Why doesn't the sky fall?

[BUDDYonRC at aol.com]

In a message dated 8/15/2005 7:13:19 PM Central Daylight Time,  
natpenton at centurytel.net writes:
Nat
Because your fingers are not oily and dont slip off of the sticks.
Buddy

Randy, thats excelent, you win !! There are  comments the F3A electrics are 
easier to fly than the IC jobs.  Why ?          Nat

----- Original Message ----- 
From:  _Wayne Galligan_ (mailto:wgalligan at goodsonacura.com)  
To: _discussion at nsrca.org_ (mailto:discussion at nsrca.org)  
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 5:32  PM
Subject: Re: Why doesn't the sky  fall?


SO..... in other words... Newtons theory about  the apple falling on his head 
about sums it up.... right?
 
WG
 

----- Original Message ----- 
From:  _randy10926 at comcast.net_ (mailto:randy10926 at comcast.net)  
To: _discussion at nsrca.org_ (mailto:discussion at nsrca.org)  
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2005 4:35  PM
Subject: Re: Why doesn't the sky  fall?


At the top of a planet's atmosphere,  particles are running around in all 
directions, at all of the various  speeds corresponding to the kinetic 
temperature, and to the predictions of  the Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution. Some of the 
particles will be headed  upwards, some downwards, and some sideways. Some of 
them will be moving  slowly, some at an average speed, and some very quickly. 
Whether a planet  will hold onto an atmosphere will depend upon the motions of 
those  particles which happen to be moving upwards at a much higher than 
average  speed. If those particles are moving upwards at less than the planet's  
escape velocity (the speed which an object must be traveling at in order  to 
escape the planet's gravity, and go off into space), then the particles  will 
follow curved paths which are ellipses with a focus at the center of  the 
planet, and will go up for a while, and then fall back into the  atmosphere. (This 
discussion assumes that we are in the very outermost  reaches of the 
atmosphere, where there is so little gas that the particles  don't collide with other 
particles very often. If we were talking about a  lower region, the particles 
would be deflected from their paths, and  change their energies, so frequently 
that any discussion of motions which  resemble orbital motions would be  
pointless.)
However, if the particles  were moving upwards faster than the planet's 
escape  velocity, they would follow hyperbolic paths which would take them out  
into space, never to return. Of course, only those particles which  happened to 
be heading upwards at very high speeds would follow such  paths, but as already 
discussed, there is a continual shuffling of  particle motions and speeds, 
and as a result, in a short while, particles  which did not originally have such 
motions would end up with motions  identical to those particles which had 
been lost, and then those particles  would also be lost.
 
 
Simple ain't it.
 
Randy
 

--------------  Original message -------------- 
I thought it was time to stir the pot  while we wait for the results from the 
Worlds.
Can anyone explain why gravity doesn't pull  all the air molecules down to 
earth?  Are they lighter than  space?  What is their mean speed?
I don't think this will help answer  the weathervaning question and won't 
help us fly any better but I  thought it might be fun.
Jim O


 
____________________________________
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG  Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date:  7/28/2005



Internal Virus Database is  out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus  Database: 267.9.7/60 - Release Date: 7/28/2005




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.f3a.us/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20050816/56755cd5/attachment.html