Asteroid to pass by earth Sunday - too close for comfort

[cantthinkofanything]

will be between 18-20 miles from earth at its closet. Funny how the mention of these things gets closer and closer to the actual event. Either they can't predict them properly or don't want to report what they know. If they every find one that's going to hit earth, we'll never hear about it.


http://cbstampa.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/asteroid20140903-640.jpg?w=620&h=349&crop=1

[bigzak25]

But no cigar!

[TeyshaBlue]

will be between 18-20 miles from earth at its closet. Funny how the mention of these things gets closer and closer to the actual event. Either they can't predict them properly or don't want to report what they know. If they every find one that's going to hit earth, we'll never hear about it.


*Hint*
It'll be that big ball of fire in the sky.

[hehateme]

The picture doesn't look like its 18-20 miles away from the earth...or someone can't draw very well.

[Cry Havoc]

A geostationary orbit (GEO) is a circular geosynchronous orbit in the plane of the Earth's equator with a radius of approximately 42,164 km (26,199 mi) (measured from the center of the Earth). A satellite in such an orbit is at an altitude of approximately 35,786 km (22,236 mi) above mean sea level.


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

[Cry Havoc]

http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news184.html


Based on current calculations, the best estimate for closest approach will be on 7 September, 2014, at about 18:15 UTC (2:15 PM EDT) at approximately 1/10th the distance from the Earth to the Moon, or at about 40,000 kilometers (25,000 miles). Its apparent magnitude at closest approach will be about 11.5, rendering it unobservable to the unaided eye. However, amateur astronomers with small telescopes might glimpse the fast moving appearance of this near-Earth asteroid.

It's 60ft across. Hardly an extinction level event. :lol

[Joseph Kony]

is there a more generally retarded poster than the OP?

[cantthinkofanything]

*Hint*
It'll be that big ball of fire in the sky.

Thanks. Hopefully I'll have time to run out to my basketball goal and poop in the French Drain.

[cantthinkofanything]

http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news184.html


It's 60ft across. Hardly an extinction level event. :lol

60' x 9.81 m/s2 x acceleration x mass of meteor = pretty severe destruction

[Cry Havoc]

60' x 9.81 m/s2 x acceleration x mass of meteor = pretty severe destruction

How much damage is it going to do 25,000 miles away (as opposed to the 20 miles, as you claimed)?

If they don't want to talk about it, why is it on NASA's website and has already been classified as a threat level 0 on the torino scale?

[cantthinkofanything]

How much damage is it going to do 25,000 miles away (as opposed to the 20 miles, as you claimed)?

If they don't want to talk about it, why is it on NASA's website and has already been classified as a threat level 0 on the torino scale?

25,000? did you see the graphic? Have no idea about NASA's website or a torino scale.

[spurraider21]

60' x 9.81 m/s2 x acceleration x mass of meteor = pretty severe destruction
are u just multiplying random numbers hoping to make it look bigger?

why would you have 9.8 m/s2 x acceleration? 9.8 m/s2 IS acceleration :lol.

[Spurminator]

25,000? did you see the graphic?

You're looking at times, not miles. There is a distance scale on the bottom of the graphic.

[cantthinkofanything]

are u just multiplying random numbers hoping to make it look bigger?

why would you have 9.8 m/s2 x acceleration? 9.8 m/s2 IS acceleration :lol.

nice try LOL.

[Cry Havoc]

25,000? did you see the graphic?

:lmao Can you read a fucking graphic? :lmao


Have no idea about NASA's website or a torino scale.

Yes, educating yourself on something that you predict doomsday over would definitely be above your station.

[Cry Havoc]

A geostationary orbit (GEO) is a circular geosynchronous orbit in the plane of the Earth's equator with a radius of approximately 42,164 km (26,199 mi) (measured from the center of the Earth). A satellite in such an orbit is at an altitude of approximately 35,786 km (22,236 mi) above mean sea level.


:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao

Quoted again since apparently what I pasted before wasn't read.

[cantthinkofanything]

Quoted again since apparently what I pasted before wasn't read.

above mean sea level. it's not an absolute number. you posted it yourself. Regardless...20 miles or 20,000...if they are off on their calculations by a little bit or something changes the trajectory...then lights out.

[Cry Havoc]

above mean sea level. it's not an absolute number. you posted it yourself. Regardless...20 miles or 20,000...if they are off on their calculations by a little bit or something changes the trajectory...then lights out.

Right. There's no difference between 20 and 25,000. Because scientists might be wrong. :lmao

[cantthinkofanything]

Right. There's no difference between 20 and 25,000. Because scientists might be wrong. :lmao

have you heard of the Butterfly Effect? or Occam's Razor?

[spurraider21]

have you heard of the Butterfly Effect? or Occam's Razor?
neither apply

[cantthinkofanything]

neither apply

both apply.

There could be some small thing happening out in space that cause the asteroid to turn toward earth.
And Occam's Razor...if something can go wrong, it likely will. Not a guarantee mind you...but still valid.

[baseline bum]

60' x 9.81 m/s2 x acceleration x mass of meteor = pretty severe destruction

Son, you should read this book about gravity

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/81aEUlUkh2L.jpg (http://www.amazon.com/Gravitation-Physics-Series-Charles-Misner/dp/0716703440)

[Cry Havoc]

And Occam's Razor...if something can go wrong, it likely will. Not a guarantee mind you...but still valid.

:lmao :lmao :lmao

Sorry, could you please define Occam's Razor for me again? I'm not quite sure I got it the first time.

[cantthinkofanything]

dammmmmm...no thanks...$170....

[cantthinkofanything]

:lmao :lmao :lmao

Sorry, could you please define Occam's Razor for me again? I'm not quite sure I got it the first time.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=occams+razor

[baseline bum]

dammmmmm...no thanks...$170....

Buy a used copy

[cantthinkofanything]

Buy a used copy

just bulletpoint it for me

[spurraider21]

And Occam's Razor...if something can go wrong, it likely will.
:lol i think you are referring to Murphy's law tbh

[Cry Havoc]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=occams+razor

You should really read that link yourself.

[Spurminator]

And Occam's Razor...if something can go wrong, it likely will.

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv77688jZA1qcbby3o1_250.gif

[Brazil]

:lol dat thread tbh

[cantthinkofanything]

:lol i think you are referring to Murphy's law tbh

similar. theory of unification.

[Cry Havoc]

similar. theory of unification.

No. And no. You're wrong.

[cantthinkofanything]

No. And no. You're wrong.

you don't believe in the theory of unification?

[Cry Havoc]

you don't believe in the theory of unification?

I don't believe that Occam's razor is a theory that states that "anything that can go wrong, will go wrong". Or anything remotely similar to that. Do you? Because that's exactly what you said.

[cantthinkofanything]

I don't believe that Occam's razor is a theory that states that "anything that can go wrong, will go wrong". Or anything remotely similar to that. Do you? Because that's exactly what you said.

Theory of Unification ties all of the theories up into one "unified" theory. I say Occam's Razor...you say Murphey's Law. Tomato tomato.

[Cry Havoc]

Theory of Unification ties all of the theories up into one "unified" theory. I say Occam's Razor...you say Murphey's Law. Tomato tomato.

:lmao I can just cite the ToU for everything and never be wrong! That's not inarticulate or lazy at all! :lmao

[cantthinkofanything]

:lmao I can just cite the ToU for everything and never be wrong! That's not inarticulate or lazy at all! :lmao

string theory

[DD]

I propose we send a team of drillers to rendezvous with the asteroid, dig a hole, and drop a nuke in it.

[pgardn]

are u just multiplying random numbers hoping to make it look bigger?

why would you have 9.8 m/s2 x acceleration? 9.8 m/s2 IS acceleration :lol.

Its actually way smaller than that. This is disregarding two huge factors.
9.81 m/s/s is accel. at the surface of the Earth and not way out like right now, and
there is a very large resistive force also affecting accel. in the form of the atmosphere, especially if the angle is severe.

And that crazy formula he wrote is just wacked, but it is quite humorous.

[leemajors]

I propose we send a team of drillers to rendezvous with the asteroid, dig a hole, and drop a nuke in it.

Might as well mine it while we're at it.

[cantthinkofanything]

Its actually way smaller than that. This is disregarding two huge factors.
9.81 m/s/s is accel. at the surface of the Earth and not way out like right now, and
there is a very large resistive force also affecting accel. in the form of the atmosphere, especially if the angle is severe.

And that crazy formula he wrote is just wacked, but it is quite humorous.

others dismissed with "crazy" ideas

Mendel
Galileo
Zweig
Popovich
Einstein

[Aztecfan03]

25,000? did you see the graphic? Have no idea about NASA's website or a torino scale.

The graphic does not show miles but it appears roughly 50,000 km away with the scale. 50,000 km = 31,000 miles so 25,000 miles sounds about right.

[cantthinkofanything]

The graphic does not show miles but it appears roughly 50,000 km away with the scale. 50,000 km = 31,000 miles so 25,000 miles sounds about right.

you can't use the perceived distance from the graphic. If they put the asteroid at the exactly distance by scale, it'd be too close to tell what the fuck was going on. That's why they labeled it.

[SnakeBoy]

:lol if this thread was turned into a picture I'd imagine it would look something like this....

http://media11.break.com/dnet/media/2006/11/novone6_384x216.jpg

[cantthinkofanything]

:lol if this thread was turned into a picture I'd imagine it would look something like this....

http://media11.break.com/dnet/media/2006/11/novone6_384x216.jpg

I bet you like to imagine that.

[Brazil]

you can't use the perceived distance from the graphic. If they put the asteroid at the exactly distance by scale, it'd be too close to tell what the fuck was going on. That's why they labeled it.

http://priuschat.com/attachments/notsureifserious-jpg.64335/

[SnakeBoy]

I bet you like to imagine that.

Hey your the one doing it to yourself :lol

[Aztecfan03]

http://priuschat.com/attachments/notsureifserious-jpg.64335/

Seems to be. Unless he is trolling.

[spurraider21]

Its actually way smaller than that. This is disregarding two huge factors.
9.81 m/s/s is accel. at the surface of the Earth and not way out like right now, and
there is a very large resistive force also affecting accel. in the form of the atmosphere, especially if the angle is severe.

And that crazy formula he wrote is just wacked, but it is quite humorous.
yeah but if said asteroid were to approach earth, when it is approaching surface level its acceleration would be 9.8

[cantthinkofanything]

Hey your the one doing it to yourself :lol

I don't even know what your pic is supposed to mean other than that you have access to a pic of a guy with balls in his face. I'm glad you didn't post your nsfw pics.

[Aztecfan03]

you can't use the perceived distance from the graphic. If they put the asteroid at the exactly distance by scale, it'd be too close to tell what the fuck was going on. That's why they labeled it.

If it would be too close, they would have just zoomed in, not put the path in the wrong place.

[pgardn]

others dismissed with "crazy" ideas

Mendel
Galileo
Zweig
Popovich
Einstein

So try proposing some insight into things we don't have a handle on, like the people on your list did.
Why is gravity so weak compared to electromagnetic force? Speaking of unification...

Batter up.

[cantthinkofanything]

If it would be too close, they would have just zoomed in, not put the path in the wrong place.

lmao. If they zoomed in, you couldn't see the whole earth and the change in distance.

[cantthinkofanything]

So try proposing some insight into things we don't have a handle on, like the people on your list did.
Why is gravity so weak compared to electromagnetic force? Speaking of unification...

Batter up.

I could try to explain to my dog how evaporation works but she's not going to get it.

[pgardn]

yeah but if said asteroid were to approach earth, when it is approaching surface level its acceleration would be 9.8

No not when it is approaching, at the surface, assuming there is no atmosphere.

[pgardn]

I could try to explain to my dog how evaporation works but she's not going to get it.

Ok.
Explain it to yourself, but type it out here.

[spurraider21]

No not when it is approaching, at the surface, assuming there is no atmosphere.
right, i meant as it was near the earth's surface. at the moment of impact

[Brazil]

so it's 20 miles or 25 000 miles ? :lol

[hehateme]

Seems to be. Unless he is trolling.

The answer is in this post.

[lefty]

But did Earth dieded ?

[pgardn]

right, i meant as it was near the earth's surface. at the moment of impact

Yep, assuming there is no atmosphere.

Think about a parachute falling at a constant velocity, it's running into so much air.... If this true there is no acceleration.
The force of air resistance = force of gravity on the parachute if it falls at a constant velocity, therefore 0 acceleration.

in fact when the asteroid enters the atmosphere it slows down so it is actually accelerating away from the Earth. Some would say decelerating.

[cantthinkofanything]

Ok.
Explain it to yourself, but type it out here.

:lol

explain the theory of unification on Spurstalk message board. to myself. on Friday at 3:30.
what are some other choices?

[cantthinkofanything]

But did Earth dieded ?

yes. asterood shoosted through the earf's clouds and didded the earth to dieded

[pgardn]

:lol

explain the theory of unification on Spurstalk message board. to myself. on Friday at 3:30.
what are some other choices?

No just evaporation, the thing your dog can't get.

[Aztecfan03]

Yep, assuming there is no atmosphere.

Think about a parachute falling at a constant velocity, it's running into so much air.... If this true there is no acceleration.
The force of air resistance = force of gravity on the parachute if it falls at a constant velocity, therefore 0 acceleration.

An asteroid would fall nothing like a parachute.

[cantthinkofanything]

An asteroid would fall nothing like a parachute.

it would if they weighed the same

[pgardn]

An asteroid would fall nothing like a parachute.

It would fall exactly like a parachute if did not change velocity from an acceleration point of view, both would be 0.
But the asteroid would have a larger constant velocity. Yes.

[cantthinkofanything]

No just evaporation, the thing your dog can't get.

zoooom.

let me dial it back. you can teach a 3 year old that 8x8=64. but he's not really understanding what it means. People can train dogs that 1+1 = 2 bones. But they aren't really understanding the concept.

[Aztecfan03]

it would if they weighed the same

If they weighed the same, it would be a small asteroid with nothing close to the air resistance the parachute has and thus it would fall nothing like the parachute.

[pgardn]

it would if they weighed the same

No it would not. It would not even if they had the same mass. Shape makes a difference when air is present.

[cantthinkofanything]

If they weighed the same, it would be a small asteroid with nothing close to the air resistance the parachute has and thus it would fall nothing like the parachute.

let me put it this way to you...

which weights more, a ton of asteroid? or a ton of silk?

[cantthinkofanything]

No it would not. It would not even if they had the same mass. Shape makes a difference when air is present.

I thought we were talking about in space.

[pgardn]

zoooom.

let me dial it back. you can teach a 3 year old that 8x8=64. but he's not really understanding what it means. People can train dogs that 1+1 = 2 bones. But they aren't really understanding the concept.

Ok.

Still would like you to write about evaporation.

[Aztecfan03]

It would fall exactly like a parachute if did not change velocity from an acceleration point of view, both would be 0.
But the asteroid would have a larger constant velocity. Yes.

I see what you are saying now. You are saying it will reach its terminal velocity.

[Aztecfan03]

let me put it this way to you...

which weights more, a ton of asteroid? or a ton of silk?

the same, but they have a different surface area and different air resistances.

[cantthinkofanything]

Ok.

Still would like you to write about evaporation.

why do you want me to explain something you should have already learned?

[cantthinkofanything]

the same, but they have a different surface area and different air resistances.

right. they're the same. you answered your own question.

[pgardn]

let me put it this way to you...

which weights more, a ton of asteroid? or a ton of silk?

Weight is a force. They would weigh differently at different altitudes. At the same altitude, 1000 kg of asteroid would weigh the same as 1000 kg of silk. Yes.

[Aztecfan03]

right. they're the same. you answered your own question.

i never asked a question. and weight isn't the only variable factor in acceleration and velocity.

[pgardn]

why do you want me to explain something you should have already learned?

To make sure I got it right?

[cantthinkofanything]

Weight is a force. They would weigh differently at different altitudes. At the same altitude, 1000 kg of asteroid would weigh the same as 1000 kg of silk. Yes.

read the question again...it's a bit of a riddle...

a TON of anything weights the same as a TON of anything else.

[cantthinkofanything]

i never asked a question.

my apolgies for coming off as flippant. It's a very old trick question. A TON of one thing weighs...a ton. A TON of something else heavier...weighs a ton.

[pgardn]

I see what you are saying now. You are saying it will reach its terminal velocity.

yes possibly, or it might just keep decreasing in velocity meaning it would be accelerating up ( or away from the Earth).

[pgardn]

read the question again...it's a bit of a riddle...

a TON of anything weights the same as a TON of anything else.

So is a ton a force or a mass? How are you using it?

[Aztecfan03]

my apolgies for coming off as flippant. It's a very old trick question. A TON of one thing weighs...a ton. A TON of something else heavier...weighs a ton.

Yes I have heard that since high school or earlier

[cantthinkofanything]

So is a ton a force or a mass? How are you using it?

like a measurement not like a noun

[cantthinkofanything]

Yes I have heard that since high school or earlier

I've been trolled. Well done sir. :lol

[Brazil]

:lol dat trolling cantthinkofanything

[pgardn]

like a measurement not like a noun

So you are saying you are using a ton as a measurement of force or mass? Force and mass are both nouns.

[pgardn]

To make sure I got it right?

Ima waiting...

[Aztecfan03]

I've been trolled. Well done sir. :lol

what are you talking about? If anything you are the one trolling.

[cantthinkofanything]

So you are saying you are using a ton as a measurement of force or mass? Force and mass are both nouns.

I'm using it like if you had a big fucking scale and put a ton of asteroid on it. And then put a ton of parachute on it later.

[cantthinkofanything]

Ima waiting...

if you don't understand evaporation, it would be like trying to explain the color red to a deaf person.

[pgardn]

I'm using it like if you had a big fucking scale and put a ton of asteroid on it. And then put a ton of parachute on it later.

So what is your scale measuring?

Force, or mass?

[cantthinkofanything]

So what is your scale measuring?

Force, or mass?

it's measuring weight dumbass

[pgardn]

it's measuring weight dumbass

So is that a force or mass? Or neither?

And I need the evaporation thing...

[pgardn]

I'll be back.
Later.

Then we can continue your science lesson and obvious riddle that ain't so obvious.

[cantthinkofanything]

So is that a force or mass? Or neither?

And I need the evaporation thing...


I'll be back.
Later.

Then we can continue your science lesson and obvious riddle that ain't so obvious.

I'll leave my evaporation thesis in your mom's vag. I'll put it just behind the weed eater.

[xmas1997]

What, didn't you hear, the earth was hit and completely destroyed.

This is all a figment of your overwrought imaginations.

[spurraider21]

Yep, assuming there is no atmosphere.

Think about a parachute falling at a constant velocity, it's running into so much air.... If this true there is no acceleration.
The force of air resistance = force of gravity on the parachute if it falls at a constant velocity, therefore 0 acceleration.

in fact when the asteroid enters the atmosphere it slows down so it is actually accelerating away from the Earth. Some would say decelerating.
it would decelerate as it entered the atmosphere, sure. but after entry as it plummets toward the earth, by the time it reaches the surface it would accelerate at nearly 9.8m/s2, minus some for wind resistance. an asteroid will probably behave like a rock rather than a balloon or parachute

[SnakeBoy]

I've been trolled. Well done sir. :lol

No you got powned...repeatedly.

[cantthinkofanything]

No you got powned...repeatedly.

spellcheck alert

[Cry Havoc]

Occam's razor
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For the aerial theatre company, see Ockham's Razor Theatre Company.

Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a principle of parsimony, economy, or succinctness used in problem-solving devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347). It states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.

The application of the principle can be used to shift the burden of proof in a discussion. However, Alan Baker, who suggests this in the online Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, is careful to point out that his suggestion should not be taken generally, but only as it applies in a particular context, that is: philosophers who argue in opposition to metaphysical theories that involve allegedly “superfluous ontological apparatus”.[a] Baker then notices that principles, including Occam’s Razor, are often expressed in a way that is not clear regarding which facet of “simplicity” — parsimony or elegance — is being referred to, and that in a hypothetical formulation the facets of simplicity may work in different directions: a simpler description may refer to a more complex hypothesis, and a more complex description may refer to a simpler hypothesis.[b]

Solomonoff's theory of inductive inference is a mathematically formalized Occam's Razor:[2][3][4][5][6][7] shorter computable theories have more weight when calculating the probability of the next observation, using all computable theories which perfectly describe previous observations.

In science, Occam's Razor is used as a heuristic (discovery tool) to guide scientists in the development of theoretical models rather than as an arbiter between published models.[8][9] In the scientific method, Occam's Razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic or a scientific result; the preference for simplicity in the scientific method is based on the falsifiability criterion. For each accepted explanation of a phenomenon, there is always an infinite number of possible and more complex alternatives, because one can always burden failing explanations with ad hoc hypothesis to prevent them from being falsified; therefore, simpler theories are preferable to more complex ones because they are better testable and falsifiable.[1][10][11]

[pgardn]

it would decelerate as it entered the atmosphere, sure. but after entry as it plummets toward the earth, by the time it reaches the surface it would accelerate at nearly 9.8m/s2, minus some for wind resistance. an asteroid will probably behave like a rock rather than a balloon or parachute

No actually the faster you go, the higher the resistance by about F air = bv^2. Where b is some constant related to mass, surface area, and changing air density. Notice v is squared so you air speed is very important. This kind of stuff is sorta rocket science as the mass and SA of the asteroid change as well. Rocket science in reverse. The asteroid could be at terminal velocity or even slowing down, so that's zero acceleration or even acceleration AWAY from the Earth.

Acceleration is not as easy a concept as some people think.

[baseline bum]

Son, does your theory of unification used closed or open strings?

[spurraider21]

No actually the faster you go, the higher the resistance by about F air = bv^2. Where b is some constant related to mass, surface area, and changing air density. Notice v is squared so you air speed is ver important. This kind of stuff is sorta rocket science as the mass and SA of the asteroid change as well. Rocket science in reverse.
yeah, i just took basic kinetics as far as all this. intro level kinetics, e and m, and optics

[baseline bum]

No actually the faster you go, the higher the resistance by about F air = bv^2. Where b is some constant related to mass, surface area, and changing air density. Notice v is squared so you air speed is very important. This kind of stuff is sorta rocket science as the mass and SA of the asteroid change as well. Rocket science in reverse. The asteroid could be at terminal velocity or even slowing down, so that's zero acceleration or even acceleration AWAY from the Earth.

Acceleration is not as easy a concept as some people think.

:cry U forget the viscosity term :cry

[pgardn]

yeah, i just took basic kinetics as far as all this. intro level kinetics, e and m, and optics

Thats good stuff.

But then you add on variables. Friction being a pain. Especially friction that is velocity, mass, and air density dependent.

[TheyCallMePro]

A 60 ft asteroid could destroy a city, kill millions.

Too bad it couldn't hit Baghdad.

[baseline bum]

yeah, i just took basic kinetics as far as all this. intro level kinetics, e and m, and optics

Incredible lecture here on air drag and other resistive forces. Freshman level too, so no hard math. At least nothing you would consider hard math since you had to take at least 31A to graduate.

9lvNofoUYwI

[pgardn]

:cry U forget the viscosity term :cry

well the b is a mess. I mean it is approximately v^2 so the so called constant is not really. It's just a model that works pretty well. But then I know you are pretty good at this if I remember correctly.

[baseline bum]

well the b is a mess. I mean it is approximately v^2 so the so called constant is not really. It's just a model that works pretty well. But then I know you are pretty good at this if I remember correctly.

You ever read Taylor's Classical Mechanics book? Chapter 2 of his book has a great discussion of this topic. Actually, the whole book is awesome; way more readable than Goldstein, though I kind of like Goldstein because it's more rigorous mathematically. Nothing compared to Arnold though.

[pgardn]

You ever read Taylor's Classical Mechanics book? Chapter 2 of his book has a great discussion of this topic. Actually, the whole book is awesome; way more readable than Goldstein, though I kind of like Goldstein because it's more rigorous mathematically. Nothing compared to Arnold though.

I am a biochemistry guy. I just find physics beautiful. But I defer to any engineer as I work with them and Biochem types to help them understand each other for a common goal. So I don't know the books. Serway, Giancolli... Very basic. That's about it. But Wallter Lewin is great to listen to.

[pgardn]

I'll leave my evaporation thesis in your mom's vag. I'll put it just behind the weed eater.

Well good for you.

[baseline bum]

I am a biochemistry guy. I just find physics beautiful. But I defer to any engineer as I work with them and Biochem types to help them understand each other for a common goal. So I don't know the books. Serway, Giancolli... Very basic. That's about it. But Wallter Lewin is great to listen to.

If you're ever looking for a physics book to fucking knock your socks off, read Kleppner and Kolenkow (it's the textbook for MIT's honors version of 8.01). It's the material of Serway and Giancoli but taught from more a physics than an engineering view. Very challenging problems and really illuminating explanations. The way it introduces Newton's laws is fucking amazing.

http://www.amazon.com/An-Introduction-Mechanics-Daniel-Kleppner/dp/0521198216

And if you want an E&M book, Purcell is beautiful. I like the second edition
http://www.amazon.com/Electricity-Magnetism-Edward-Purcell/dp/1107013607

But the third edition uses standard SI units like Coulomb, Ampere, Volt, etc instead of Gaussian units like electrostatic unit, statvolt, etc., and it has a bunch of solved problems.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1107014026/

[spurraider21]

Incredible lecture here on air drag and other resistive forces. Freshman level too, so no hard math. At least nothing you would consider hard math since you had to take at least 31A to graduate.

9lvNofoUYwI
Yeah I took 31A, 31B and 32A my freshman year. 31A was a joke because I had taken AP calc. To place out of it I needed a 5 on calc AB or a 4 on BC instead I got a 4 on AB so I had to take the same class I had literally just taken in high school :lol

[Robz4000]

A 60 ft asteroid could destroy a city, kill millions.

Too bad it couldn't hit Africa and the Middle East multiple times.

ftfy

[Robz4000]

This reminds me of what happened in 2013 when NASA warned of an asteroid passing near Earth only for one they never saw of a larger size to explode over Russia.

[HI-FI]

well if an asteroid hits least pretentious threads like this will cease.

[pgardn]

well if an asteroid hits least pretentious threads like this will cease.

So let's get back to the who you would fuck stuff. Sometimes you find a few folks you have something in common with.
But overall, you deserve a touché.

[HI-FI]

So let's get back to the who you would fuck stuff. Sometimes you find a few folks you have something in common with.
But overall, you deserve a touché.
don't worry, I won't survive the asteroid. Your ego will live on though.

[pgardn]

don't worry, I won't survive the asteroid. Your ego will live on though.

Ouch kabob!

Damn.

I already gave you a touché. You can stop with the viscous puncturing.

[HI-FI]

Ouch kabob!

Damn.

I already gave you a touché. You can stop with the viscous puncturing.
sorry. some of that electrical and math stuff is interesting tbh, just mainly taking a shit in this thread. carry on.

[pgardn]

sorry. some of that electrical and math stuff is interesting tbh, just mainly taking a shit in this thread. carry on.

Its all good.

I might have got some more stuff to read out of it.

[xmas1997]

well if an asteroid hits least pretentious threads like this will cease.

25,000mi. away? Unlikely.