Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!dual!lll-crg!gymble!umcp-cs!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf
From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Dinosaurs in Distress
Message-ID: <845@mit-vax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Sep-85 11:39:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: mit-vax.845
Posted: Tue Sep 17 11:39:50 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Sep-85 05:36:54 EDT
References: <369@cornell.UUCP> <241@uw-june>
Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 34

In article <241@uw-june> gordon@uw-june (Gordon Davisson) writes:
>>[Michael I. Schwartzbach]
>> Now, on the hemisphere closest to
>> Saturn gravity would indeed be lower, but on the far side gravity
>> would in the same manner be much higher (right?).
>
>Nope.  You're forgetting that up is the opposite direction on the far
>side of the earth, so the 'felt effect' of gravity is low at both the
>near and far ends, and normal on the great circle halfway between them.
>(actually, there are some nonlinearities, but a first approxamation is
>close enough for this).

I think you made a mistake. "Up" is in the OPPOSITE direction, but the
gravity vectors from Saturns gravitational feild are in the SAME
direction, so that feild would ADD to gravity rather than SUBTRACTING
from it. (Or do gravity feild-line passing through a sphere of mass
reverse? :-)

This makes this statement wrong:

>From this and Ted's theory that Ultrasaurs couldn't support themselves
>in normal gravity, we would expect to find them at both poles (or just
>one.

I think it would only be one. (I really hate to correct someone who's
correcting Ted...)
-- 
Charles Forsythe
CSDF@MIT-VAX

"What? With her?"

-Adam from _The_Book_of_Genesis_


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com