The Big Bang and Conservation of angular momentum??

"Go out into your yard with a small weight tied onto the end of a thread. Swing this around over your head until it's going fast enough for the thread to snap. Then come back and report how much of the angular momentum was conserved."All of it. Until inertia acted on it. If I spin the weight clockwise, and the tread snaps, it will travel away from center, rotating clockwise, and vice versa."Not gravity then?" Since I'm assuming you don't understand how planets and stars are formed, I'll respond with a question. Where is the gravity force coming from? Since the big bang only contained the elements helium and hydrogen that formed gas clouds, what is celestial body is acting on these elements??Heres a better question. What causes gravity? I'm going to bet you don't know, because no one knows. They only know that it acts on MASS."The BBT has nothing to do with the piddling business of solar system formations."Since the Helium and Hydrogen from the big bang formed that clouds that formed all planets and stars (with the help of radiation), I would suppose your an idiot."Did you take magnetic drag into account?"No. Dumb question. I took the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum into account. I didn't take it into account with the figure skater either, just so you know.

Hi Dennis, Careful. You will find yourself contradicted by all physics books and reality on this one. The weight will travel in a trajectory tangent to the circle in the position it was in when released. It will not continue to circle at all. Just try it. Trust me. Mass causes gravity. But we don't need to know the details. All we need to know is that gravity is what causes gas clouds to collapse. Careful. lyx2no is one of the most intelligent posters on this forum, but he will not hesitate to write something witty and demeaning in response to your post. Obviously what he meant was that talking about the big bang is irrelevant in discussing the specific mechanics of solar system formation. Just like it's irrelevant when discussing the aerodynamic properties of a beetle's wings.Welcome to EvC.-MeldinoorEdited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.Edited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.

"I've got to get up early to go to school."I'm sorry, are we writing a biography? Or debating? OR, are you letting me know that you promise to educate yourself (if this is the case, I'm impressed)."See my previous post. And a physics book."Your previous post does not respond to the rotational energy of the sun, or lack thereof. Response?"Why set such a low standard of evidence? Makes me think you aren't really trying. How much surface evidence would your knowledge expect to find of a collision that would liquify said surface? How much on a gas giant? oow! Trick question."Actually, no it's not. Since none of the planets with retrograde orbits are gas giants. And liquify the evidence? Are you kidding me? I don't know what your taking in school, but i hope your money is refundable."In the most simplistic of terms; a meteor crater is the result of the damage and destruction that has been caused after a meteor has crashed into a planet’s surface. The size and speed with which this extra-terrestrial body is hurtling towards the unfortunate planet will have a determining factor on the scale of impact crater that is left behind."
Meteorites.orgRead the rest of the source, educate yourself."Is it only Jupiter that you have confused with Uranus? Or are you confusing Uranus for a font of knowledge?"No. Uranus has a retrograde orbit. Jupiter rotates on it's side. Stop talking.

A quick check of Wiki shows that Uranus has an axial tilt of 97.77 while Jupiter's is only 3.13 and neither has a retrograde orbit, maybe you should re-check your sources.Edited by DrJones*, : No reason given.

---

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

Until inertia acted on it? You realize, don't you, that we're talking about inertia from the get go right? The nut will not be spinning at all. The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum doesn't exist in a vacuum, ya' know? Hey! wait yes it does. You tricked me. You're tricky. It's starting to look like you should assume nobody understands anything about anything 'cause your statements make you look a bigger ass then your questions. Gravity is the warping of space reacting to mass. None: mass attracts mass. Not celestial body attracts stuff. Both He and H have mass, ipso facto, mutual attraction. Well, I live in MASS. so maybe I've got an in. Clue: we don't need to know its cause nearly so much as we need to know its behavior. That we have down pat. You're spelling takes the sting out of the slight. Not to mention it seem strangely non sequitur. One would think the early synthesis of the Universe would have a lot to do with ones suppositions concerning the mental capacity of others, but still, I tend to believe other factors nearer at hand would be more pertinent. I've been told that there are no dumb question when it comes magnetic breaking during star formation.Edited by lyx2no, : Typos.

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

"Mass causes gravity. But we don't need to know the details. All we need to know is that gravity is what causes gas clouds to collapse."Wrong. Well...sorta. This was a longstanding theory. But ever since Cepheus B (I hope I'm spelling that right) was discovered, it's been accepted that radiation passing through the clouds causes the collapse.You have to understand that before Cepheus B, no one had observed any stars forming, and the gravitational theory was just that, a theory."Mass causes gravity."No. Gravity acts on mass."Careful. lyx2no is one of the most intelligent posters on this forum, but he will not hesitate to write something witty and demeaning in response to your post. Obviously what he meant was that talking about the big bang is irrelevant in discussing the specific mechanics of solar system formation."Right, so I shouldn't challenge lyx2no on his beliefs. Good one. I don't even read the names. I see something I can make a point on, and do it. Game. Set. Match. Anyways. The big bang is the source of all light gasses, and is completely relevant to the arguement of star formation, since stars are made up of these elements.Can't know where your going till you know where you've been.One quick question, before I piss my pants about lyx2no, if radiation is required for star formation, where did the first radiation come from? How did the first star ignite?

Hi Dennis, I'm aware of suggestions that supernovae explosions and radiation pressure help to push gas together until gravity becomes strong enough to eventually contract it and begin nuclear reactions. As far as I know, nobody denies that gravity plays the most important role in star formation. Do you have any sources verifying your claim? Two metal balls in a lab will attract each other gravitationally. By using this knowledge, the gravitational constant was determined by Henry Cavendish in 1798. In other words, we've known since 1798 that mass creates gravitational fields. (Actually Newton knew that way before Cavendish) LinkGo right ahead. I challenge him on his beliefs whenever I think he's wrong. Just don't write anything stupid, and above all, don't go spouting ad hominems. I'm not sure I agree that radiation is required for star formation. But the first radiation would have appeared with the Big Bang, and early cosmic background radiation can in fact be seen as radio waves to this day. The first stars formed because the universe, even early on, was not completely uniform, but had matter spread out somewhat unevenly. See the discoveries of COBE that demonstrate this. The first stars formed through the gravitational contraction of the denser regions of matter.Respectfully,-MeldinoorEdited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.Edited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.Edited by Meldinoor, : No reason given.

`The nut will not be spinning at all.`Prove it. Thats an opinion without supporting evidence.`The Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum doesn't exist in a vacuum`I`m hoping you are being sarcastic.Gravity is the warping of space reacting to mass.Wow this computer is bs. I can#t use quotations question marks anything. sorry. Bear with me on this reponse and I#ll reboot after.You didn#t answer my question, what causes gravity thats a question mark...we don't need to know its cause nearly so much as we need to know its behavior. That we have down pat.OH GOOD!! So you have documented evidence of gravity causing star formation question marks...Cause I have evidence saying it#s radiation...hmmm, which should I go with...I've been told that there are no dumb question when it comes magnetic breaking during star formation.OH GOOD!!! So you have evidence to support your theory question marks.Because NASA says I#m right. I#ll stick with them for now.Please go find me EVIDENCE. Because without it, you are stating an OPINION. An educated one, but an opinion nonetheless.Liked the use of big words by the way. You sounded smart at least.

It's just that I get, like, 97% of my self esteem fix from correcting errors made on the internet, so I can't let your posts lie without comment. I'm way too jazzed to sleep now. And I don't know if this qualifies as a debate so much as a punkfest. Well, ya' see, that's where the magnetic breaking comes in. I didn't just write that because it's got some of my favorite letters in it. The rotational energy from the gas that remains behind can be bled off into the gasses that escape by magnetic field interactions. That's why it needs to be taken into account. If a magnetic figure skater bled off sufficient quantities of charged gas one would have to take that into account too. You need to wrap your head around Uranus instead of the other way round. Uranus is a retrograde, gas giant. With an axial tilt of 97.77 it is 7.77 past the mark. (Sorry, Dr. Jones*.) At 177.3 the only other retrograde planet is Venus. That makes two.

1. ☿ 2.11'
2. ♀ 177.3
3. ♁ 23.26
4. ♂ 25.13
5. ♃ 3.13
6. ♄ 26.73
7. ♅ 97.77
8. ♆ 28.32

That's eight. Didn't miss any, did I? Them thar' crater makin' pebbles ain't got the juice to turn a planet around. Have you any idea how much energy one would have to impart to reverse the spin of even a wee planet? Crust melting magnitudes worth.Furthermore, your argument for CoAM, insignificant magnetic breaking added to slow retrograde rotation is a good indication that Venus was turned about by collision. I can't stop grinning. I just can't stop grinning. Edited by lyx2no, : Insert Dr. Jones* venerable asterisk.Edited by lyx2no, : Typos.

---

"Mom! Ban Ki-moon made a non-binding resolution at me." Mohmoud Ahmadinejad

They have retrograde/reverse rotations but not retrograde orbits. Unless I'm confusing terms.

---

It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry
Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor

Where are you getting this rubbish from?Jupiter has less axial tilt than any other planet except Mercury; and Uranus has retrograde rotation, not a retrograde orbit.And you could have found that out with a few seconds' research.

Saying that three planets have retrograde orbits is definitely not a fact. You are delightfully amusing.

So, this response shows you don't actually know what you're talking about.
I'll list the mistakes to make it easy for you: 1) Only two planets have retrograde rotation. None have retrograde orbits. 2) It's called axial tilt, not axial orbit.3) Jupiter does not spin on its side, it has an axial tilt of about 3 degrees.4) Uranus has an axial tilt of about 98 degrees. This is the frst planet with retrograde rotation.5) Venus has an axial tilt of about 177 degrees. This is the second planet to have a retrograde rotation.6) Compare this to the other planets axial tilts (Mercury 0.01 degrees, Earth 23.44 degrees, Mars 25.19 degrees, Jupiter 3.13 degrees, Saturn 26.73 degrees and Neptune 28.32 degrees), and it's very clear they have "weird" axial tilts.7) If the third "planet" you were refeering to is Pluto, that is no longer a planet.So, that makes 7 (6 if we're generous) mistakes in a reply that is 4 sentences long. And you're calling me stupid? Ha! You're a funny guy Dennis.If you can't even get these basic facts straight, why in the world would we listen to anything else you've got to say?Edited by Huntard, : Typo

No. You should observe that only if stars never lose any angular momentum; but it is certain that they must and that they do; specifically, it is transferred to the solar wind.If you'd ever taken any real interest in this question, instead of just learning to recite creationist gibberish about it, you'd know that.

"I'm aware of suggestions that supernovae explosions and radiation pressure help to push gas together until gravity becomes strong enough to eventually contract it and begin nuclear reactions. As far as I know, nobody denies that gravity plays the most important role in star formation. Do you have any sources verifying your claim?"Sure:
Trigger-Happy Star Formation | NASACepheus B is the closest anyone has gotten to witness star formation. But the data there shows that radiation triggers the collapse."Two metal balls in a lab will attract each other gravitationally."Right, but mass is required for the force of gravity to act. And no one knows what causes it. Maybe planets like each other. Thats my theory."don't go spouting ad hominems."No idea what that is, so I can't make any promises. This is a hobby for me, so if I can cause the greatest minds in here to think, then I'm having fun, and thats what a hobby is supposed to be. Fun."But the first radiation would have appeared with the Big Bang"Okay. Lets assume you are correct, and CMB's are responsible for the first star formation. Why then are other observed clouds of helium and hydrogen not collapsing, since CMB's are everywhere?Man it feels good to have my punctuation back! Not relevant to arguement.