Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

In the angular momentum equation, L = r x p, when the magnitude of the radius changes, which one of the remaining variables is correctly conserved ?


  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

#121 imatfaal

imatfaal

    lazy do-nothing mudslinger

  • Moderators
  • 7,691 posts
  • LocationSt James's Park

Posted 20 June 2017 - 01:53 PM

!

Moderator Note


Mandlbaur
 
Everyone in this thread realises what is wrong with your conception and why this leads to your fallacious assertions - except you.  You have been really quite rude to everyone who has tried to explain your misunderstanding.  Now you are insulting a member who has spent considerable time trying to re-engage your understanding of momentum and angular momentum.  Personally I will not put up with this level of ingratitude. 
 
I am moving this thread to speculations and will close it fairly promptly if you do not start to respond to counter-arguments - for your further guidance, your replies to counters should be more than denials and slights.  You are challenging a keystone of mechanics - and seem to be doing so based on a misunderstanding of a very basic equation and a general lack of knowledge of the field.  The thread would have remained open for as long as it took for these problems to be remedied - but if you are going to spurn help then your OP will be treated as base speculation.
 
Do not respond to this moderation within the thread. 

 

 

!

Moderator Note

Mandlbaur  - please reread the above quoted moderation and the rules of this forum before continuing to issue blanket refusals to engage with members argument; this vainglorous grandstanding is both insulting to the members trying to discuss the matter and hampering you from discovering your errors.

 

Do not respond to this moderation within the thread.


  • 0

A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.

- Alexander Pope

 

feel free to click the green arrow  ---->

 


#122 Bender

Bender

    Protist

  • Senior Members
  • 751 posts

Posted 20 June 2017 - 09:50 PM

1) Engineers do not use conservation of angular momentum when designing machines. If they did, their machines would not work properly. I have had this discussion on various occasions with engineers and none have been able to provide any evidence of anything which varies in radius that was designed using conservation of angular momentum. They use conservation of energy which predicts substantially different results.

The specific situation of a changing radius in a closed system indeed doesn't come up very often. One example is the de-spin device on satellites, which work great.

 

However, since you are making claims that go against what has been shown to work in every quantitative experiment ever, could you at least show how you would use your hypothesis to make calculations on a concrete example.

 

2) Astronomers do fail to predict the movements in which they are using conservation of angular momentum in their calculations and the radius is variable. I have had this discussion with various astronomers and they have failed to produce any data which confirms actual measurements of planetary movement against predictions. There are also various examples of planetary motion discrepancies.

We aren't talking about "examples of planetary motion discrepancies". According to you, all planetary motions should be completely and utterly wrong.

 

Can you please demonstrate how you would calculate the orbit of a planet or moon of your choice?


Edited by Bender, 20 June 2017 - 09:50 PM.

  • 0

#123 swansont

swansont

    Evil Liar (or so I'm told)

  • Moderators
  • 36,711 posts
  • LocationWashington DC region

Posted Today, 01:28 PM

 

2) Astronomers do fail to predict the movements in which they are using conservation of angular momentum in their calculations and the radius is variable. I have had this discussion with various astronomers and they have failed to produce any data which confirms actual measurements of planetary movement against predictions. There are also various examples of planetary motion discrepancies.

 

 

And yet the same physics has predicted the return of Halley's comet again and again. 

 

You need to detail these alleged discrepancies. A blanket accusation of failure of conservation of angular momentum doesn't wash. 


  • 0

Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum          To go to the fortress of ultimate darkness, click the up arrow ^

I am not a minimum-wage government shill.             Forget it, Jake — it's Crackpottown.

My SFN blog: Swans on Tea                                                           

 

 

                                                                                                                     

 

 


#124 Phi for All

Phi for All

    Chief Executive Offworlder

  • Moderators
  • 16,778 posts
  • LocationCO, USA

Posted Today, 03:05 PM

!

Moderator Note

Off-topic post about 3 Powers of the Defender hidden. Speculation is difficult enough for an OP without others posting their own pet concepts.


  • 0
"You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred!" -- Super Chicken
 

My biggest problem is the absolute ignorance of the others who post here.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users