james blunt
Well-Known Member
As the Earth gains more mass each year it gains gravitational strength , is the moon going to be pulled to Earth and inevitably enter the atmosphere becoming a catastrophic event and the end of human civilization ?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Earth isn’t gaining mass, it’s actually losing it on balance (Earth mass - Wikipedia). That scale of loss is so minimal compared to the overall mass of the Earth that it won’t have any significant impact on gravitational forces or anything else though. The expansion of the Sun will happen long before this has any notable impact.As the Earth gains more mass each year it gains gravitational strength , is the moon going to be pulled to Earth and inevitably enter the atmosphere becoming a catastrophic event and the end of human civilization ?
The opposite is happening.As the Earth gains more mass each year it gains gravitational strength , is the moon going to be pulled to Earth and inevitably enter the atmosphere becoming a catastrophic event and the end of human civilization ?
I thought of using Fox News, but that tends to make some here testy.Good source!
55 Tonnes Of Cosmic Dust Fall To Earth Every DayThe Earth isn’t gaining mass, it’s actually losing it on balance (Earth mass - Wikipedia). That scale of loss is so minimal compared to the overall mass of the Earth that it won’t have any significant impact on gravitational forces or anything else though. The expansion of the Sun will happen long before this has any notable impact.
They would say the opposite wouldn't they ?The moon is moving away from earth at a rate of around 4cm a year and earths orbit is slowing meaning motion v gravity will push it away faster in the future
I thought of using Fox News, but that tends to make some here testy.
That’s true but there are other ways mass is lost from the Earth too and the overall effect is loss, albeit a relatively minuscule one on a planetary scale;
That’s true but there are other ways mass is lost from the Earth too and the overall effect is loss, albeit a relatively minuscule one on a planetary scale;
“Earth's mass is variable, subject to both gain and loss due to the accretion of micrometeorites and cosmic dust and the loss of hydrogen and helium gas, respectively. The combined effect is a net loss of material, estimated at 5.5×107 kg (54,000 tons) per year.” - Earth mass - Wikipedia
They can't measure mass for a very simple reason !
Mass is electrical charge and it doesn't matter how dense the mass is it will always measure 0 . The reason for this is A+B=0 .
So if you can follow the following
1*(A+B)=0
2*(A+B)=0
Jump some
A billion * (A+B)=0
The way science measures ''mass'' is measuring the applied pressure on a set of scales . Just a different unit than Newtons .
They would say the opposite wouldn't they ?
-5 ?I see math is still giving you problems. You need to fully define your terms, otherwise your argument is worthless. Quick question what is 10 - (-15)?
Well, we have instruments on the moon that allow very precise measurements of the distances involved.
The moon is, in fact, moving away from the Earth on average. This is primarily due to tidal effects, not to mass effects. Any increase in mass from cosmic dust accumulation is trivial compared to this effect.
Maybe , maybe not !
The moon affects the tides , the tides don't affect the moon . Water is not dense enough to have affect on gravitational position of the moon. If it were true and the moon is moving way , that will be because field density is changing .
However , if M1 gains more field density and M2 gains more field density , the effect will be a stronger gravitational pull towards each other and the fields do not have enough density to stop objects falling .
-5 ?
I don't claim to be a mathematician , numbers are invention malarkey . I can explain my theory using A and B , why would I need to know anything else for my own theory ?Um...you might want to recheck that one.
They would say the opposite wouldn't they ?