PDA

View Full Version : Gravity wasn't so ad back in the day


smurfslappa
03-02-2006, 10:10 AM
Gliders and sailplanes have wings made for maximum lift and, hence, relatively lumbering flight. Fighter aircraft have wings made for aerial maneuver and fast flight, but nowhere near as much lift. For that reason, if a C5-A is the largest transport plane which modern technology allows us to build, and it is, then you do not expect to see a fighter plane five times the size of a C5-A, the reasons being fairly obvious.

Likewise, the albatross and certain condors are bird equivalents of sailplanes and transports and, at 30 - 35 lbs. or so, albatrassos have enough trouble with takeoffs and landings for sailors to call them "gooney birds". You therefore do not expect to see an eagle or a hawk, or anything like that, basically a bird equivalent of a fighter aircraft made for maneuver and pursuit, five times the size of the largest albatross, for the same reason which you do not see a fighter five times the size of the C5-A.

If, on the other hand, you DID see something like that in prehistoric times, then you have to figure something was very different in the extent to which gravity itself, the limiting factor here, operated in prehistoric times.

The original article on the Argentinian teratorn from Bioscience, December 1980:

Argentine scientists' have unearthed the fossil remains of what Seems to be the world's largest known flying bird, Argen- tavis magnificens. The bird lived be- tween eight and five million years ago, in the late Miocene era. With a wingspan of 25 feet, the bird measured' 11 feet from beak to tail, and weighed in at l6 to 170 Ibs. Its first wing bone, the humerus, was approximately 22 inches long.

Paleontologists Kenneth E. Campbell and Eduardo P. Tonni identified the fos- sil remains at Argentina's La Plata Mu- seum. Working with leg, wing, and skull bones, Campbell and Tonni, have tenta- tively concluded that the enormous bird probably did more soaring than flapping. They admit that it seems initially unlike- ly that a bird of that size could even get off the ground, but believe that the size of the wing bones and their markings in- dicate that Argenravis magnificens did fly. "It has the right size wing bones, and it has the markings on the wing bones of secondaries, a type of flight feathers," Campbell said. "It's unlikely that a bird would have feathers and wing bones suit- able for flight if it didn't fly."

In the past, there have been larger birds and larger flying animals, but no larger flying birds. Pterosaurs, giant fly- ing reptiles, were the biggest creatures to take off; one pterosaur found in Texas had a wingspan of 30 to 33 feet. The larg- est previously known flying birds were the North American Teratornis incred- ibilis and a marine bird calied Osteo dontoris orri. Both had wingspans of al- most 16 feet.

Based on his studies of another tera- torn fossil, Teratornis merriami, Camp bell believes that the teratorns were predators. "The long, narrow hooked beak and the type of jaw mechanism found in this species are similar to those that would be expected of a bird that grabbed small animals with its beak and swallowed them whole," he said

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/Baalbek.jpg

Baalbek, Lebanon, is the scene of another of the funny anomalies involving gravity in the ancient world. At the temple of Jupiter at Baalbek, and also in a nearby quary, are found carved stone blocks which are simply too heavy to be moved by any modern technology and, hence also one would assume, by any ancient technology. The only assumption which works, as noted also in the case of the large Teratorn, is that gravity was simply not the problem then which it is now.

If you assume that the largest elephants are the largest animals possible in our present world, and if you accept McGowan's 180 ton figure for the ultrasaur and equate the two, i.e. if you assume that the sauropod could have "felt" no heavier than the largest elephant feels now at 7 or 8 tons, then you get a factor of about 2.7 to one between the acceleration due to gravity in our world and in the ultrasaur's world. Even accepting the lightest figures ever published for ultrasaurs, supersaurs, seismosaurs etc., you would still get a required attenuation of gravity too great to be accounted for by any possible cosmic alignment, interaction with other bodies, or accumulation of mass on our planet between then and now. The only possibility remaining, is that there is something fundamentally wrong with our basic understanding of gravity. That in fact turns out to be the case, as Ralph Sansbury describes.

All That Was Ripped Off

Yep, something is weird with gravity. Way back in the day when our ancestors were still worshipping Jupiter and Saturn (instead of the moon and sun supposedly the biggest things in the sky back then from what we're taught) the solar system was supposed to be a lot more charged, and there were many fights with lightning bolts hurled. You could see everything in the sky back then, I'm sure... Gravity has something to do with all that, and why these guys could lift all these stones and all these huge ass birds could fly. But alas, the conditions have changed and everything is heavier now...

XerxesX
03-02-2006, 10:34 AM
Insects as well. The respiratory tecnique of insects does not allow for the size of prehistoric insects. A heavier, more oxygenated atmosphere is onepossible factor.

smurfslappa
03-02-2006, 10:35 AM
What changed was the same damn thing that froze the mammoths so fast, we can still identify the contents of their stomachs, and their meat is still delicious. And that they've found fruit trees that only grow in southern latitudes.

Pioneering zoologist Georges Cuvier who, in his 1829 work Revolutions and Catastrophes in the History of the Earth commented that: “this eternal frost did not previously exist in those parts in which the animals were frozen, for they could not have survived in such a temperature. The same instant that these creatures were bereft of life, the country which they inhabited became frozen”

On the 16th January1960, an American newspaper, the Saturday Evening Post, published an article by Ivan T Sanderson entitled Riddle of the Quick-frozen Giants in which he wrote: “The mammoths died suddenly, in intense cold, and in great numbers. Death came so quickly that the swallowed vegetation is yet undigested ….. Grasses, bluebells, buttercups, tender sedges and wild beans have been found, yet identifiable and undeteriorated, in their mouths and stomachs.”

Gotta wonder what killed all the Megafauna here in North America... Ice Age probably, the same way we get a nice warm winter over here, and all the cold goes to the other side of the world, the people over here really got screwed for a while.

SPOooOn
03-02-2006, 11:06 AM
Thats an easy one .. back in the day the earth was hotter.. earth cools down = earth shrinks = same weight in less space = more gravity..

OMG .. we're slowly turning into a black hole . .

smurfslappa
03-02-2006, 11:21 AM
So much, Spoon, that flight for a 200 lb bird was possible?

XerxesX
03-02-2006, 06:44 PM
A magickal thesis, is that reality is constituted by the sentience observing.

As such, the ability to fly and trancend universes is nothing. The discource is something. The ability to trancend the mono-sentient and reach the omni-sentience of oneness.

After all. The first flight is bound to take you away from the nest. In this, gravity and time constitute boundaries set by ourself with the ultimate intention of understanding.

Limits are for growth. Try telling that to a plant in a to small pot though.

The paradox of reality is a conch much needed. Lets change it :!:

chester grape
03-02-2006, 06:56 PM
Thats an easy one .. back in the day the earth was hotter.. earth cools down = earth shrinks = same weight in less space = more gravity..

OMG .. we're slowly turning into a black hole . .

Sorry, wrong. Same mass, regardless of size, equals same gravity.

There might be an argument that, as we live on the surface of the earth, as the earth shrinks we get closer to the earth's centre of gravity. But that effect would be negligible (you don't notice that there's "less" gravity when you're flying 20,000ft up in a plane, do you?).

Nope, a more richly oxygenated atmosphere is what's responsible for the proliferation of megafauna. Ice drilling in Antarctica, I believe, has proven that the atmosphere had more than double the oxygen levels it does now.

SPOooOn
03-03-2006, 03:10 AM
Sorry, wrong. Same mass, regardless of size, equals same gravity.

Explain me a black hole then . .

diogenes
03-03-2006, 04:58 AM
Black Holes defy conventional physics. Newtonian physics does not allow for a singularity, since in a singularity particles of matter do exist in the same space. Thus the puzzle of explaining black holes.

SPOooOn
03-03-2006, 06:52 AM
mass equals gravity.

Is that wy I feel drawn to dwaine?

diogenes
03-03-2006, 06:55 AM
I'm more inclined to think it would be your latent homosexuality, but it's possible Dwaine is a black hole. I heard he is able to exist in two places simultaneously.

SPOooOn
03-03-2006, 07:25 AM
Is that wy I feel drawn to dwaine?
I ment that in a manly, non homo-erotic way . . *hides pink hanky*

XerxesX
03-03-2006, 11:33 AM
A black hole would have less mass. It would be sort off [/i]tighter. A whole hole. Half a hole would be bigger. Possibly even bigger than Dwaine

Totalrecall1982
03-03-2006, 11:58 AM
Maybe learn a little more about gravity and air density of prehistoric times before making crazy assumptions that any fucking scientist would have thought of already!

diogenes
03-03-2006, 09:54 PM
Without crazy assumptions where would smurf be? Honestly think about it.

XerxesX
03-04-2006, 11:27 AM
What makes the real Quaid, presumably the father of the famous real McQuaid, presume that any fucking scientist have not thought this. Does he say that since any fuckin scientist has thought of it, our contribution is superfluous ? Does he speak of himself. I guess most of the conotations are subtextual. ( Like a silent agreement of meaning ) That still does not constitute meaningfull laguage. ( Not even english language ). Speak up boy. Your face is all read, and those eyes are a clear sign of drugabuse. What have you got to say for yourself :evil:

I might add that many serious scientists have claimed that the earth is flat. Other seem to find the current USenvironmental and energy-policy to be a product of adult human minds.

Totalrecall1982
03-21-2006, 01:50 PM
Another thing, sauropods such as the Ultrasaur would have crushed themselves under their own weight. Also, the blood pressure required to get blood to their brains would of been immense and caused them to pop all sorts of blood vessels. They also think these dinosaurs kept their heads horizontal in a "resting" position to cope with all this weight and blood pressure. What the hell kind of animal keeps their extremely long, extremely heavy limb sticking straight out like that to rest it? You never see a giraffe do that, and when they're drinking water I'm sure they're all like "Goddamit fuckin bullshit!" Gravity wasn't so bad back in the day, that's how these long-necked beasts were able to cope.

smurfslappa
03-21-2006, 01:51 PM
Whoops, that was me.

chester grape
03-21-2006, 06:09 PM
Busted!

smurfslappa
03-22-2006, 12:20 AM
No, I was on his computer at work and he has that automatic log-in.

diogenes
03-22-2006, 12:23 AM
You're assuming that these giant herbivores didn't live in semi-aquatic and aquatic conditions, which would dramatically reduce blood-pressure and muscle requirements for having such a long neck.

smurfslappa
03-22-2006, 12:28 AM
The 200 lb. bird still flew

diogenes
03-22-2006, 12:33 AM
Another huge assumption. How do they know that the bird would have weighed 200lbs. and how do they know the atmosphere wasn't more dense?

smurfslappa
03-22-2006, 12:35 AM
The bird had a 25 foot wingspan, 200 bs was an estimate but still a far cry from the 30 lbers we have nowadays. How dense would the atmosphere have to be to make up that difference?

diogenes
03-22-2006, 12:38 AM
Not much. The increase in atmospheric density would be multiplied by total lift generated by the wing.

smurfslappa
03-22-2006, 09:31 AM
Are you so sure about that, Diogenes? The bird still weighs 200 lbs, and our 30 lb birds already have trouble taking off because they're so damn fat and juicy. MmMmM...

Totalrecall1982
03-22-2006, 10:07 AM
Damn it smurf stole my identity!