![]() |
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
|
| | Thread Tools |
| | #21 (permalink) (top) |
![]() Mass'Debator Posts: 4,724 | Didn't some cult already try to do this, by cutting off their wangs, and killing themselves so they can be transported up to some alien ship? Kinda sounds like the same thing, only waiting to be chucked into a black hole..... in which may turn your wang inside out, being equal to slicing it off ![]() |
| | |
| | #22 (permalink) (top) | |
![]() Mass'Debator Posts: 4,724 | Quote:
Well who am I to argue with Stephen Hawking? Oh wait.... Me..... ![]() The issue with this explaination is they are talking about, as an example on that link, four seperate objects entering one gravitational pull, resulting in each being pulled at different amounts...... but we as humans are one solid object. My arms and legs are attached to me.... the example they show would be closer to watching four different humans being pulled at different amounts. I remember studying gravitation pull a few years back, but on order for something to actually rip you apart, those gravitational effects would have to be contained in the same space as one another and be equal, yet opposite. Once you hit one gravitational pull, you are over powered and pulled into that one. In other words, if I was out in space, floating around in a space suit and I was directly between two equally sized moons, their combined gravitational pulls would cancel each other out in the middle, and I would have to move one way or another for one of the forces to affect me. Now in regards to a black hole where the gravitational pull is extreme in a small space compared to the overall mass...... I dunno..... I'm looking at the numbers, I'm reading the explinations, but they don't add up to me.... and it seems more like a common accepted explination, rather then actual fact. In other words, I'm not saying it's all wrong, but I don't believe we know enough about black holes just yet to make a claim as above in the wiki article. To me, something about the enitre explination doesn't add up to my personal collective of understanding what goes on in this universe. Maybe I'm missing something, but it doesn't make enough sense to me to be true. I feel they're close to how it works, but I strongly feel there is a key part missing in this whole concept. I can't explain it yet..... but I will. To me, they seem to be focusing on one part of the black hole and they're missing other very important factors.... maybe this will be my discovery in life to figure out... because I'm listening to their explinations, and they just don't add up..... in some kind of logic it does, but there's still soemthing missing.... I can feel it. | |
| | |
| | #23 (permalink) (top) |
![]() Arbiter of Weird Location: New Hampshire Posts: 1,587 | You're clearly getting close to understanding. There is a point where the gravity from the two moons cancels out. However, an astronaut is not a point so while he/she could be balanced between the two moons around that point there will always be tides. Oh, and if you want even more to read: Tidal force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia And that's about all I have to say about tides. Destroying America one Volconvo post at a time. Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause. |
| | |