Did we actually land on the moon?

hom36rown

hom36rown

Well-Known Member
PoseidonsNet said:
by what miracle of maths do you arrive at this conclusion?
plz show me your calculations.
Click to expand...
ok, here.... I can prove objects do not fall 6x slower on the moon

the time it takes for an object to fall distance d is t=sqrt(2d/g)

ok, so now let plug in a random distance, lets say 2m, and see the time it takes to fall on earth and on the moon and compare the times

so on earth the time it would take an object to fall 2m would be sqrt(4/9.8 ) which comes out to about .64 seconds
the time it would take an object to fall the same distance on the moon would be sqrt(4/1.62) which comes out to be about 1.57 seconds

ok, now divide the 2 times and tell me what you come up with
 
Last edited:
We TaRdED

We TaRdED

Well-Known Member
hom36rown said:
so on earth the time it would take an object to fall 2m would be sqrt(4/9.8 ) which comes out to about .64 seconds
the time it would take an object to fall the same distance on the moon would be sqrt(4/1.62) which comes out to be about 1.57 seconds
Click to expand...


Its a difference of a factor of 2.453125 or ~2.5...

I thought PosNet knew exactly how gravity works? I thought you said I was right about my postulates PosNet. I knew something was fishy because there was no 6 X vids on youtube, so that threw red flags at me.

I was only speculating on my postulates for what the dynamics of the moon are. I have not done any mathematical research on gravity since starting this thread.

Thanks homegrown for doing some research. :mrgreen:

RON PAUL REVOLUTION

~PEACE~
 
PoseidonsNet

PoseidonsNet

Well-Known Member
coming soon
real maths in open source vb code




t=sqrt(2d/g)
Click to expand...
please quote the source for this formulae

its a simple iteration, why r u square rooting? (i'll get back 2u on this)

9.8 m.s^-2

means that after 1 sec the velocity is 9.8 m.s

1.6 m.s^-2

means that after 1 sec the velocity is ............

other gravity programs by poseidons.net
Orbit Game :-OG
Solar System Simulator :-OG2
Free Space Game Download for PC : Orion Space Racer
Download pc game : AMADA
Critical Cricket: screen shots of free cricket game ;-j (cricket balls with perfect gravity applied to them)

and there are a few more in the pipeline too
 
PoseidonsNet

PoseidonsNet

Well-Known Member
So that would put you around my age then, yes? I'm 48, and you? Don't you still live at home w/ your parents?
Click to expand...
y do u have to be such a condescending prick just bcos u have been proven totally wrong by my simple photos of 1940's film tech.

if you can take a fucking glorified quadbike to the moon, y not a little camera?
u would still have a few minutes of real footage, could sell for millions

where i live is of fuckall consequence to this argument. it shows u have to try and attack my person rather than the argument. it shows a losing battle, china.

i own my own property, which has lost much value mainly due to your american fucked up housing bubble

r u a sub-primer, china?
 
SocataSmoker

SocataSmoker

Well-Known Member
Dave, it's like arguing with a kid... he'll never understand and he'll never accept the facts. He's so set in his ways that anything else is just bullshit nazi'ism to him.
 
VTXDave

VTXDave

Well-Known Member
PoseidonsNet said:
y do u have to be such a condescending prick just bcos u have been proven totally wrong by my simple photos of 1940's film tech.

if you can take a fucking glorified quadbike to the moon, y not a little camera?
u would still have a few minutes of real footage, could sell for millions

where i live is of fuckall consequence to this argument. it shows u have to try and attack my person rather than the argument. it shows a losing battle, china.

i own my own property, which has lost much value mainly due to your american fucked up housing bubble

r u a sub-primer, china?
Click to expand...
So I'm a condescending prick because I asked your age and questioned the validity of it? You went on record stating that you were in school during the 60's. Do you live with your folks or not? I didn't refute the cheesy French camera and I believe I explained myself fully as they didn't bring rolls and rolls of film to the moon and opted to download in realtime. You still haven't refuted my argument of the Soviet exposing us for the hoax that we perpetrated on the world other than...."I don't speak Russian"....That's convenient. And you still haven't refuted the thousands of people who downloaded the link that had telemetry trained on the moon that very well could have exposed the fraud had it come from another source? Refute me...Show me the Pravda news article in 1969. You weren't alive in 1969 and you did not live in the political climate that I did. We were in a deathlock with the Soviets on the world stage for technical superiority and prestige. I'm assuming that you belive the Cuban Missile Crisis was also a hoax as well, yes? I lived it, you did not. How old are you? You're not a liar, are you?
 
Last edited:
PoseidonsNet

PoseidonsNet

Well-Known Member
following on from the way you did this math
i will use your method to prove your method is wrong

2m would be sqrt(4/9.8) which comes out to about .64 seconds
Click to expand...
so put your numbers back into the formula to see if the distance covered
returns the same amount.ie 2m.
g=m.s^-2
9.8=m.(.64)^2
therefore m =.4/9.8
which means m = 0.04

which is obviously wrong. as you already assumed m was 2m

now lets do the same for the moons gravity.

time it would take an object to fall the same distance on the moon would be sqrt(4/1.62) which comes out to be about 1.57
Click to expand...
1.6 = m * (1.57)^-2
m =1.6/(1.57)^2
m therefore must equal 1.54m
which is also obviously wrong.

therefore your method is wrong
 
PoseidonsNet

PoseidonsNet

Well-Known Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoseidonsNet
its a simple iteration, why r u square rooting? (i'll get back 2u on this)

9.8 m.s^-2

means that after 1 sec the velocity is 9.8 m.s

sorry, wrong again, it means after one second it is accelerating at 9.8m/s...the velocity is given by v=sqrt2gh

so much for your little game
__________________
Click to expand...

so u think that if i accelerate for 1 second @ 10m.s^2 then my velocity is not 10 metres per second ?

my velocity starts at 0
over one second it increases by 10

0+10 = 10

or what?

please show my humble error in this?

an acceleration of 10m.s^-2 means my velocity is increasing by 10m.s-1 every second

seeing as tho 1 second later i am now 10m.s-1 faster, how can it be any other way?
 
PoseidonsNet

PoseidonsNet

Well-Known Member
it means after one second it is accelerating at 9.8m/s
Click to expand...
nonono the whole time g is constant, not only after the first second!
it always accelerating at 9.8 !!! not only after the first second !!!
 
hom36rown

hom36rown

Well-Known Member
Did you see the link I gave you, the time it takes for an object to fall distnace d is
t=sqrt(2d/g), this is a given formula, the math you gave made no sense....
 
hom36rown

hom36rown

Well-Known Member
An initially-stationary object which is allowed to fall freely under gravity drops a distance which is proportional to the square of the elapsed time.

straight from wikipedia, you are wrong dude face it
 
PoseidonsNet

PoseidonsNet

Well-Known Member
straight from wikipedia, you are wrong dude face it
Click to expand...
with respect hom36, with much much respect (u r the only one who followed the math)
i appreciate the route you followed is correct

it is not i that disputes the formula
the math itself does

plz lets put the personals aside and deal with the math

ok?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top