Leaderboard

I found this but way over my head. https://space.stackexchange.com/questions/284/why-should-the-james-webb-space-telescope-stay-in-the-unstable-l2 The maths seems to be here, as mentioned at the end of the first link: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/286642/why-are-the-lagrangian-points-l-1-l-2-l-3-unstable

Lmao I messaged arturo. Guess what he says :- 'To be honest, I wrote all that to Claudio messori just because he is my friend. I like him, but I do not agree with his thinking '

Beecee, as soon as you get to 2022, tell us about it. I'm not taking any chances.

About the dialog between Claudio Messori and Arturo Tozzi? That they should get a room.

Yeah it seems that L1, L2, L3 are all saddle points: Very interesting. There's a part of it I can follow; other parts, like the stability conditions on the Hessian, which make sense to me but go over my head too. This is quite advanced Newtonian mechanics, and I don't think all of it can be safely done without computers.

BTW, if anyone is interested in where JW Telescope is, there is an online tracker available: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbLaunch/whereIsWebb.html

https://webb.nasa.gov/content/about/orbit.html Some Technical Details: It is easy for an object (like a spacecraft) at one of these five points to stay in place relative to the other two bodies (e.g., the Sun and the Earth). In fact, L4 and L5 are stable in that objects there will orbit L4 and L5 with no assistance. Some small asteroids are known to be orbiting the Sun-Earth L4 and L5 points. However, L1, L2, and L3 are metastable so objects around these points slowly drift away into their own orbits around the Sun unless they maintain their positions, for example by using small periodic rocket thrust. This is why L1, L2, and L3 don't "collect" objects like L4 and L5 do. Webb At L2 If Webb is orbiting the Sun further out than Earth, shouldn't it take more than a year to orbit the Sun? Normally yes, but the balance of the combined gravitational pull of the Sun and the Earth at the L2 point means that Webb will keep up with the Earth as it goes around the Sun. The gravitational forces of the Sun and the Earth can nearly hold a spacecraft at this point, so that it takes relatively little rocket thrust to keep the spacecraft in orbit around L2. And Webb will orbit around L2, not sit stationary precisely at L2. Webb's orbit is represented in this screenshot from our deployment video (below), roughly to scale; it is actually similar in size to the Moon's orbit around the Earth! This orbit (which takes Webb about 6 months to complete once) keeps the telescope out of the shadows of both the Earth and Moon. Unlike Hubble, which goes in and out of Earth shadow every 90 minutes, Webb will have an unimpeded view that will allow science operations 24/7. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: In summing, L2 is actually only semi stable and still needs some rocket thrust to keep it in orbit around L2. https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/754/what-is-a-lagrange-point/ "L4 and L5 correspond to hilltops and L1, L2 and L3 correspond to saddles (i.e. points where the potential is curving up in one direction and down in the other). This suggests that satellites placed at the Lagrange points will have a tendency to wander off (try sitting a marble on top of a watermelon or on top of a real saddle and you get the idea). But when a satellite parked at L4 or L5 starts to roll off the hill it picks up speed. At this point the Coriolis force comes into play - the same force that causes hurricanes to spin up on the earth - and sends the satellite into a stable orbit around the Lagrange point".

I think we can all agree that for the purpose of reproduction of the species ( human, that is ), only two sexes are needed. One is not enough, and three ( or more ) are superfluous. That doesn't mean that there are not people who don't fully fit into the male, or female, grouping; but for the criteria of reproduction, there is no third ( or 4th, or 5th ) category to place them in. One has to ask, then, what is the purpose ( or agenda, if you will ) for having more than the male and female sex classifications. Please explain. Thank God he's not Mexican, or you'd imply he was lazy. Or Oriental and a bad driver. Or Italian and a mobster. Can you see what is wrong with that line of thinking, Stringy ? I had hoped this thread had died, because I really don't like having people I consider friends call each other 'dicks', or make thinly veiled implications of transphobia, homophobia or racism, so this will be my only post on this thread. But I would like an answer ( I will still read ) as to WHY a third sex is needed, and what is the PURPOSE of the differentiation. Is more 'separation' really desirable to more 'inclusion' ? Is this just another social engineering exercise ? Is it to make some people, who feel 'different', feel better about themselves ? What am I not seeing ?

What is curious about this news is that the wrong information that is was done by Russians seems to come from a Russian (dis)information news site: https://www.altusintel.com/public-yy752j/ But anyway, what is more interesting is why formaldehyde is thought so significant. This seems to be for two reasons. One is that it has a clear rotational spectrum, which astronomers can use for a number of purposes, e.g determining temperatures and velocities (via Doppler shift) of clouds of dust and gas. The other is that it can react with ammonia to produce amines and ultimately amino acids.

Nothing but words '''is not a logical and mathematical explanation to real reasoning :