Planetside Software Forums

General => Open Discussion => Topic started by: WAS on October 29, 2018, 05:03:55 PM

Title: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on October 29, 2018, 05:03:55 PM
Without access to the original images it's a little hard to tell, but it sure does look like light being captured as it moved (stray refraction or something), and thus looks elongated.

https://www.ibtimes.co.in/mysterious-green-ufo-spotted-jupiter-nasa-image-sparks-debate-784044?fbclid=IwAR0Ap7-VupLqMgTgj9SVcE0Tg37NyR74OMXsKIQSmzB9tQ7OjTb4qqsq1v8
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: digitalguru on October 29, 2018, 07:20:50 PM
[attachimg=1]
QuoteAfter watching the video, many people argued that this green UFO is an irrefutable evidence of alien life.

What do they know, it's obviously Thunderbird 2
[attachimg=2]
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on October 29, 2018, 07:47:23 PM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/fGuqeA6PiXINa/200.gif)
[ All Laughing ]
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: ajcgi on October 30, 2018, 06:06:03 AM
Ah no! There's a hole in my tin foil hat!  ;D
If you look at the raw Juno images, they're full of imaging anomalies or abherrations.
https://www.missionjuno.swri.edu/junocam/processing?source=junocam&ob_from=&ob_to=&perpage=16 (https://www.missionjuno.swri.edu/junocam/processing?source=junocam&ob_from=&ob_to=&perpage=16)
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: PabloMack on October 31, 2018, 12:04:37 PM
So that's where my gum wrapper went. In space, UFOs don't need propulsion systems.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on October 31, 2018, 03:57:49 PM
Quote from: PabloMack on October 31, 2018, 12:04:37 PM
So that's where my gum wrapper went. In space, UFOs don't need propulsion systems.

You'd think if a UFO had visible propulsion systems anything like what we perceive as them, it's likely not a UFO. That would inherently show a lack of ability to even get here (cosmically).
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: PabloMack on November 01, 2018, 12:00:03 PM
I would surmise that the act of "flying" is only applicable to something that is in the atmosphere and must "fly" to counter the force of gravity.

In space though, UFO="Unidentified Floating Object". Though my gum wrapper is floating, once identified it is no longer a UFO but an IFO :D
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 01, 2018, 01:58:29 PM
Technically it's still flying, just not by atmospherics. In space you still have to overcome gravitational influences.

Take yourself for example, if you were as high as the ISS, but not at 28k a second velocity, you would literally fall to Earth no different than within the atmosphere. You would also not really warm up at all in the atmosphere due to terminal velocities and not traveling at an access of 25+ thousand miles a second.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 01, 2018, 07:49:11 PM
I beg to differ. Outside of the atmosphere there is nothing to slow your fall, so by the time you reach substantial atmosphere you'd be going fast enough to give yourself a good roasting... no?
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 01, 2018, 07:52:43 PM
Try this calculator:

https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224835316
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 01, 2018, 08:45:34 PM
I'm no good at the math and I have no reference point for a free fall time from the ISS or something of notable distance. But when you're this high, the gravity of earth is not as substantial, but does increase as you get closer to the surface. For example at 40km at the equate we see a loss of 1.2% from just a airliner jet.

http://www.mansfieldct.org/Schools/MMS/staff/hand/lawsgravaltitude.htm

Felix Baumgartner actually dives from Earth's upper most atmospheric boundary (able to be reached by a balloon at 23 miles) and was able to reach Mach 1.24 (372.78666 mp/s) and experienced very little in his suit, and the only quote at temperatures range of protection was "100 degrees Fahrenheit to -90 degrees Fahrenheit" according to DCC (David Clark Company) that designed the suit. 100 degrees F is uncomfortable but not deadly.

From my understanding of 1/R for gravity by km, the specific gravity at the ISS should be 0.024... so specific speed of fall would be incredibly slow depending on the weight and mass of the person, and it wouldn't really increase much even at the atmospheric boundary of of 100km at 0.09g. And of course, you don't weigh much in micro gravity because of this gravity + interstellar mass vs individual mass relationship.

Most objects in space, even dust, burn up, because of the velocity they were launched at, or because of the distance they traveled in relation to their mass and gravitational influences - which is usually dozens and dozens times that of a fall from the ISS. Even debris being launched from work on the ISS is moving at 25 thousand + mph.

This is also why scientists have talked about how spaceships entering the atmosphere like in Independence Day isn't that realistic because these alien ships have anti-grav flight to begin with, and would be able to be at a stand still and enter the atmosphere at a rate that wouldn't cause damage.

Update: The only variable I think we aren't taking into consideration in this scenario is if you aren't traveling as fast as the ISS, are you traveling at the earths rotation? Cause if not, you're going to be interfering with the earths rotation which would change things/add friction. Especially if at a "complete" stand still while Earth is rotating at about 1,000 mph.

Additionally, I've done this KSP many times which is known for pretty good physics. You can stop a vehicles motion to 0/ms and it will fall to Kerbin (or Earth if you have real scale solar system mod) and not burn up. And that's with Kerbin/Earths rotation.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 01, 2018, 10:51:33 PM
Gravity at the ISS is quite similar to what it is here on Earth. It only seems to be weightless because it's in freefall - it's travelling sideways incredibly fast, so while it's falling towards the Earth the Earth is curving away from it at the same rate.

Here's why:

1. Gravity falls off at 1/r^2. Radius is measured from the centre of the planet - this is only an approximation, but it's a good enough approximation for nearly spherical planets where the measurements occur outside of the sphere of the planet.

2. Earth has a radius of about 6380 Km. At about 400 Km above the ground, the ISS is at 6380 + 400 = 6780 Km. So let's look at the ratio of that to the Earth's surface. 6780 / 6380 = 1.063, i.e. only 6.3% further away from the centre of the planet.

3. If we plug that into 1/r^2 we get 1 / (1.063 x 1.063) = 1 / 1.13. That means the Earth's gravity at the ISS is only 13% less than it is here on the surface.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 01, 2018, 11:00:08 PM
4. Therefore, if you were at a fixed, stationary point above the surface - unlike the ISS - but at 400 Km up, you are going to fall almost as quickly as if you were near the surface. But at 400 Km up there is barely any atmosphere to slow you down. So you start falling. Every second you accelerate at 9.81 m/s/s (Ok, 13% less than that, so 8.68 m/s/s). Every second your velocity increases by 8.68 m/s. After 100 seconds you are travelling at about 868 m/s. You have a long way to fall, and it takes quite a few minutes.

One of the other calculators on that page I linked to allows you to plug in the *distance* you fall, not just the amount of time:

https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224852055

You're going to fall for 400 Km, and most of that (maybe 300 Km?) there is negligible atmosphere. So I plugged in 300,000 metres and I tried gravity of 9.8 and 8.6. You're going to be falling for about 250 seconds before you reach the top of the atmosphere at 100 Km. At that time you're going at about 2400 m/s, or 8600 Km/h. The atmo density will build up quickly after that, and you're still speeding up. That'll cause an unhealthy amount of friction before it really has a chance to slow you down.

Maybe you wouldn't burn up though. Maybe? I might have overestimated the final speed. I'll leave that question to those of you who know more about materials and thermodynamics than I do.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 01, 2018, 11:14:03 PM
Quote from: WASasquatch on November 01, 2018, 08:45:34 PM
Additionally, I've done this KSP many times which is known for pretty good physics. You can stop a vehicles motion to 0/ms and it will fall to Kerbin (or Earth if you have real scale solar system mod) and not burn up. And that's with Kerbin/Earths rotation.

I'm curious to know what its max speed gets to as it falls. And how long does it take?
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 12:47:20 AM
Quote from: Matt on November 01, 2018, 11:14:03 PM
Quote from: WASasquatch on November 01, 2018, 08:45:34 PM
Additionally, I've done this KSP many times which is known for pretty good physics. You can stop a vehicles motion to 0/ms and it will fall to Kerbin (or Earth if you have real scale solar system mod) and not burn up. And that's with Kerbin/Earths rotation.

I'm curious to know what its max speed gets to as it falls. And how long does it take?

I haven't timed that but could give it a go. It takes a pretty good while in Real Solar System mod.

However I'll point out the ISS isn't in freefall, it is effectively ballistic flight, or spaceflight, at a speeds which defeats the SOI + pull. That speed slowly slows and once it's too slow for the SOI begins to "actually" fall towards the center of mass, which is when they do orbital correction burns.

Even at a specific gravity of about 90%, we don't have enough mass to create enough friction in Earths atmosphere. These objects are falling at over 10km/s, not just mere meters a second. }

I'll also point out that calculator is simply, purely wrong on top of not being able to find the "distance" version. It provides distance as a result? But yeah, for Felix's jump it says he would be traveling at 676.65885m/s . Even with him actually diving and not just free falling, he only reached 418 m/s or mach 1.23. So this formula is missing some information from reality. Which may be why his team and scientists are studying his jump, as well as up in the ISS studying micro gravity. May be aspects missing from that basic school formula.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 01:12:08 AM
The Real Solar System mod isn't compatible with the latest version of Kerbal Space Program so I'll need to downgrade to use it, but I'll try and make video if my system can handle it (game sucks up RAM).
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 05:34:19 AM
This is the version where you plug in distance and it outputs time and end velocity:

https://keisan.casio.com/exec/system/1224852055

You can't use this for Felix's jump because he was inside the atmosphere. The calculator assumes no air resistance. That's why it gave you a higher top speed than Felix's real jump.

I only used it to calculate the speed you would reach *before* reaching any substantial atmosphere. I picked 400 km to 100 km altitude - there is some atmosphere at 100 km, but not enough to matter in these calculations. Felix was much lower in the atmosphere so it will give the wrong number.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 05:58:40 AM
Quote from: WASasquatch on November 02, 2018, 12:47:20 AM
However I'll point out the ISS isn't in freefall, it is effectively ballistic flight

Yes, it's in ballistic flight. Ballistic flight is freefall.

Quote
at a speeds which defeats the SOI + pull. That speed slowly slows and once it's too slow for the SOI begins to "actually" fall towards the center of mass, which is when they do orbital correction burns.

True. The gradual slowdown is caused by minute amounts of air resistance, even at 400 km. (I don't know the term SOI though - what's that?).
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 06:08:06 AM
Oh duh! That makes sense. Though like I was saying I don't think you'd heat up. Think of the SpaceX boosters. They fall from at least half of ISS orbital distances, and don't even heat enough to create vapor.

The Shuttle reaches a maximum of about about 1,650 C with a re-entry of Mach M or Mach ~25 (7823.2mp/s) (And even at this speed it's a gradual inclination to the atmosphere, not a steep fall).

Also, I'm unsure those falling characteristics are still that accurate when you consider mass of on object which place a significant role in gravitational pull. For example, it takes more delta v to lift said mass into orbit, it also plays a roll in descent.

It'd be weird for a person to gain the speed you suggest (2400mps), as it suggests if it were able to continue falling, you would gain orbit (7666mps equatorial), or break orbit from Earth which just wouldn't make sense.

Ballistic Flight is not free-falling, it is defeating gravitation influence without aerodynamics. Flying is lift via aerodynamics, Spaceflight is lift via delta v, or acceleration only. Saying it's freefalling means all flight is freefalling which is just silly. Freefalling is freefalling, from a fixed position under gravitational influence without thrust. For example you could be using spaceflight for ascension, which would be the opposite of falling towards the gravitational influence until you break the SOI.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 06:13:25 AM
In the absense of atmosphere, feathers fall at the same speed as cars.

Re. freefall/orbital physics, I suggest you read an article on the subject if you're really interested in understanding this stuff.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 06:14:55 AM
Quote from: Matt on November 02, 2018, 06:13:25 AM
In the absense of atmosphere, feathers fall at the same speed as cars.

Re. freefall/orbital physics, I suggest you read an article on the subject if you're really interested in understanding this stuff.

Falling is falling. As I edited in my last post, you could be using your delta v for ascension until you break SOI. Even my teacher corrected a student citing that immediately as "urban legend". Even spaceflight wiki doesn't mention anything about technical freefall, or even Google Scholar.

And even than, still not answering the point where that speed is just simply too fast. Objects being flicked from a finger from a fixed position could gain orbital speeds. It's just not adding up.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 06:22:51 AM
What did I say that isn't true?
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 06:30:34 AM
What did I say that wasn't true? I said that speed doesn't add up from your calculations and the calculator you used. The speeds accumulated are already near break-away speeds for leaving the atmosphere, close to gaining orbit. And at speeds much greater than that things don't even burn up completely like larger celestial objects, like most meteorites. Most space-junk is reduced only to 10-15%, and these are just basic material satellites, thin aluminum you can melt through with a lighter (foil casings), plastics (carbon fibers too), etc. More expensive ones with titanium, but usually not in things they'll know will de-orbit quickly.

My argument, despite sub-arguments in technicalities like falling rates of mass and getting to know things, is a person falling will not burn up. Just won't. Things aren't even burning up well at de-orbiting speeds from a orbit today and posing a serious risk. Takes much longer prolonged heats to burn up the mass of our bones let alone muscles etc.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 06:32:54 AM
It takes more energy and fuel to lift a heavy rocket into orbit than a smaller object, but the same delta v. The speed of the orbit is the same for small objects as for heavier ones.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 06:35:32 AM
Quote from: Matt on November 02, 2018, 06:32:54 AM
It takes more energy and fuel to lift a heavy rocket into orbit than a smaller object, but the same delta v. The speed of the orbit is the same for small objects as for heavier ones.

You're just sort of arguing random technicalities now, whether to maintain some sort of angle of correctness or whatever, but the initial argument is a person would burn up. They wouldn't.

What I stated is the speeds you quoted are much too fast, and related them to similar speeds, for example, the speed of equatorial orbit (which isn't the same in other orbits)
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 06:41:01 AM
With speeds like that, it makes me wonder why we don't do slingshots using the suns SOI to get anywhere in the solar system. Lol All you'd have to do is get the object out of Earths SOI and out of the path of other SOI's and just do trajectory corrections. With correctional burns you'd think you could save enough fuel for orbital burns around other bodies even. Hmmm.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 06:44:29 AM
I already admitted on the previous page that I don't know whether you would get hot enough to burn up. That is beyond my knowledge. I realised that after I did that first calculation.

But the velocity calculations are what they are. To be clear, I'm talking about a vertical drop straight down to the ground. NOT an orbit. The velocity gets pretty high when you're falling in a vacuum straight down towards the ground. It doesn't matter whether it's a human or an enormous rocket, they fall at the same speed in a vacuum.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 07:04:39 AM
Quote from: Matt on November 02, 2018, 06:44:29 AM
I already admitted on the previous page that I don't know whether you would get hot enough to burn up. That is beyond my knowledge. I realised that after I did that first calculation.

But the velocity calculations are what they are. To be clear, I'm talking about a vertical drop straight down to the ground. NOT an orbit. The velocity gets pretty high when you're falling in a vacuum straight down towards the ground. It doesn't matter whether it's a human or an enormous rocket, they fall at the same speed in a vacuum.

It's pretty shocking to see such a speed increase. But I did always thought mass played a huge role in gravitational influence, as mass creates gravity, even in minuscule scales. Like black holes to starts, stars influencing each other, and stars planets, and planets moons, etc.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 07:12:54 AM
Would you like to know why mass doesn't matter here? Or shoud we wrap up the conversation?
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 07:20:35 AM
Quote from: Matt on November 02, 2018, 07:12:54 AM
Would you like to know why mass doesn't matter here? Or shoud we wrap up the conversation?

Sure, though I imagine it's just the size of the mass in relation to the absolute massive mass (ha pun) of Earth.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 07:22:12 AM
Sorry if I sound argumentative - I just like to correct misunderstandings of how things work if it's a subject I'm interested in. But I should stop now unless you want to learn more.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 07:24:41 AM
Quote from: Matt on November 02, 2018, 07:22:12 AM
Sorry if I sound argumentative - I just like to correct misunderstandings of how things work if it's a subject I'm interested in. But I should stop now unless you want to learn more.

It's hard with text in general, but It's ok. Comes with the area of subject too, wanting to clear up misunderstandings. And, no go ahead and continue since I pressured the point initially with my understanding. Far to tired and late to go googling things. May even pass Out here. In bed as is.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Tangled-Universe on November 02, 2018, 07:30:47 AM
It seems WAS is classically mixing up mass and weight...
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 07:34:32 AM
Quote from: WASasquatch on November 02, 2018, 07:20:35 AM
Quote from: Matt on November 02, 2018, 07:12:54 AM
Would you like to know why mass doesn't matter here? Or shoud we wrap up the conversation?

Sure, though I imagine it's just the size of the mass in relation to the absolute massive mass (ha pun) of Earth.

Yes. The force of gravity is proportional to the mass of the earth plus the mass of the other object. however, when the mass the object is very small compared to the earth (which is true for both a feather and a spaceship), we just do the calculations for the movement of the feather or spaceship, and assume the earth stays in one place. Or in other words, whether its a feather or a spaceship, the total mass is essentially just the mass of the earth, so the calculations are the same for both objects. EDIT: I got this wrong, sorry!

Another way to look at it is this: The force of gravity pulling on a spaceship is much larger than the force on the feather, because the force is proportional to the mass. But the acceleration on the feather is the same as that on the spaceship because acceleration = force / mass. So the mass cancels out.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Matt on November 02, 2018, 08:12:18 AM
My favourite intuition of this is that everything is made of particles, every particle is being accelerated by earth's gravity by the same rate, and larger bodies are just larger collections of particles all accelerating at the same rate.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: digitalguru on November 02, 2018, 09:05:36 AM
Quotesparks debate
damn so it did :-) - turned into a very informational thread

QuoteIn the absence of atmosphere, feathers fall at the same speed as cars.

It's one thing knowing it, another seeing it - check this amazing footage from the BBC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E43-CfukEgs
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 02:10:49 PM
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on November 02, 2018, 07:30:47 AM
It seems WAS is classically mixing up mass and weight...

??? I don't think so. Weight is a product of gravity from mass. Which is why there is infuence from massive masses.

Quote from: Matt on November 02, 2018, 07:34:32 AM
Quote from: WASasquatch on November 02, 2018, 07:20:35 AM
Quote from: Matt on November 02, 2018, 07:12:54 AM
Would you like to know why mass doesn't matter here? Or shoud we wrap up the conversation?

Sure, though I imagine it's just the size of the mass in relation to the absolute massive mass (ha pun) of Earth.

Yes. The force of gravity is proportional to the mass of the earth plus the mass of the other object. however, when the mass the object is very small compared to the earth (which is true for both a feather and a spaceship), we just do the calculations for the movement of the feather or spaceship, and assume the earth stays in one place. Or in other words, whether its a feather or a spaceship, the total mass is essentially just the mass of the earth, so the calculations are the same for both objects. EDIT: I got this wrong, sorry!

Another way to look at it is this: The force of gravity pulling on a spaceship is much larger than the force on the feather, because the force is proportional to the mass. But the acceleration on the feather is the same as that on the spaceship because acceleration = force / mass. So the mass cancels out.
[/quote

The second part is a good anaology -- the particles.

By that logic makes me wonder though, is there really a terminal between the moon and Earth or other objects? And is it big enough to float an item? ]
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: Tangled-Universe on November 02, 2018, 05:58:47 PM
Quote from: WASasquatch on November 02, 2018, 02:10:49 PM
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on November 02, 2018, 07:30:47 AM
It seems WAS is classically mixing up mass and weight...

??? I don't think so. Weight is a product of gravity from mass. Which is why there is infuence from massive masses.

Ehm... No.
In the context of this discussion you are mixing it up.
Title: Re: Mysterious green UFO spotted on Jupiter from NASA image, sparks debate
Post by: WAS on November 02, 2018, 06:22:09 PM
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on November 02, 2018, 05:58:47 PM
Quote from: WASasquatch on November 02, 2018, 02:10:49 PM
Quote from: Tangled-Universe on November 02, 2018, 07:30:47 AM
It seems WAS is classically mixing up mass and weight...

??? I don't think so. Weight is a product of gravity from mass. Which is why there is infuence from massive masses.

Ehm... No.
In the context of this discussion you are mixing it up.

How so, though? Weight is a product of mass of an object and gravity within the SOI that an object resides. So a object in deep space with no other SOI effecting it; is weightless, but creates weight for things much smaller than it's mass. Which causes the object to pull towards it COM (center of mass).

I don't see how I'm mixing them up? I may have dyslexicly used weight, but the fundamental theories are so polar they don't even apply to anything we're talking about (until hitting the atmospheric conditions in decelerating that is)