posted 01-16-2002 10:00 PM            

I have been deeply interested in this strange phenomenon since it was introduced to me by my uncle (who is nothern mn guy). I have read hours upon hours of the studies, forum posts, and new articles that this and other sites have presented. The name of my topic may be slightly misleading, I am not a de-bunker, just another guy trying to make sense of it all. I, like most people, think things like this over before deciding on it.

However, I cannot decide on this, I have seen to many things here that seem proof enough that something big is happening in our skys. But I have yet to come to belive many of the things that some are saying, such as mind control, are actually happening.
I have read a great deal of the posts from the forums and can say there are many valid points, but some also that I very much want to talk about, as I do not think they are accurate, and I will post on them at a later date.

A little about myself, I am a 17 year old student in Prior Lake, Minnesota. We are just South of the Twin Cities. Isn't that just what all you old folks need? A crazy rebelious teenager sitting behind his computer arguing about planes in the sky and how they aren't out to get us? I would like to think I have witnessed CT activity, but cannot. Perhaps I just never looked for it before, but I can say I am now. In fact, tommorow I am heading to Duluth to visit my uncle, and I assure you, much of our time will be devoted to topics such as this. In fact, while I am up there I am bringing my camera, and will "search for activity".

I hope you all will welcome me, perhaps talking (or arguing) together we can come to some valid conclusions about the truths we seek.

I will post again tommorow after you guys have flamed me. :P

posted 01-17-2002 08:05 AM            

Well, it's me. All I can say is that you have some interesting theories I believe this group will, not only agree with, but find interesting. I welcome you, even though I myself are new.

One small note, and I believe this to be true, is that I don't think you will get flamed by any members of this group unless you 'personally' single someone out and attack them in an unappropriate manner. I have seen that most all people, and their posts, have been pretty open-minded. Another thing bud, Your age don't mean a thing. Most times someone younger is not yet able to critically think, I don't believe this to be true in your case, but younger people bring fresh ideas for us Old Brains to consider and work on. This type of topic news all people. Welcome

I hope I made sense, I don't feel good this morning.

posted 01-23-2002 10:48 AM            

Actually, LTC and Stuart are correct - in a manner of speaking. "g" cannot be an acceleration, because acceleration is a change in motion, and "g" is a force that (sometimes) causes acceleration.

Let's look at the two concepts.

Acceleration

Acceleration is based on a speed change (usually measured in meters per second or m/sec) over time (measured in sec). If you start off at rest and increase your speed from zero to 9.8 m/sec the first second, to 19.6 m/sec the second second, to 29.4 m/sec third second, and so on, then each second your speed is increasing by 9.8 m/sec. Put another way, your speed is increasing 9.8 meters per second per second, or your acceleration is 9.8 m/sec/sec. (The reason I use 9.8 m/sec/sec for my acceleration example is that it's the approximate value of the acceleration caused by gravity on the Earth's surface.)

There are several basic formulas used to determine the average acceleration of an object if the acceleration is constant, and to determine the object's displacement (how far the object moves) under average acceleration. If the acceleration changes, you can still determine displacement and averages, but it requires calculus to do so.

Gravity

Gravity, from nonscientific terms, is seen as the reason the apple falls from the tree to the earth and the explanation for why we do not float off the face of the planet. From the scientific point of view, it is a bit more tangible and less mystical. Gravity, or gravitation, is the force of attraction between two objects because of their masses. The force of gravity increases with the masses, and thus gravity and mass have a direct relationship.

A force is usually described as a push or a pull exerted on an object by another. This push or pull, if it is strong enough, will accelerate the object significantly. Forces are measured in newtons, which is equivalent to kg*m/s, and that a one-Newton force is required to accelerate a one-kilogram object one meter per second.

According to Newton, any two masses will attract one another with a force proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. This became known as his Universal Law of Gravitation. In equation form, the force of attraction (F) is equal to G (the gravitational proportionality constant equal to 6.67 x 10^-11 N * m ²/kg²) times the product of the masses (m1, m2) divided by the distance between them squared (r²).

Earth, as we all know, has a very large mass and thus our attraction to it is large. So large, in fact, that it appears that objects accelerate towards the earth at a rate of 9.8 m/s². Remember, this value, 9.8 m/s², is the acceleration due to gravity (but not gravity itself) and is seen as the letter "g" in equations. Because falling objects are falling due to the influence of gravity, "g" (gravity) can be substituted for "a" (acceleration) for equations involving falling objects.

But they're not the same thing! G is a force measured in newtons which can cause an object to accelerate, which acceleration is measured in m/sec/sec.

Another way to think of this is to consider that you can have "g" without attendant "a".

Question: A ball in your hand (on the surface of the Earth) is subject to a force of one "g". What is its acceleration (in m/sec/sec)?

Answer: zero, if you don't drop it! The "g" vector (gravity) is balanced by an opposing force vector caused by the muscles in your arm holding up the hand. You still have the "g" vector, but you have no "a".

This is the easiest way to show that "g" and "a" are not the same thing.

And that is what Stuart was talking about when he mentioned standing on the Earth's surface. You are still subjected to the Earth's gravity (or else you'd float away) -- but you're not accelerating (because the Earth's surface in in the way).