Myth: 1 G barrel rolls are impossible.

I used the escape velocity limitation to disallow the obvious
argument.


The intitial velocity limitation says 'vertical'. I don't care what
size the 'walnut' is, it will be impacted given there was no
horizontal velocity component.

Even if there was, by the way, the Newtonian physics demand the path
will cross the starting point, and the implication to most readers
would be that was on a surface.

Jose, I don't think from an initial impluse, which is the model I
described, you can avoid impact unless the mass of the projectile is
such that conservation of momentum would demand the launching surface
move enough out of the way of the way to avoid the impact.

You really can't go orbital with a initial impulse launch from a
realizable surface unless the object gets redirected as it gains
altitude. I did not allow that redirection in my model.

As for abstract thinking mentioned in another post? I might use a word
other than abstract.

The intitial velocity limitation says 'vertical'.

I haven't really been following the thread, so I don't know what the
initial thing is (except, by the thread title, that it's a
miscommunication about whether the 1g force one feels standing still is
to be "counted" or not, and whether a degenerate case of the barrel roll
"counts".

I don't care what size the 'walnut' is,
it will be impacted given there was no
horizontal velocity component.

True. But if there is =no= horizontal component, you don't have a very
interesting maneuver.

btw, is a satellite "in orbit" if it blows up before it completes a
complete revolution (even though it would have completed it just like
any other orbiting satellite?)

Even if there was, by the way, the Newtonian physics demand the path
will cross the starting point,

True (fsvo starting point)

and the implication to most readers
would be that was on a surface.

Depends on the situation. Rockets start from the surface, but don't
"enter orbit" until they are far from that surface (yes, this involves
acceleration).

Jose, I don't think from an initial impluse, which is the model I
described, you can avoid impact unless the mass of the projectile is
such that conservation of momentum would demand the launching surface
move enough out of the way of the way to avoid the impact.

If by "impulse" you mean "instantaneous change in velocity" then you
would need the launching surface (if there be one) to move out of the
way. But you don't need a launching surface. You can jump into the air
(vertically) and then apply a (huge) impulse horizontally while you are
still airborne, and you will be in orbit. (IF we are talking about
instantaneous impluses, why not extend the fantasy)

If by impluse you merely mean "very fast change in veolocity", then
there will be some value of "very" for which you can avoid impact.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

writes:

The intitial velocity limitation says 'vertical'. I don't care what
size the 'walnut' is, it will be impacted given there was no
horizontal velocity component.

There is always a horizontal component, although one isn't really necessary.

Even if there was, by the way, the Newtonian physics demand the path
will cross the starting point, and the implication to most readers
would be that was on a surface.

If there's a surface in the way, the starting point and ending point will be
different.

On Jun 16, 12:46 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
The intitial velocity limitation says 'vertical'. I don't care what
size the 'walnut' is, it will be impacted given there was no
horizontal velocity component.

There is always a horizontal component, although one isn't really necessary.

Even if there was, by the way, the Newtonian physics demand the path
will cross the starting point, and the implication to most readers
would be that was on a surface.

If there's a surface in the way, the starting point and ending point will be
different.

Care to write an equation or two to demonstrate that? It's a two body
problem, one massive with respect to the other. The initial conditions
are a vertical impulse from the surface, of a massive sphere. That's
high school physics.

writes:

Care to write an equation or two to demonstrate that?

You need an equation?

I throw a baseball into the air. It lands twenty feet away. The starting
point and ending point are different.

It's a two body
problem, one massive with respect to the other. The initial conditions
are a vertical impulse from the surface, of a massive sphere. That's
high school physics.

I finished high school a long time ago.

Read the post -- it specified vertical. It may be your concept of
vertical is different than the one commonly accepted. If your throw
was vertical you had aerodynamic effects, disallowed earlier in your
earlier post.

I would have suspected you did finish high school some time ago. That
you have forgotten what you learned is obvious.



On Jun 16, 4:16 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Care to write an equation or two to demonstrate that?

You need an equation?

I throw a baseball into the air. It lands twenty feet away. The starting
point and ending point are different.

It's a two body
problem, one massive with respect to the other. The initial conditions
are a vertical impulse from the surface, of a massive sphere. That's
high school physics.

I finished high school a long time ago.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

I throw a baseball into the air.


You would miss.

El Maximo wrote:
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

I throw a baseball into the air.


You would miss.

Maybe more viagra to make him taller would help?