come on, CB....
>>Kepler's Third Law proves it<< Kepler (I, II, III, X) does not prove anything. It's a law - and it's not a lawyer's law, it's a physical (physicist's) law.
I'll refrain from taking this satellite discussion as something serious. It's a mirror of our own personalities, nothing else - they fly as they would fly without us and the differences between "what I think" and "what they do" is a gauge on me, not on them.
Our concern should be the immediate, intermediate and far future. Remember, CFC 2001?
The 3rd (p = const) Kepler's law is a no-contest in THIS CONTEXT. Take it all. I can order some more of it, if thats not enough. Why trying to prove you (I,he,she,they) are right?... (sigh) these boots are made for walking ... etc.
In this game,that's going on right now, the winners will be a VERY tiny minority. Count them on one, max two hands.
The low-flying vs high-flying satellites and Keppler dont give a s*t about losers. We should, tough.
dj |
