Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirlI said your "calculations" don't make sense. Which they don't, and they keep varying, and you mix physical terms incorrectly, ending up with strange units.
You said all of that and didnt' say anything. If you aren't going to post up the difference in the amount of power it takes to move the earth with no orbit/gravity, and compare it to moving it with the earth out of orbit, then all you are doing is pretending to be smart. Now be smart and tell us how much force it would take to move the earth at a steady pace out of it's orbit. Or Hold it in orbit. Kthanksbye.
I've been ignoring angular mechanics because it's not properly factored into either of your "calculations" anyway where all you've implied is that they're moving the Earth against the gravitational attraction between the Earth and Sun. But since you're now bringing up angular velocity... albeit in a convoluted manner... you've stated two different scenarios.
One doesn't need to halt the Earth's orbit to move it out of orbit. The Earth's orbit is a balance between it's tangential velocity and the gravitational force between the Earth and the Sun. If one equalizes the acceleration between the Sun and Earth then it will fly off at a tangent to its orbit at 30,000 m/s. If one matches the angular velocity and equalizes the gravitational acceleration, varying the force exerted as it lessens the further the Earth gets then they can steadily move it.
Holding the Earth in orbit is a different thing. If one wants to halt the tangential velocity, say, over a time of one second then one would need to decelerate the mass at 30,000 m/s^2 and the force required to do so would be 1.8 x 10^29 N. If over 10 s 1.8 x 10^28 N, if over 100 s then 1.8 x 10^27 N and so forth. Once the tangential motion ceases the Earth would begin to fall centrally towards the Sun. Simultaneously balancing the gravitational force and decreasing the tangential velocity, I'm going to be lazy and just add vectors - So one would need to apply a constant force at a 45 degree angle to the tangential motion of 1.8 x 10^27 N over 100 seconds (ignoring that gravity decreases the larger the radius). A third of that would equate to roughly lifting a mass of ten Earths condensed into one Earth volume, at the surface of the Earth.
All of which has nothing to do with the gravitational attraction between the Sun and the Earth making the Earth hundreds of times more "weighty" because of the Sun being so much bigger than the Earth of having to pull the "weight of the gravity" of the Sun, nor accurately calculated. And none of which qualifies this statement:
Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirl
HAh. Wonder Woman towed a third of the Earth's Mass against the gravitation pull of the sun. Thus Actually pulling a third the weight of the gravity of the sun. It was like each of them were pulling hundreds of Earths. Now let's see Apollo Even begin to scratch that.
Again I have to ask, why is this topic still up. Prime is faster,more durabie and stronger then Thanos. Thanos is outclassed here pure and simple and the only defence i hear is this BS "mind rape"theory that has little to no basis considering Prime has never been shown to be affected by such a attack...otherwise MM would have owned him a long time ago. So for the last time Supes wins and Thanos loses...close thread.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I said your "calculations" don't make sense. Which they don't, and they keep varying, and you mix physical terms incorrectly, ending up with strange units.I've been ignoring angular mechanics because it's not properly factored into either of your "calculations" anyway where all you've implied is that they're moving the Earth against the gravitational attraction between the Earth and Sun. But since you're now bringing up angular velocity... albeit in a convoluted manner... you've stated two different scenarios.
One doesn't need to halt the Earth's orbit to move it out of orbit. The Earth's orbit is a balance between it's tangential velocity and the gravitational force between the Earth and the Sun. If one equalizes the acceleration between the Sun and Earth then it will fly off at a tangent to its orbit at 30,000 m/s. If one matches the angular velocity and equalizes the gravitational acceleration, varying the force exerted as it lessens the further the Earth gets then they can steadily move it.
Holding the Earth in orbit is a different thing. If one wants to halt the tangential velocity, say, over a time of one second then one would need to decelerate the mass at 30,000 m/s^2 and the force required to do so would be 1.8 x 10^29 N. If over 10 s 1.8 x 10^28 N, if over 100 s then 1.8 x 10^27 N and so forth. Once the tangential motion ceases the Earth would begin to fall centrally towards the Sun. Simultaneously balancing the gravitational force and decreasing the tangential velocity, I'm going to be lazy and just add vectors - So one would need to apply a constant force at a 45 degree angle to the tangential motion of 1.8 x 10^27 N over 100 seconds (ignoring that gravity decreases the larger the radius). A third of that would equate to roughly lifting a mass of ten Earths condensed into one Earth volume, at the surface of the Earth.
All of which has nothing to do with the gravitational attraction between the Sun and the Earth making the Earth hundreds of times more "weighty" because of the Sun being so much bigger than the Earth of having to pull the "weight of the gravity" of the Sun, nor accurately calculated. And none of which qualifies this statement:
Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirlSo you want to know the force distribution over the planet for some reason? I could probably do it with some time maybe, but only if you actually genuinely wanted to know and not if it's purely being spiteful. 😬 I occasionally find comic book "science" interesting but not to the extent that I intend to waste my time beyond my normal procrastination.
do me a favor now, calculate what it would take in constant pressure to be able to move the earth against an orbit, or out of orbit, or out of the suns pull, while not disturbing the atmosphere. Keep in mind that the moons gravitational pull also has something to do with the earth's orbit and how the sun's pull effects it. I know you can do it.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
So you want to know the force distribution over the planet for some reason? I could probably do it with some time maybe, but only if you actually genuinely wanted to know and not if it's purely being spiteful. 😬 I occasionally find comic book "science" interesting but not to the extent that I intend to waste my time beyond my normal procrastination.
Well shit. You are so good at it. Trust me, Your calculations will help me better argue for wondy. 🙂
Originally posted by The Great GalenWho says Prime is more durable than Thanos. Prove it.
Again I have to ask, why is this topic still up. Prime is faster,more durabie and stronger then Thanos. Thanos is outclassed here pure and simple and the only defence i hear is this BS "mind rape"theory that has little to no basis considering Prime has never been shown to be affected by such a attack...otherwise MM would have owned him a long time ago. So for the last time Supes wins and Thanos loses...close thread.
Thanos is four times the thinker as Prime. Thanos can throw down and can mindrape. I mean geez hes above top tier. This fight would be a good one but the inexperienced Prime would fall to Thanos.
Originally posted by quanchi112I think otherwise i actually give Prime the upper hand i doubt he is as durable as Thanos but I never seen prime knocked out or even bfred.
Who says Prime is more durable than Thanos. Prove it.Thanos is four times the thinker as Prime. Thanos can throw down and can mindrape. I mean geez hes above top tier. This fight would be a good one but the inexperienced Prime would fall to Thanos.
Originally posted by nvrbeenwthagirlI'm going to respectfully decline, as it requires me relearning a whole lot of undergrad I'd sooner forget and I'm not sure you're genuinely interested..... I might make a thread to discuss trying to figure out things like this Thor's wheel turning, the heaven's chariot thing, etc. speculatively in the general Comic Book forum.
Well shit. You are so good at it. Trust me, Your calculations will help me better argue for wondy. 🙂
The force wasn't evenly divided from what I recall of the scan anyway, so there'd be a gradient of pressure... it would be complex.
In any event, rather than saying that Wonder Woman or Superman in pulling the Earth away from the gravity of the sun, it's better to say in halting the orbit of the Earth and preventing its collapse towards the sun if you want to suggest the did more than the equivalent lifting of the mass of the Earth.
Although I recall it being more the former than the latter, I can't remember them having to restart the Earth's tangential velocity.
Oh and SMP likely wins.