wood burning stoves*
The moose likes Meaningless Drivel and the fly likes questions about planets Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


Win a copy of Soft Skills this week in the Jobs Discussion forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Other » Meaningless Drivel
Bookmark "questions about planets" Watch "questions about planets" New topic
Author

questions about planets

ankur rathi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 11, 2004
Posts: 3830
I've few questions about planets. Hope I get logical answers to them here:

1. Have men reached to any planet other than moon? I think, no. Can anyone tell, why?
2. Why moon revolves around earth?
3. Why moon doesn't go towards sun or somewhere in universe (I think it's because of earth's gravity but then why it doesn't come towards earth?)

Thanks.
Maneesh Godbole
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Jul 26, 2007
Posts: 10532
    
    9

1) Moon is not a planet. Its a satellite. Watch Star Trek for a detailed answer to this question
2) Because earth is the center of the universe
3) It does go and come back. Thats how we see the phases of the moon.


[How to ask questions] [Donate a pint, save a life!] [Onff-turn it on!]
Christophe Verré
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 24, 2005
Posts: 14688
    
  16

1) Moon is not a planet. Its a satellite. Watch Star Trek for a detailed answer to this question

You can watch Star Trek on that satellite ? How much per month ?


[My Blog]
All roads lead to JavaRanch
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Aug 16, 2005
Posts: 14420
    
  23

ankur rathi wrote:1. Have men reached to any planet other than moon? I think, no. Can anyone tell, why?

No. Why? Because it is not easy to get to another planet. NASA has been thinking about sending people to Mars, but such a mission would be very hard (much harder than going to the Moon) because Mars is much, much farther away than the Moon. It would also be very expensive (hundreds of billions of dollars!) and there are technological problems for which we don't have any good solutions yet. For example, there's a lot of dangerous radiation in space, and there's no good way to protect astronauts from that radiation. A mission to Mars would also take at least two years or so, because Mars is so far away. Maybe there will be humans on Mars sometime this century, but it won't be anytime soon.
ankur rathi wrote:2. Why moon revolves around earth?

Because the Moon is a natural satellite of the Earth. The current scientific idea of how the Moon came into existence is an interesting story: scientists think that in the early time of the Solar System, Earth collided with another large protoplanet, and the Moon came out of this collision; see Giant impact hypothesis.
ankur rathi wrote:3. Why moon doesn't go towards sun or somewhere in universe (I think it's because of earth's gravity but then why it doesn't come towards earth?)

Because of how the physics of gravity work. Things don't just fly anywhere by themselves, everything works according to the laws of physics.

Java Beginners FAQ - JavaRanch SCJP FAQ - The Java Tutorial - Java SE 8 API documentation
ankur rathi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 11, 2004
Posts: 3830
Maneesh Godbole wrote:1) Moon is not a planet. Its a satellite. Watch Star Trek for a detailed answer to this question
2) Because earth is the center of the universe
3) It does go and come back. Thats how we see the phases of the moon.


Thanks Maneesh.

I just checked definition of satellite, it's: Man-made equipment that orbits around the earth or the moon. Anyway, let's say it's called satellite because it revolves. I'd watch the movie when I get a chance but any brief explanation of why men are not able to reach on any planets?
For 3, we see different phases because it revolves around earth - I mean, someone from earth should always (except during moon eclipse time) see complete moon...
Joe Ess
Bartender

Joined: Oct 29, 2001
Posts: 8994
    
    9

ankur rathi wrote:
I just checked definition of satellite, it's: Man-made equipment that orbits around the earth or the moon.


Time to get yourself a new dictionary!

1. Astronomy. a natural body that revolves around a planet; a moon.
. . .
5. a device designed to be launched into orbit around the earth, another planet, the sun, etc.

satellite

ankur rathi wrote: any brief explanation of why men are not able to reach on any planets?


The largest rockets we have can't lift enough payload to keep a man alive for the 9 months or so it would take to get to mars.

ankur rathi wrote: I mean, someone from earth should always (except during moon eclipse time) see complete moon...

Because the moon is rotating around the Earth and lit from the sun, it is not always fully lit. see here

[How To Ask Questions On JavaRanch]
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Aug 16, 2005
Posts: 14420
    
  23

ankur rathi wrote:I just checked definition of satellite, it's: Man-made equipment that orbits around the earth or the moon.

Natural satellite
Steven Mann
Ranch Hand

Joined: Apr 05, 2010
Posts: 55
Mars is the most viable planet to travel to, and it's still 6-9 months away. Then they would have to stay there till the next cycle begins (two years I think. Maybe four). Think about that for awhile, and you will come up with numerous issues that need to be solved.


If love was a sandwich, I'd eat it.
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Aug 16, 2005
Posts: 14420
    
  23

Can People Go to Mars?
NASA has a mystery to solve: Can people go to Mars, or not?

"It's a question of radiation," says Frank Cucinotta of NASA's Space Radiation Health Project at the Johnson Space Center. "We know how much radiation is out there, waiting for us between Earth and Mars, but we're not sure how the human body is going to react to it."
fred rosenberger
lowercase baba
Bartender

Joined: Oct 02, 2003
Posts: 11494
    
  16

Think of gravity as a string. There is a string between the Earth and the Moon. The moon keeps trying to fly away, but the string keeps pulling it back. It's just like tying a ball to a string and whipping it around your head. If at any point you let go, the ball would fly off.

the reason the moon doesn't fly off towards the sun, even though the Sun's gravity is stronger, is that the Sun is further away. It's so far away, it doesn't have much of an effect on the orbit of the moon (but it DOES have a small effect).

Planets are FAR away, compared to the moon. the Moon is anywhere from 360,000 km to 405,000 km.

Mars can be anywhere from 55,000,000 km to 401,000,000. It all depends on where they are in their orbits around the sun. So, at BEST, Mars is 100 times further.


There are only two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors
Vikas Kapoor
Ranch Hand

Joined: Aug 16, 2007
Posts: 1374
Steven Mann wrote:Mars is the most viable planet to travel to, and it's still 6-9 months away. Then they would have to stay there till the next cycle begins (two years I think. Maybe four). Think about that for awhile, and you will come up with numerous issues that need to be solved.


What cycle? For what they have to wait?
Henry Wong
author
Sheriff

Joined: Sep 28, 2004
Posts: 19059
    
  40

Vikas Kapoor wrote:
What cycle? For what they have to wait?


It has to do with the relative position of the two planets. Sometimes they are very close. And sometime they are on opposite sides of the Sun. To get to Mars, you have to take off (from Earth) during a time period, so when you reach Mars' orbit, the planet is actually there. These periods, or windows, are very small, and they come at a cycle that are years apart.

Henry


Books: Java Threads, 3rd Edition, Jini in a Nutshell, and Java Gems (contributor)
Henry Wong
author
Sheriff

Joined: Sep 28, 2004
Posts: 19059
    
  40

Jesper Young wrote:Can People Go to Mars?
NASA has a mystery to solve: Can people go to Mars, or not?

"It's a question of radiation," says Frank Cucinotta of NASA's Space Radiation Health Project at the Johnson Space Center. "We know how much radiation is out there, waiting for us between Earth and Mars, but we're not sure how the human body is going to react to it."


Although Radiation is a problem, it can be solved with enough shielding. I always thought that the big issues were food, water, and air. You need enough for the trip there, for waiting to the next window, and for the trip back.

Henry
Vikas Kapoor
Ranch Hand

Joined: Aug 16, 2007
Posts: 1374
Astronomy is full of surprises and imaginations and if you have read sci-fi books in your childhood then you might have found it captivating.

I think untill we have a super sonic photonic vehicle (~ Speed of light) it is very hard to *explore* universe.
Bear Bibeault
Author and ninkuma
Marshal

Joined: Jan 10, 2002
Posts: 61755
    
  67

Vikas Kapoor wrote:...untill we have a super sonic vehicle
super sonic? Got those. You mean super-photonic!


[Asking smart questions] [Bear's FrontMan] [About Bear] [Books by Bear]
marc weber
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 31, 2004
Posts: 11343

The cost of sending men to Mars is staggering. Fortunately, Mars needs women, so if we could get a substantial price break using female astronauts.


"We're kind of on the level of crossword puzzle writers... And no one ever goes to them and gives them an award." ~Joe Strummer
sscce.org
fred rosenberger
lowercase baba
Bartender

Joined: Oct 02, 2003
Posts: 11494
    
  16

I think the shuttle on re-entry is doing something like Mach 25. That's about 30,000 kph. That would take about 70 days to get to Mars, if you could travel in a straight line at a constant speed.

(my math could be off...)
marc weber
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 31, 2004
Posts: 11343

In 1902, a projectile mishap agitated the moon. It has been revolving around the Earth since then, watching and waiting for an opportunity to strike back.


Bear Bibeault
Author and ninkuma
Marshal

Joined: Jan 10, 2002
Posts: 61755
    
  67

W. Joe Smith
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 10, 2009
Posts: 710
fred rosenberger wrote:I think the shuttle on re-entry is doing something like Mach 25. That's about 30,000 kph. That would take about 70 days to get to Mars, if you could travel in a straight line at a constant speed.

(my math could be off...)


Without any research on my part, I believe that a big portion of that speed comes from simple gravity pulling the shuttle towards Earth. I had a professor in college that simplified orbits to "controlled falling". Basically, the Earth's gravity has caught the moon and various man-made things, and they are falling toward Earth. However, the Earth is a constantly moving target, so as it falls we move out of the way and it just kind of continues to fall. Its not the most precise definition, but it makes sense.

Back to the point...getting a ship to sustain those speeds would be very difficult, unless Cmr. LaForge can divert power from the life support systems on decks 4-19 to the engines.


SCJA
When I die, I want people to look at me and say "Yeah, he might have been crazy, but that was one zarkin frood that knew where his towel was."
Bear Bibeault
Author and ninkuma
Marshal

Joined: Jan 10, 2002
Posts: 61755
    
  67

It would also entail decoupling the phase converters and shifting the bipolar tachyon pulse emitters to inverse polarities.
W. Joe Smith
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 10, 2009
Posts: 710
But first you have to get the tribbles out of the plasma injectors!
Bear Bibeault
Author and ninkuma
Marshal

Joined: Jan 10, 2002
Posts: 61755
    
  67

Didn't I tell you to do that last week?
W. Joe Smith
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 10, 2009
Posts: 710
Damn it Bear, I'm a programmer not an animal control specialist!
marc weber
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 31, 2004
Posts: 11343

Bear Bibeault wrote:It would also entail decoupling the phase converters and shifting the bipolar tachyon pulse emitters to inverse polarities.

"We may go up in the biggest ball of fire since the last sun in these parts exploded, but we've got to take that one-in-ten-thousand chance!"
marc weber
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 31, 2004
Posts: 11343

Of course, we've completed several manned expeditions to Pluto, but since it's no longer a planet...
ankur rathi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 11, 2004
Posts: 3830
Maneesh Godbole wrote:
2) Because earth is the center of the universe


This can't be a reason. If it is, then why sun doesn't revolve around earth?
marc weber
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 31, 2004
Posts: 11343

ankur rathi wrote:...why sun doesn't revolve around earth?

Because it would crash into the moon.
Bear Bibeault
Author and ninkuma
Marshal

Joined: Jan 10, 2002
Posts: 61755
    
  67

marc weber wrote:
ankur rathi wrote:...why sun doesn't revolve around earth?

Because it would crash into the moon.


Well, it occasionally does -- that's what caused all those burn marks.
Devaka Cooray
ExamLab Creator
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Jul 29, 2008
Posts: 3266
    
  49



Author of ExamLab ExamLab - a free SCJP / OCPJP exam simulator
What would SCJP exam questions look like? -- Home -- Twitter -- How to Ask a Question
fred rosenberger
lowercase baba
Bartender

Joined: Oct 02, 2003
Posts: 11494
    
  16

W. Joe Smith wrote:Without any research on my part, I believe that a big portion of that speed comes from simple gravity pulling the shuttle towards Earth.


From here, shuttle in orbit is 5 miles / sec == 18,000 mph

18 000 mph = 28 968.192 kph or roughly 30,000 kph.
Bear Bibeault
Author and ninkuma
Marshal

Joined: Jan 10, 2002
Posts: 61755
    
  67

Newton's orbital thought expirement is still the best way to understand the concept of a stable orbit.
W. Joe Smith
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 10, 2009
Posts: 710
Bear Bibeault wrote:Newton's orbital thought expirement is still the best way to understand the concept of a stable orbit.


That's what I was trying to say....I guess Newton was much better at this gravity stuff than me.
Pat Farrell
Rancher

Joined: Aug 11, 2007
Posts: 4659
    
    5

Jesper Young wrote: NASA has been thinking about sending people to Mars, but such a mission would be very hard (much harder than going to the Moon) because Mars is much, much farther away than the Moon. It would also be very expensive (hundreds of billions of dollars!) and there are technological problems for which we don't have any good solutions yet. For example, there's a lot of dangerous radiation in space, and there's no good way to protect astronauts from that radiation.


The real problem is that there is little reason to send humans to Mars. It would be insanely expensive. Not just very expensive, national budget busting expensive. NASA always thinks about manned exploration. They love sending men. But its a really bad idea. Humans are fragile, and raise the costs by several orders of magnitude. Just send robots. Oh, yeah, they did that, on a shoestring budget, with rovers that were supposed to last a few months. Four years later, we are still getting great science from the cheap rovers.

Rocket with rover on it blows, up, say "drat" and build another one. Rocket with astronauts on it blows up, nation goes into mourning, budgets go up by a factor of ten to prevent it. Yo NASA, rockets blow up, get used to it.

Look at the nearly 30 years NASA has wasted on the Shuttle to low earth orbit. There is nothing new in low earth orbit.

The key thing is that the race to the moon was a proxy race for the war with Russia/USSR. When the Soviets put Sputnik in orbit, everyone knew that they could put a nuclear bomb in orbit. While the race was wrapped in the American flag, it was a military effort with a thin veneer of science. Of course, most of the early scientists were Nazi scientists, but that did not matter. Beating the Russians was all that mattered.
Arvind Mahendra
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 14, 2007
Posts: 1162
Even if we find a way to get around the radiation problem, how are we going to deal with Bigfoot if he catches us?


I want to be like marc
Ulf Dittmer
Marshal

Joined: Mar 22, 2005
Posts: 42906
    
  69
Pat Farrell wrote:NASA always thinks about manned exploration. They love sending men. But its a really bad idea. Humans are fragile, and raise the costs by several orders of magnitude. Just send robots.

Bear Bibeault
Author and ninkuma
Marshal

Joined: Jan 10, 2002
Posts: 61755
    
  67

Maneesh Godbole
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Jul 26, 2007
Posts: 10532
    
    9

Pat Farrell wrote:NASA always thinks about manned exploration. They love sending men. ...

This sexual discrimination has to stop. Why is it that men get to go? Women too are up to the mark. Let us have a womanned expidition.
Feminists of the world, unite!
Devaka Cooray
ExamLab Creator
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Jul 29, 2008
Posts: 3266
    
  49

NASA has recently discovered water on Mars.
Pat Farrell
Rancher

Joined: Aug 11, 2007
Posts: 4659
    
    5

Maneesh Godbole wrote:This sexual discrimination has to stop. Why is it that men get to go? Women too are up to the mark. Feminists of the world, unite!

They have sent some women, I meant "man" in the mankind sense. Woman are too fragile to send into space as well. I'm sure that there has been sex in space, but no one talks about that. I mean, six months in the ISS with women. Even blue water sailors get to make port calls.
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: questions about planets