[Note: a lot of the notes only exist in quotation]
From: Anthony (anthonyd@zeus.argo44.net)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 18:07:06 -0800
Subj: Hi and Welcome!
This was sent to me, but I think was meant for the list!
>From: nick@masterpiece44.com
>Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 14:35:44 -0500
>Subject: Hi and Welcome!
>To: anthonyd@zeus.argo.net
>
>Okay, this is a small detail that has always bugged me about Space:1999.
>Does anybone else think it is strange, that since the explosion which
>blew the moon out of Earth orbit happened on the DARK side of the moon
>(the side which ALWAYS faces AWAY from the Earth). Why wasn't the moon
>blown INTO the Earth? (I Know it's JUST a science fiction show) But
>maybe somebody can come up with a clever PCR (post creative
>rationalization) to explain it. Anyway, wouldn't it have been cool if
>the Alphans had eventually upgraded the travel capabilities of the moon
>so that it could be directed, much the way it was upgraded in "The
>Exiles"? Or, found some kind of drive to move the durned thing? That's
>what I would have done.
From: dwelle@online.dct44.com (David Welle)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 21:56:31 -0800
Subj: Why No Collision w/Earth? (was Re: Hi and Welcome!)
Ah, the Cleveland Question (anyone recognize the reference?)....
The side that faces away from Earth is quite large, amounting to almost half
the Moon's surface (41%, I believe--why it's not 50% is a whole other subject).
Now if the explosion occurred on the *exact* opposite side of the Moon from
the earth, as in #1 on the picture below (not a nuclear dump number, just a
picture label), then yes, it would crash into the Earth. (Actually, that's
an over-simplification, because rotational velocity--or more precisely,
momentum--would still be "attempting" to carry the Moon in its original orbit.)
1 "Far Side"
__
"Far Side" _-- --_ 2
- -
/ \ 3
____--- | Moon |
<---- \ /
-_ _-
"Near Side" --__-- "Near Side"
/
/ |
/ |
|/ |
L-- |
\|/
V
To Earth
Instead, imagine looking up at the full Moon. Picture it not as the flat
disk it can sometimes seem like, but as an enormous ball. Imagine reaching
out and touching it, right in the center of the side that's facing you. Now
trace your finger to the right, towards the visible edge. Now allow your
finger to continue moving just a little more beyond the visible edge, so
that the tip of your finger is just out of sight. Finally, with your finger
on the right side, give it a push--it will sail neatly to your left.
An explosion just beyond the visible edge of the Moon--on the so-called Dark
Side (usually called the "Far Side" instead)--would have the same effect,
with no collision. That's like #3 on the first picture, and would result in
the path like that shown below:
moon--explosion occurs near the right edge,
____----O.... just out of sight;
____---- \.. moon is propelled to the left,
<--- \. out of Earth's orbit.
/ \
| _ |
| (_) | --> Sun
| Earth |
\ /
\_ _/ Part of Normal orbit
\__ __/
\_______/
Of course, the further into the far side of the Moon, the closer the Moon
would have approached to Earth. A blast on almost the opposite side would
have sent it on a path that might have nearly grazed earth before passing it
by at high speed. Getting any closer at all could trigger nasty tidal
effects, resulting in earthquakes. A near graze by such a large body could
have had disastrous effects. It really depends on just where that "engine"
was located on the Moon.
#2 on the first picture, on the Far Side, halfway from the right edge to the
point opposite of earth, would result in a path like that below--getting
close to Earth for a moment before heading forever away from Earth:
O....
/ \..
/ \.
/ \
/ _ |
/ (_) | --> Sun
/ Earth |
/ /
/ _/
/ \__ __/
/ \_______/
/
/
/ (Actually, the path would bend slightly, but I can
|/ only do so much with ASCII diagrams!)
L--
Of course, that doesn't actually address the physics of the actual
explosion, but assuming the blast is /that/ powerful, and that the Moon
survives (if it hadn't, S19 would have been one very short series :-), the
physics of the Moon's post explosion path is believable.
On that same subject, was Area Two (site of the Breakaway explosion) ever
given a location or coordinates?
>>Anyway, wouldn't it have been cool if
>>the Alphans had eventually upgraded the travel capabilities of the moon
>>so that it could be directed, much the way it was upgraded in "The
>>Exiles"? Or, found some kind of drive to move the durned thing? That's
>>what I would have done.
Actually, I think you're refering to "Seance Spectre," where they changed
the Moon's path to avoid a semi-solid cloud with a recently-formed planet
hidden inside.
But yeah, further using the dumps as a kind of engine would be incredible,
and I'm sure the idea would have been considered, but I get the impression
the Alphans didn't want to mess with /that/ force too often. Also, wasn't
there some reference to the possible fragility of the Moon after the
Breakaway explosion, to the point they feared the Moon would break apart
under the stress of another similar detonation? Plus the nuclear dumps are
a limited resource. Between the explosions of Areas One and Two in
"Breakaway", and whatever that other area in "Seance Spectre" was, there
might not have been too many dumps left. Then again, we really don't know
how many there were, do we?
Or were you talking about outfitting the Moon with a giant jump drive or
something non-explosive in nature? One can only imagine the Science
Department working on new technologies, or trying to rebuild something from
all those crashed alien ships littering the Moon....
Arra said (in "Collision Course"), "You shall continue on. Your odyssey
shall know no end." Wouldn't hurt to have some little control over the
direction of that odyssey. Then again, maybe the lack of control is a point
onto itself. Oops, that's another subject.
Now *I* am heading on a tangent (feel free to lengthen it though :-).
Back to lurking for a little while again. Have a happy New Year!
----David W
From: nick@masterpiece44.com
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 1995 23:42:00 -0500
Subj: Why No Collision w/Earth? (was Re: Hi and Welcome!
I was indeed refering to "The Exiles" episode. The aliens had reworked
the life support system on moonbase to act as a space folding kind of
device. First it transported the aliens back to their homeworld, then
brought the moon in afterwards. So, it had already been modified. By
theway, I'm one of those people who is glad that Gilligan was finally
rescued along with the castaways. In other words, they should've decided
on some osrt of goal for Space:1999. It might've lasted longer.
Nuf. Chat at ya later. Paul
From: dwelle@online.dct44.com (David Welle)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 01:07:35 -0800
Subj: Technology (was Why No Collision w/Earth?)
Oops, I stand corrected (sorry Nick!). A rather major oversight on my part.
Serves me right for posting the note when I've had only a few hours of sleep
the last few nights. I had a great Christmas, but it was an island of peace
in the midst of overtime at work.
Now that I remember what you were originally trying to refer to, I seem to
remember that the exiles had some sort of telekinetic abilities as well--so
was the space folding a combination of computer modification and telekinesis?
That's the sad part about the Alphans. They get so close to accessing some
more advanced technology, only to have it snatched away, destroyed, or found
to be hopelessly incomplete.
Even Maya can't help much in advancing Alpha's technological level. The
only physical device she brought to Alpha was her necklace, which contained
only a bit of Psychon technology. Otherwise, the gap between her knowledge
and the current level of Earth technology may be so great that she simply
has no means of building the really advanced stuff, because it would require
advanced building machines.
Oh, that was probably confusing. What I mean is it's probably like our
jumping from mechanical calculating machines, to vacuum tube machines, to
modern circuitry. Big steps made up of a lot of little steps. Psychon
technology may have been a half-dozen "big steps" further ahead.
Say their machines worked on the basis of controlled tachyon showers
generated by infintesimal bending of the sixth and seventh "nano-dimension"
(to indulge in techno-babble long enough to make a point). To Earth
science, these things are little more than hypothetical. We haven't even
found evidence of their existence (like I said, they're merely
hypothetical), much less turned them into technology. Imagine trying to
jump from machines that use ordinary electrons to something that can somehow
sense tachyons. Then try to build one that manipulates them. Then turn
that still "primative" piece of machinery into something that can do
anything remotely useful (like adding 2+2), then into something resembling
our modern computers, then finally into something that the Alphans never had
before, like a transporter or jump drive. Ouch, poor Maya. Imagine all
those Alphans hoping she can do something, then realizing she can't work
miracles.
Of course, instead of this path, there is the "clever" path, where
"ordinary" machines are, in a flash of inspiration or through dogged
research, put to some completely unexpected use, or through the addition of
a seemingly unrelated device, given a powerful new ability--all using
current technology to create a new advance in technology. It may be small,
but could turn out to be large too.
Psychon knowledge and human ingenuity. Sounds like a promising combination.
And with all those ships littering the Moon, albeit most in little pieces
(except for that alien ship--damaged but mostly intact--from "Space Warp"),
and the evidence of the modifications the Exiles made, and other such
things--it seems like ideas would be ripe for the picking. Sooner or later,
they'd start rolling out major new technology, taking a big step, and then a
couple decades later, another step. The Alphans would learn their lessons,
and grow from them. Of course, with less than 300 personnel, there aren't
all that many people to do research, at least compared to current Earth, so
the pace may be comparatively slow. But since they are being "exposed" to
so many advanced technologies (/a la/ the Exiles, Maya, the ship from "Space
Warp", etc.), that may counter the small number of people involved).
Opinions, anyone?
----David
P.S. Hmmm, I lurked for all of three hours!
From: Philippa@sidle.demon44.co.uk (Philippa Sidle)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 11:11:41 -0800
Subj: Re: Technology (was Why No Collision w/Earth?)
There's another factor to add to all David's valid points as to why Maya
might not turn out to be the 'mirical worker' some Alphans would expect -
why should one young woman have a particularly broad knowledge of the
science and technology of her own culture? Like any scientist, she would
have a smattering of general principles - many half-forgotten at the age
of seventeen - and in-depth, detailed expertise in one specific area. If
Psychon had advanced science and technology (and we're told it does), it's
most unlikely that its young people would be educated to understand it all.
On Earth, the 'Renaissance Man' died a long time ago!
--
Philippa Sidle
From: costopoa@ERE.UMontreal44.CA (Costopoulos Andre)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 08:05:17 -0800
Subj: Re: Hi and Welcome!
You would probably need a bigger explosion to blow
the moon AWAY from earth. If you propel an orbiting body
towards earth, you decrease its perigee and therefore increase
its tangential velocity. In other words, after the explosion
the moon whizzed by earth on a "close call" trajectory and gathered
enough speed to escape earth orbit at its next apogee. Of course,
if this is really what happened, the alphans are deluding themselves.
There is nothing but a ravaged earth to return to. All civilization
was probably destroyed by the lunar fly-by.
Andre Costopoulos
costopoa@ere.umontreal.ca
From: "Phillip C. Merkel" (captphil@unix.asb44.com)
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 10:01:38 -0800
Subj: Re: Hi and Welcome!
I always wondered after the explosion if the moon went "up" out of the plane
of the "ecliptic?" (Scientists do I have this right?) instead of flying by
the outer planets of our solar system and out into interstellar space.
Was this ever stated in the books or episodes?
From: MMeskin@aol44.com
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 12:13:55 -0800
Subj: Re: Explosion
Fellow Alphans,
Earlier in this string someone posted that 41 percent of the moon is the dark
side, the reason that its not 50 percent is twofold. First, the moon
precceses, or wobbles as it orbits around the earth, that is on ocassion the
moon turns a little allowing us a peak at the far side. Secondly the Earth
and moon are close together in cosmic terms, and the Earth is quite large.
When you can't see something thats around a corner if you move to the side a
little you can. The 50% visible to say somone in England is not the same 50%
visible to someone 2000 miles to the west.
Your Alphan Janitor,
Mark
From: Gary Girouard (GGirouard@rihosp44.edu)
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 14:42:26 -0800
Subj: [none]
** Top Secret **
** High Priority **
** Reply Requested When Convenient **
dear alphans, just one question, when the moon was blown oput of
orbit, and there was massive destruction and earthquackes on the earth,
with the present g forces, would the same effect happen if the moon did
head for earth? gary girouard alphan fleet engineer #67
From: "R.P. Minor" (hunter@elderhostel44.org)
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 14:50:51 -0800
Subj: Thoughts on Post-Explosion Lunar Trajectory
Despite the quote from Starlog, it makes more sense IMHO that
the Moon remained in the plane of the ecliptic. The frequency
with which Alpha encountered other planets further suggests this.
A lunar trajectory taking it 90 degrees from the ecliptic (our
solar and galactic "horizon") would take it into relatively empty
space. Furthermore, the Moon was likely hurled towards the
center of our galaxy rather than away - the latter of which
would also mean that, sooner or later, Alpha's neighborhood
would get pretty empty. My guess that the angle of departure
was less than 10 degrees (but my Eagle's on-board computers
can't say for sure ).
Weren't the nuclear waste silos on the dark side of the Moon
anyway? They would have to be close to the lunar "poles"
to propel it up or down relative to the ecliptic. If the silos were
dead in the middle of the dark side, the Moon would have
hurled right into Gerry Anderson's flat. Since he lived to make
_Space Precinct_, they must have been located along
the lunar equator just on the edge of the dark side.
There's my two bits -- or 37 cents Canadian. :)
****************
BTW, what happened to the nice Eagle thread that we had
going several weeks ago? That was fun. Did anyone finish
the Eagle log and verify that the highest Eagle number was 29?
Just curious.
Another thing: Has anyone noticed Anderson's thing for one-eyed
creatures/entities? The Guardian of Piri has one big eye-type
thing, and twenty-year-old memories seem to recollect that the monster
in _Dragon's Domain_ had one eye. The truly brilliant
supermarionated _Thunderbirds Are Go!_ has one-eyed
"rock snakes." Are there any other episodes of S1999 that have
one-eyed beings?
Best wishes to all for a great 1996.
From: "Stephen M. Arenburg" (arenburg@phobos.astro.uwo44.ca)
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 15:20:43 -0800
Subj: Re: Hi and Welcome!
On Thu, 4 Jan 1996, Phillip C. Merkel wrote:
> Ok, but was this ever stated in a source closer to canon, say in the actual
> show or the novelizations or in the making of 1999 book?
> I know the tech manual was produced around the time of the show but I'm not
> sure everything in it matches what the shows original intention was.
> I guess I'm mostly interested in whether or not the trajectory of the moon
> was something the producers thought about once they had "Sold" the show. Or
> was it something they needed to put in afterward to make the premise more
> believable.
>
> Phil
> captphil@unix.asb.com
>
> "I am the genuis of Me!"
> Pat Cooper
It is almost physically impossible for the moon to leave the
Earth's orbit at 90 degrees to the plane of the ecliptic. The moon's
orbit lies in a plane only 5 degrees tilted to the ecliptic. The moon's
velocity in it's orbit is 1010 m/s. To leave at such an angle the upward
velocity post explosion would have to be 263 times the current velocity,
and would place dump site 2 at the northern or southern limb, and not on
the far side. Fot a reasonable acceleration (say 4g, something that
Victor could survive) the explosion would have to last 6635 seconds at
full strength, just under two hours. The most favourable is an explosion
on the western limb. This would accelerate the moon in the direction of
it's own orbital velocity. The velocity increase needed to leave the
earth's orbit would be only an extra 410 m/s which would only require 11
seconds at 4g to accomplish.
At this point I haven't said anything about the moon leaving the
influence of the sun's gravity (a situation dependent on where the moon
was in it's orbit. If people want to, I can calculate a table of dump
positions, moon's orbit positions, accelerations/times required,
explosion force and energies, and trajectories required for the moon to
escape the solar system, including possibly some of the effects on the
earth (Tidal forces and heights).
___
___/___\___ #######################################################
/ \ * Stephen M. Arenburg * *
\ ______/ * arenburg@phobos.astro.uwo.ca * *
\ / * SCA: Benjamin Hammerfield * *
/ \ ----/ \ *******************************************************
/ \ / \ * http://phobos.astro.uwo.ca/~arenburg/www/home.html *
\___/\___/\___/ #######################################################
From: jquimby@utmmg.med.uth.tmc44.edu (Jeanette Quimby)
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:24:35 -0800
Subj: Re: Thoughts on Post-Explosion Lunar Trajectory
I go with the ecliptic plane theory (if that's what it's called and not the
straight up theory). They were still receiving transmissions from the Mars
satellite (we just don't know the exact position of Alpha - but the
transmission occurred quite a few minutes after the initial explostion - if
they were going straight up, wouldn't the distance for transmission from the
Mars satellite have been greater and then less likely of reaching them in
that time frame?). Also I would assume the "Meta" was on the ecliptic plane
(remember the original plan to send astronauts to investigate) - and the
moon and Meta met in "A matter of life and death".
From: dwelle@online.dct44.com (David Welle)
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:52:24 -0800
Subj: Re: Why No Collision w/Earth? (was Re: Hi and Welc
Going through a week's worth of new mail, I got this note, which I am
apparently supposed to send to everyone, it seems.
----David W
>From: nick@masterpiece.com
>Date: Sat, 30 Dec 1995 12:28:20 -0500
>Subject: Re: Why No Collision w/Earth? (was Re: Hi and Welc
>To..: dwelle@online.dct.com
>
>You think we can be a little more creative than this? (this post is for
>everybody, by the way). Why must our thoughts on the moon's propulsion
>be limited to only what was in the series? I suggest that something has
>been created to propel the moon, period. Let's call it the "Quantum
>Drive", or maybe even The "Bergman Drive" after the late doctor. It is
>capable of folding space. It was a combination of alien technology found
>along the way, and Dr. Bergman's experiments with the scientific teams,
>LONG before the moon left Earth orbit. A vote was taken, and the
>majority of Alphans decided not to return to Earth using the new drive.
>Instead, they have been exploring the galaxy! Along the way, they have
>made many notable changes.
>
>Okay, I heard (from my roommate) that the "role playing" that everybody
>was involved in was to "write" an internet "Space:1999" novel, or story.
>I would like to get in on this in a very different way. I don't want a
>character myself. I would rather serve the function similar to what a
>"Dungeon Master" would be to D&D games. You all pick your characters,
>and I'll suggest the scenario. You react, as in your character, to
>whatever I throw at you. (I'll be the random universal forces) And from
>there we should have a very interesting story develop. Okay, let's hear
>some responses. Ta ta! (Nick from Masterpiece)
From: MMeskin@aol44.com
Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 12:13:55 -0800
Subj: Re: Explosion
Fellow Alphans,
Earlier in this string someone posted that 41 percent of the moon is the dark
side, the reason that its not 50 percent is twofold. First, the moon
precceses, or wobbles as it orbits around the earth, that is on ocassion the
moon turns a little allowing us a peak at the far side. Secondly the Earth
and moon are close together in cosmic terms, and the Earth is quite large.
When you can't see something thats around a corner if you move to the side a
little you can. The 50% visible to say somone in England is not the same 50%
visible to someone 2000 miles to the west.
Your Alphan Janitor,
Mark
From: Petiepry@aol44.com
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:57:19 -0800
Subj: Interesting subject
Speaking of the moon and its trajectory when leaving orbit, I have always
been interested in what impact a lack of moon would have on the health of
planet Earth, ie.
its impact on the tides. Just curious.
From: "Phillip C. Merkel" (captphil@unix.asb44.com)
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 1996 17:15:43 -0800
Subj: Re: Hi and Welcome!
At 02:21 PM 1/4/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi. I wouldn't consider the novels to be cannon. In fact, if it did not
>issue forth from Gerry Anderson's lips, or his typewriter, it is either
>apocryphal or mythological. My opinion is that the writers of the show
>did not even think about it as hard as you seem to be. They just asked
>the simple question: "What would happen if the moon were blasted out of
>Earth orbit?" And that was the end of it.
Actually, I thought the background to the moon out of orbit story was that
it came up in talks Anderson had with (Lew Grade?) or the ITC people. I
remember seeing some article where Gerry had left the offices and they had
settled on the premise of the moon leaving orbit and he said something to
the effect, "What now?" I don't think it was Anderson's intention of making
a show with the moon flying all over the galaxy, instead the premise came up
during his efforts to sell the show.
>Gerry Anderson has long since left
>Space:1999 and moved on to other things. And I would personally feel
>irritated if someone were to ask him such questions at an upcoming
>convention.
Just following a thread here. I doubt I'll ever see Gerry at a convention
but if I do I'm sure someone would ask it. I doubt i would though.
>You inevitably find yourself in the position of being
>creative yourself, and not making the same mistakes that leave these
>kinds of questions unanswered. That should satisfy your question to the
>best of anybody's ability. Have a nice day :)
>
Actually, no. What I was most interested in was not justifying the shows
premise so it would make sense in the real world. I was wondering if the
producers actually realized the amount of scientific error and tried to
compensate in the novelizations or the show. I figure outside of the actual
scripts the closest thing to canon material (But not actually canon) would
be the novelizations and the Making of Book. Is the tech manual considered
canon by Anderson?
From: "Stephen M. Arenburg" (arenburg@phobos.astro.uwo44.ca)
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 09:39:47 -0800
Subj: Re: Interesting subject
On Fri, 5 Jan 1996 Amardeep_Chana@wb.xerox.com wrote:
> >----------
> >From: MMeskin@aol.com
> >To: The Space-1999 Mailing List
> >Subject: Re: Interesting subject
> >Date: Thursday, January 04, 1996 9:22PM
> >
> >We would still have tides, just solar ones(much smaller), but the Earth would
> >be colder do to the fact it would move to an orbit farther from the sun.
> >
> >-Mark
> >
> >P.S. Sorry I didn't do the math for this but I always hated that part of
> >Physics
> >
>
>
> Mark,
>
> What is your reasoning for Earth moving to a higher orbit to the sun?
> Orbits are inherently unstable. An increase in tangential velocity
> will increase altitude and the Earth would spiral away from the sun at
> an ever increasing rate. A decrease would cause the orbit to decay
> and it would eventually fall into the sun. Both cases assume no
> interaction with other planetary bodies, which could of course change
> things drastically.
>
> Amardeep
>
Actually,. . . . no. Currently the Earth's orbit is nearly
circular (eccentricity 0.7%) so it's orbital velocity is fairly
constant. An increase in velocity (less than ~1.4 times it's current
velocity) would increase it's aphelion distance from the sun, creating an
elliptical orbit with a perihelion diatance of 1 A.U. (the current
Earth-sun distance) and an aphelion distance much larger. At the greater
velocity the Earth would leave the solar system along a hyperbolic
trajectory (sorry, no spirals). With a decrease of velocity the reverse
happens. The aphelion distance stays the same, but the perhelion distance
shrinks. Only if the perhelion distance became a few solar radii would
the friction of the Earth with the chromosphere slow the Earth down and
cause the orbit to decay. (At this point the Earth would be fried on the
first pass anyway). This is why low orbiting spy sattelites fall back to
Earth - the friction with the Earth's thin upper atmosphere slows them
down, while geostationary sattelites (over 40000 km away) will stay up
for many millions of years. There is one special case, velocity is
reduced to zero. In this case the Earth will fall into the sun on more
or less a straight line, unless it encounters Mercury or Venus along the way.
From: Terry Lee (terryl@asymetrix44.com)
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 08:26:47 -0800
Subj: Collision course with the Earth
If you want to see a good movie that deals with a planet on collision course
with the Earth, check out When Worlds Collide (the book is very good as
well).
From: Erkki Rautio (trerra@uta44.fi)
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 06:31:50 -0800
Subj: Re: What if , moon TOWARD earth?
> (Delurker mode activate:)
>
> I believe this was asked sometime earlier by someone. But I'll ask again.
> What if instead of away from the earth, the moon had been hurled toward it?
> What would the effect have been. Could the earth recover? Any life left?
> Like a nuclear winter?
Well, it's assumed (according one theory)
that it was a collapse of a comet or an
asteroid, that killed the dinosaurs, and
that it wouldn't have to be a large object
to hit the Earth to raise a giant cloud of
dust, that would cover the atmosphere for
years, and create a condition similar to
the "nuclear winter", i.e. to terminate
all life on the Earth...
*If* the Moon hit the Earth, the impact
would probably be *hard* enough to blow our
planet to smithereens (one theory is that
this how the Solar System's asteroid belt
came into being; that there used to be one
more planet in our system, that hit some
object large enough, and was consequently
blown to pieces).
> Nicolette - Med Techs, we don't get no respect
>
> (Lurker mode reinitialized) :D
A semi-lurker (haven't seen enough
episodes enough times to be able
to discuss them fandom-wise ;)
signing off,
ERkki
Tampere, pHinland
trerra@uta.fi
From: "Stephen M. Arenburg" (arenburg@phobos.astro.uwo44.ca)
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 23:31:25 -0800
Subj: Re: What if , moon TOWARD earth?
On Sat, 3 Feb 1996 MMeskin@aol.com wrote:
> I don't think ANYONE would survive the moon hitting the Earth. I do recall a
> physics prof. from college telling me if the moon orbited too close to the
> Earth the gravitational force of Earth would rip the moon apart. Then we
> would have a ring of moonlets and debris. I never bothered to check this
> with anyone else, its not exactly casual conversation material.
>
> -Mark
>
This distance (2.44 times the radius of the Earth, measured from the
centre) is the Roche limit, and applies to a rocky body that orbited the
Earth at a smaller distance. If the moon's orbit were altered such that
it were to hit the Earth, the slowest velocity of the moon (stopped in
it's orbit and sucked in by gravity) would be 7.8 km/s. At this
velocity, the moon wouldn't have time to break up before impact, and
afterward it would be moot. There would be a new asteroid belt orbiting
the sun with a mean distance of 1 A.U.
P.S. There isn't enough material in the asteroid belt to make up
even a smallish planet.
From: Allen Michael Retodo (ndver@well44.com)
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 00:36:24 -0800
Subj: Re: A Heinz 57 Perspective on the Moon's Departure from Earth's Orbit? :)
On Mon, 26 Feb 1996, Claudia Coles wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Feb 1996, Mark Eidemiller wrote:
>
> > Alpha isn't powered. No warp drive it can control. It's got to follow the
> > current, so to speak. And the if the current takes it through a black hole
> > or other spacial anomaly, there is no predictable way it will affect them,
> > or the universe around them.
> >
> > Or then, it just might be some plot twist from an unknown Space: 1999
> > script writer looking for an angle.....
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Well Mark, I was just wondering - would it have been easier for
> fans/viewers to swallow the moon's departure from earth's orbit, for
> example, had a wandering spacial anomaly [ ala STNG - sorry folks :) ]
> come by and ripped the moon out of earth's orbit? That seems to be the
> biggest bug-a-boo of the whole series for some folks - justifying the
> moon's catapultion from the earth. Just curious what you and others might
> think on this one :).
>
> Respectfully submitted,
>
> yfA,
>
> Claudia
> Communications Officer
>
>
> P.S. - for those who may not know, Heinz 57 is a ketchup known for its
> variety. :)
Yeah I guess it would be easier for viewers to accept a wandering spacial
anomaly as the moons departure mechanism. If you look at it the moon's
course is somewhat of an anomaly itself. When the moon is introduced to
new solar systems as usually it does each episode, it should should wreack
havok on all gravitational forces within that solar system. A shot
around a star or other gravitational force would produce a course change
or maybe even a warp. Thinking along these terms, if Bergman were to
have a chart of these solar systems would it be possble to map out a
projected course according to negative and positive gravitational forces?
Just thinking out load. What do you think?