Journal Entry 11/16 Continued

I still think that the truck is the reference point for Dan. With my last sentence, however, I was trying to convey the idea that because Dan's car is moving at the same speed as the truck firing the baseball, the ball itself does not appear to be moving. I think my wording was just a bit awkward in the last sentence...sorry.

Journal Entry 11/16

Let's pretend that observer A and B are at the site of the Japanese experiment with the baseball and the truck both moving at 100 km/h. Observer A saw the ball moving and observer B saw the ball not moving and here is the reason why...

Let's call person A: Jen and person B: Dan

Jen hears that her friends are doing a physics experiment at the local race track. She has finished all her homework, so she decides to head over to the track and check out the experiment. Her friend Billy who is in charge of the experiment tells her to take a seat in the stands while he and his friends perform the experiment. Billy and his friends start the car, and they drive it around the track. When it reaches 100 km/ hr, Billy shoots a baseball out of a pitching machine (which is also rotating it 100 km/hr). Jen is amazed by what she sees. The ball whizzes past her and she is truly impressed by Billy's experiment. (Jen's object of reference is the pitching machine)

Billy also told his best bud Dan about the experiment he was performing after school. Dan really wants to see what happens when the ball is shot out of the machine, while the car is moving, so he tries really hard to be on time. Dan forgets his driver's license at home after he leaves the house however, so he has to drive carefully back and get it. Behind schedule, Dan races to the track so that he doesn't miss the experiment. He drives the entire trip at 100 km/hr, even on some of the residential streets between his house and the track. Luckily he doesn't get a ticket. Although he's driving above the speed limit in an attempt to make it to the track on time, the experiment is being performed right as he passes the location. He watches the truck on the track, but the ball does not appear to be moving. After many moments of puzzlement, he realizes that because he is traveling at the same speed as the truck on the track, the ball doesn't appear to be moving. (Dan's object of reference is the truck)

Although a little surprising, both Jen and Dan are correct about the motion of the ball. Based on each of their positions and actions, the ball appears to have different motion. Jen is seated and her object of reference is the ball and the pitching machine. In terms of this machine, the ball is moving at 100 km/hr. Dan is driving pass the track at the same speed as the truck, and his point of reference is that truck. In terms of the truck, the ball does not appear to be moving.

Journal Entry 11/2

Great Debates:
The Moon Landings: All Real or All Lies??

Host (Nicole): Hello and welcome to this weeks installment of Great Debates. Tonight, we will be considering the United States Space Program, and whether or not astronauts actually made it to the moon on July 20, 1969. Our special guest debaters tonight are Bryan and John, two noted scientists. Without further ado, let's get this debate started. Bryan you were the one to initiate this debate because you wanted to discredit NASA. How do you know that astronauts did not land on the moon?

Bryan: Well Nicole, as I'm sure you know, there are at least three aspects of the so-called moon landing that are contradictory. These contradictions are pretty full-proof if I do say so myself.

John: We'll have to see about that.

Nicole: Alright guys, before you get snippy with each other, Bryan what is the first point you would like to bring up?

Bryan: First of all, I would like to point out that in photographs of the supposed moon trip, no stars are visible. The moon is in the solar system, surrounded by stars, but they are surprisingly not seen in these photographs. I wonder how that could be. Actually I do know how that's possible. The moon landings were staged and by a basic human error, no stars were placed in the shots.

John: Bryan you are completely mistaken. If you knew anything about photography, you would realize that your assumption that there was a camera screw-up is wrong. Have you ever thought about how bright the moon actually is? The soil is practically glowing. And on top of this, the astronauts are in completely white suits. As they are standing on the moon, they are reflecting the sun's light from every point. The rays bouncing off of their suits and the soil are entering the camera lens and are preventing the stars from being seen. Imagine a light bulb sitting on a desk in a classroom. If you turned the bulb on, pointed your camera at it and took a picture, how much of the rest of the classroom do you think you would see? Not much, if anything. I'm sure you can understand this example, can't you?

Bryan: Well that may be a possible explanation, but even still, I know the landing was a fake. I have other proof. Don't you worry.

Brian holds up a picture of astronauts, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, securing a US flag into the surface of the moon.

Bryan: If you're so sure that the astronauts actually went to the moon, how can you explain the movement of the flag in this picture? You have to know that there's no wind on the moon. What's going on John?

John: That's so simple Bryan. The astronauts themselves are causing the flag to move. Think about how you would put a flag into the ground. You have to twist and turn it so that it goes deep into the soil. The same thing is happening on the moon. Now if you can't come to terms with that, let's say that you decided to go to the park with your family one day. Now let's say that you stand in the middle of field and there is absolutely no wind blowing. It is the calmest day in the history of calm days. Your son and daughter decide to have a race. Your daughter starts to run and her long hair shifts around as if it is being blown by the wind. Don't forget that this is the calmest day in the history of calm days though. Clearly her own movement causes her hair to shift and flap around, as if it was being blown by the breeze.

Bryan: Hmpf. You think you're so smart. Well you're not. Show me some proof, some actual evidence that US astronauts actually went to the moon.

John proceeds to lift a moon rock out of his podium.

Bryan: What's that? Why would you bring a dumb rock to such a sophisticated debate?

John: I'm glad you asked Bryan. For your information this is no ordinary rock. This is a moon rock. Real scientists began extensive studies on these things when they were brought back from the moon by US astronauts. And do you know how we verified that these are not earth rocks? Probably not considering your other arguments. We analyzed their composition and came to see that there are no water molecules in these rocks. If they had been from Earth, there would be water molecules in them. Seriously Bryan, you should have done better research before coming on this show and embarrassing yourself.

Bryan storms off in a fit of anger and embarrassment.

Nicole: Well viewers, I hope you enjoyed today's episode of Great Debates. It certainly was interesting! Tune in next week for another Great Debate!

*** When you're looking at this Mr. D'Amato just keep in mind that I was not in class today. I looked at all the resources you provided and tried my best! ***