Orac , you are totally wrong and totally wrong.
heres the OP and there is NOTHING MENTIONED ABOUT A
REFERENCE FRAME OR A FRAMEWORK !!!!
This is just a series of thoughts leading to a “conclusion”. I would appreciate comments/criticism, please.
1. Velocity is a vector which includes speed and direction.
2. Acceleration is change in velocity.
3. Change of speed with constant direction = acceleration.
4. Change of direction with constant speed = acceleration.
5. A body orbiting at constant speed is constantly accelerating.
6. Gravity is not a force that holds an orbiting body as though it were on a string.
7. Gravity alters the geometry of spacetime such that it becomes curved.
8. The curve thus formed is a geodesic, and is defined as the most direct path from A to B in curved spacetime.
9. Thus, a geodesic is equivalent to a straight line in flat (non-curved) spacetime.
10. A body travelling at constant speed in a straight line is not accelerating.
11. It should be reasonable to argue that a body following a geodesic at constant speed is not accelerating.
12. It should, therefore, be reasonable to conclude that an orbiting body is not accelerating.
your answers ... all of them are wrong.
I answered correctly.
I am really curious how you would calculate a physical occurrence of a orbiting body using your non classical physics that you hold so dear.
but I think you said something about your non classical forms of physics not believing that a orbiting body accelerates
or something like that , and later you claim that newtons laws of motion implode ... haaaa
since your non classical physics cant even calculate something
as simple as the reasons why an orbiting body orbits then why
should people who look at the occurrences in the physical world using the tools of classical physics to calculate those
occurrences ever even have a need or desire to change the
tried and true tools that they use that have never failed them.
I honestly want to see your maths and an explanation of the
maths showing why a object orbits.
otherwise your just talking.
nothing more , nothing less.
