{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by AstroSloth:
12/1/2016 5:48:54 AM
4
*sigh* ok, Krishna, I have one more query for you then I'll let you live on your little flat disc without me trying to make you prove yourself. [spoiler]with the exception of something I deem necessary to prove one way or the other that most others may not be able to do themselves [/spoiler][spoiler]I'll ask once you reply so I know I have your attention[/spoiler]
English
-
Edited by Krishnas Prophet: 12/1/2016 7:33:05 AMShoot. I'm going to try and shell out some larger responses to this thread tomorrow. Been busy with life. I'll do my best to respond...
-
Edited by AstroSloth: 12/3/2016 9:25:55 AMHow would you explain terminal velocity? If Earth accelerates up at a constant rate then different objects shouldn't have different terminal velocities [spoiler] Sorry, I've had some issues with my phone the past few days and just saw your reply [/spoiler]
-
No prob, I have been busy and have yet to respond to many others as well. Important to note is that earths constant upward motion is not the only force in action: also, all unsupported objects tend to fall through space unless acted upon by a force. Basically, things fall. There is no reason an unsupported object would not fall downward through space forever. Fortunately earth is caught up in the current of the Universal Accelerator which causes the constant upward motion you mentioned. Combine that with the obligate tendency of all unsupported object to fall through space and you have upward motion plus downward motion. When you drop an object it begins to accelerated at 9.8m/sec (the downward tendency), until it reaches terminal velocity (due to earth's atmosphere) or the earth moves upwards into it.
-
This contradicts your previous arguments. In the past, you've mentioned that Earth accelerates upward at 9.8m/s (the correct way to write this is m/s/s or m/s^2, btw). But here you say that objects also fall on their own. This would result in objects falling faster than the 9.8m/s^2 average that is tried and true and used today. That point aside, having Earth rise into an object wouldn't result in different objects having different terminal velocities because that would mean that different parts of the Earth are moving upward at different rates. Obviously, this would make life difficult. What you've cited as reasoning for terminal velocity also relies on gravity, excluding your upward acceleration [spoiler]again, sorry for the late reply. Going into finals and I've been super busy with classes and track[/spoiler]
