takes approximately 27 days for the moon to rotate once on its axis. As a result, the moon does not seem to be spinning but appears to observers from Earth to be keeping almost perfectly still. Scientists call this synchronous rotation"

.
On the bucket thingy I said that the bucket is not rotating about its axis, obviously with relation to the bloke holding the string tied onto the bucket, and the bucket is orbiting whoever is holding the string....sheesh, what a fucking shemozzle!!!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not trying to outdo, just simply educate those that seem ignorant of the matter.

And I haven't disputed any of that.
However...

On this you are wrong. Plain and simple. It is no different to a satellite in geosynchronous orbit that always points at the same part on earth, but here the open part of the bucket always faces the same part of the person. It is no different.
If you mean relative to the person's nose, to a non-inertial frame of reference (which is definitely NOT an obvious thing to assume), then sure, the bucket is not rotating... but then your following statement is wrong:

Putting aside whether "orbit" is reserved for gravitational trajectories (this is a science forum, after all, and you should not see correcting on the scientific use of words as being pedantic), the only way for the bucket not to be rotating about its axis as it moves around a rotating person is, as per above, if you take a non-inertial frame of reference such as the person's nose. In such a case, the bucket would actually be considered stationary, and not "orbiting". I.e. it is always, from that reference point, a stationary distance away.
Now, if you imagine the person swinging the bucket with his arms while the person is actually stationary and not rotating, though, then yes, the bucket is "orbiting", but then the bucket does rotate about its axis with respect to the person.

You can't have it both ways. Unfortunately in reaching your conclusions about the bucket not rotating on its axis, and the bucket being in orbit, you have changed the frame of reference. It is no wonder you come across as being somewhat confused.

Aw, no need be so disparaging about your own post, to be honest. At least you do know that the moon rotates about its axis.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course they're different. While the shaping of one can shape the other, they are completely different phenomena. One is about gravitational trajectories, the other is about spin around its own axis. One object in orbit might rotate about its axis (e.g. the moon), and another might not (e.g. geosynchronous satellite). So yes, they are different. Just as milk is different to chocolate, or Ben is different to Jerry.

Indeed. Spin is about an axis. The sun spins / rotates about its axis, as does the Earth about its own axis, the moon, and all planetary bodies spin about their own axis (i'm not aware of any that don't).

If you're trying to tell me I am wrong for correcting you about what an orbit is, best not take a source that refers to an "object in space", where gravity is the key player.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hey, if you really need links to tell you that the moon rotates about its axis, then sure:
Let's start with one that is designed for children... so as not to overtax those grey cells of yours...
https://study.com/academy/lesson/movements-of-the-moon-lesson-for-kids-orbit-rotation.html


Then you may want to expand your understanding...

https://www.space.com/24871-does-the-moon-rotate.html
https://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/4709
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-it-just-a-coincidence/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbit_of_the_Moon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_locking
https://www.universetoday.com/48788/moon-rotation/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jillianscudder/2018/01/21/astroquizzical-spinny-moon/#40e1c1452be3
https://nineplanets.org/the-moon/
https://www.britannica.com/video/185629/role-gravity-Earth-hemisphere-planet-Moon
https://earthsky.org/space/video-full-rotation-of-the-moon

Let me know when your inability to Google something as basic as whether or not the moon rotates subsides.
In the meantime...

https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/why-do-we-always-see-the-same-side-of-the-moon
https://astronomy.com/magazine/ask-astro/2016/08/the-moons-rotation-rate
https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2010/07/13/2951472.htm
http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast161/Unit2/phases.html
https://www.space.fm/astronomy/earthmoonsun/moonrotationorbit.html
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2004/07/moon-facts/
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/moons-rotation

...
and this is just to the middle of page-3 on a Google search of "moon rotation".

Let me know what in all of that you're struggling with regard the moon's rotation.

 

I'm not trying to tell you anything, other then you obviously aren't sure about the difference between orbit and rotation, as per the highlight. I'll stick to the link I gave rather then your confused version.

I accept your correction about the bucket, but that was a separate issue that was raised.
Also Earth is spelt Earth, not aerth, since we are playing up to a online mates and being pedantic.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

[how's that three winkies!!!

 

Apologies - I have corrected my above post (actually prior to reading your reply, and probably as you were replying), as I realised I misread your first point. And I am very sure about the difference between orbit and rotation, as all my posts to that point should attest.

It's actually part of the same issue (i.e. the questioning by some as to whether the moon rotates). Other than the forces at work (centrifugal v. gravitational) the issue is the same.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Seriously, I don't consider correcting what an "orbit" is to be pedantic, not in a discussion of physics. But no worries.
Out of curiosity, though, where did I spell it "aerth", 'cos I can't find it, and I wouldn't want to be pedantic and call you out on misreading/typing your own claims of my mispelling. That would be far too ironic!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

p.s. if any mod wants to split this sidetrack (of trying to convince QQ that the moon really does rotate about its axis) into another thread, to preserve the integrity of the CoVid discussion, feel free. Cheers.

 

Apologies not in the least necessary, my problem is I'm adverse to uncalled "smart remarks" and I also know the differences between orbit and rotation.
This started with a post from QQ at 1799 which I answered at 1801 and snow balled on from there at post 1803 and 1804. Like I said the bucket was a side issue again raised by QQ.
The misspelling of Earth was at post 1807 thus.....

And yes I was being pedantic with that and obviously knew you were and are aware of the correct spelling.
By the same token this being a thread in the coronavirus, our current discussion is certainly off topic as you remarked and why I did not see any need for elaboration and simply saw the necessity of basic facts and correcting the errors and unecessary pedant posed by QQ.

 

Perhaps if you read the links you provided you will notice something...
especially :
https://teslauniverse.com/nikola-tesla/articles/moons-rotation

From the foregoing it will be seen that in order to make one physical revolution on its axis the moon should have twice its present angular velocity, and then it would contain a quantity of stored energy as given in my above letter to the New York Tribune, on the assumption that the radius of gyration is 2/5 that of figure. This, of course, is uncertain, as the distribution of density in the interior is unknown. But from the character of motion of the satellite it may be concluded with certitude that it is devoid of momentum about its axis​

 

you don't need to convince me that it rotates. I agree that it is, but my question is about the reality of that rotation.
All I posted was:

That the question was worthy of deeper consideration.

 

Sure, Tesla's work on the matter is reasonably well known. I await you actually showing you understand it, though, rather than just recognising words you think support your position (and they don't, by the way. But I'll leave that to you to uncover the detail, now that you've found your reading glasses).

??? Do you often agree to things when at the same time questioning the reality of it? Most people in such a position would be honest and state that they don't know - or admit that they don't question the reality of it. One or the other. But to agree that it rotates, but to question the reality of it, smacks of rather dishonest thinking.
The reality is, though, that it rotates about its axis. End of. Are we finished here?

Only if you're ignorant of the fact that the reality is that it rotates about its axis. Otherwise it's like contemplating the chances of another horse winning the race, when the race has already been won and the winner determined. i.e. pointless.

 

Yes .. IT doesn't rotate on IT'S axis.
IT only appears to do so.

That is the reality that Tesla and others propose...
You have a situation where both answers are correct yet diametrically opposed unless you delve deeper into the physics of it.
Logic itself is not the truth. While something can be quite logically valid it can lead to terribly wrong conclusions.
Ask any one sentenced to jail for a crime they never committed.
Circumstantial evidence is thus considered rather weak.
But of course you would not understand ( I am not seeking agreement) that point as you are too busy attempting to support your vanity by ridiculing others... ( I already accept that like Trump, you can't help it and are under compulsion so don't fret ol'e Sarkus you can believe in your superiority for as long as you wish to)
It is ok if you blindly accept the mainstream view...but look around you and ask yourself whether that is a useful and successful position.

I have already acknowledged the need to do further research...unlike you... who seems to be content in believing a potential fallacy.

Just because a million flies eat shit all day doesn't mean it tastes good...

A key point to research, if I could be bothered (another thread), is that there appears to be no momentum around it's axis. If this is founded then

• IT can not be rotating in it's own right but is merely a logical illusion created by taking a Star based perspective.
• That the moon is locked into it's particular orbit by gravitational forces that compel it to continuously face the Earth as it orbits with out rotating on it's axis.

 

If the Moon was revolving around Earth but not rotating then we would see all of it over the course of a month. That's not the case.

By the way, circumstantial evidence in court is generally more accurate than eye witness accounts. Most cases are decided by circumstantial evidence.

 

Fact: The Moon rotates on its axis.
Fact: The Moon orbits the Earth in the same period as per one rotation.
Fact: That is why we see only slightly more then one side of the Moon...slightly more of course due to Lunar libration.
Fact: All planets and moons in our solar system rotate due to the fact that they formed from the accretion disk [along with the Sun] that was also rotating.

 

Let's also add that many moons are locked in synchronous rotation. Some that come to mind are the Pluto/Charon system, all four of the Galillean Satellites of Jupiter, and many of the moons of Saturn.

 

Correct. And of course we would also see all of the Moon over a period, if its orbital and rotational rates were not synchronised as they currently are.

 

The theory that explains it suggests that the initial rotation on axis, over many millions of years was reduced so much so that the same face will always face the planet, and thus tidally locked. As such it loses any ability to rotate on it's axis except by one full orbit.
This is quite plausible... yes? I am perfectly fine with that rational.
The question now though,
Is the tidally locked moon still rotating on it's axis or is it simply stuck orbiting in a non axial rotational manner? (Illusion vs reality)
If it has no momentum around it's axis due to tidal locking then how can it be claimed to be still rotating?

 

The future of the Earth is in a tidally locked relationship with the Moon, just as Pluto and Charon are now. They are still all rotating on their axis'
With regards to the Earth, [if we are still around as we need to consider the Sun in its giant red phase and the merging of M31 and the MW] a day will be equal to a lunar month, and only one side of the planet will ever see the Moon, just as we only see one side of the Moon at present.

 

And he was wrong. It does rotate on its axis.

No, that was the theory that he proposed, not the reality. Reality is what it is.

Which has been done. And Tesla was wrong.

Noone has said logic itself is the truth, so please don't raise strawmen.

More strawmen.

You can either educate yourself or you can continue to argue ad hominem. Your choice. As for my "superiority", you're the one that seems obsessed with it, QQ. Why is that?

The position that, in this case, is correct? You're asking me if that is a useful and successful position to take??

I believe the facts, including the fact that moon rotates about its axis.

Look, if you really want to dig deep into this, great, set up a thread, move all this over to it, and we can carry on. It's great that you're exploring the matter, but as ever you have taken someone's argument and run with it without fully understanding it, simply because it contains words that you think support your case.
But let me be quite clear: Tesla was wrong. Not entirely, though, and his argument paved the way for further understanding the reasons behind the moon's formation and rotation. But he was wrong: the moon really does spin on its axis. Tesla claimed that if the moon was suddenly freed of the Earth's gravity that it would fly off and not rotate at all: "If the gavitational string, as it were, would snap, the satellite would go off in a tangent without the slightest swerving or rotation, for there is no moment about the axis and, consequently, no tendency whatever to spinning motion".
He goes on to say:
"Let us suppose that this would occur at the instant when the moon is opposition. Then it would continue on its eliptical path around the sun, presenting to it steadily the face which was always exposed to the earth. If, on the other hand, the latter would disappear at the moment of conjunction, the moon would gradually swing around thru 180-degrees and, after a number of oscillarions, revolve, again with the same face to the sun."
- http://www.energyscienceforum.com/files/tesla/nikolatesla-themoonsrotation.pdf
He thus seemed to view the earth moon system in the same manner as paddoboy's bucket swinging, and in that case the bucket would not rotate if released. But with regard the moon he was also clearly thought that the face to the earth was due to gravity alone - that the face showing did so because it was denser than the far side - the same reason "Weebles wobble but they fall down" () - they always resolve to having the dense part at the bottom.
Tesla was wrong: if suddenly freed from the earth's gravity, the moon would continue to rotate.

Do the research, if only for your own benefit, QQ. Educate yourself. Learn that the moon really is spinning. It really does rotate about its own axis. Tesla's argument from 1919, while interesting and offers an alternative perspective, is wrong.
But if you're not interested in doing so, at least don't continue to double-down on it.

 

Gosh you are funny... you complain about me using an ad hominem... lol.
Your constant ridicule of what you believe are lesser minds is why.
and sure, I will stop posting about it here and consider running another thread...

 

You're more likely to give Covid 19 to your pet than your pet is to you? I don't konnw virology, but maybe it's a population density model.

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consu...ut-coronavirus-covid-19-and-your-pets[/quote]