<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Falling In Love: The Physics Of Attraction</title>
	<atom:link href="http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/</link>
	<description>A fellowship of Atheists, Agnostics, Deists, Humanists, Skeptics, and Progressive Theists in the Philippines.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 15:38:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: f241vc15</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1471</link>
		<dc:creator>f241vc15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 02:38:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1471</guid>
		<description>Hehe

I have fond memories of vector analysis, especially with free body diagrams.

Don&#039;t worry, I&#039;ll always try to keep it a point to minimize or even skip equations in my science/physics posts. The technicalities and equations will be in the comments. :) Oh and of course I&#039;ll add some social relevance and freethinking on the sides to spice things up. ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hehe</p>
<p>I have fond memories of vector analysis, especially with free body diagrams.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t worry, I&#8217;ll always try to keep it a point to minimize or even skip equations in my science/physics posts. The technicalities and equations will be in the comments. <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  Oh and of course I&#8217;ll add some social relevance and freethinking on the sides to spice things up. <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wes</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1470</link>
		<dc:creator>wes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 02:26:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1470</guid>
		<description>vector analysis... aaaargh!!! my brain is in paaaaain!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>vector analysis&#8230; aaaargh!!! my brain is in paaaaain!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: f241vc15</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1469</link>
		<dc:creator>f241vc15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Oct 2009 01:52:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1469</guid>
		<description>Update:

Pecier has made some good points. I don&#039;t think however, that my article needs revision, since it is not technically incorrect, rather it&#039;s incomplete to cater to a more macroscopic view to remain as less technical as possible. 
Some technical points worthy of mention though:

Given that person A and B have the the mass and separation given by Pecier in his comment above, it will only take person A and B to gravitate towards each other millions to billions of years  in a non-vacuum space if:
- they somehow slowly overcome the coefficient of friction.
- an object with a relatively significant mass doesn&#039;t win, causing both of them to move towards that object instead. 

Otherwise, if they&#039;re in a vacuum, it will only take them hours to minutes if:
- an object with a relatively significant mass again doesn&#039;t interfere</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Update:</p>
<p>Pecier has made some good points. I don&#8217;t think however, that my article needs revision, since it is not technically incorrect, rather it&#8217;s incomplete to cater to a more macroscopic view to remain as less technical as possible.<br />
Some technical points worthy of mention though:</p>
<p>Given that person A and B have the the mass and separation given by Pecier in his comment above, it will only take person A and B to gravitate towards each other millions to billions of years  in a non-vacuum space if:<br />
- they somehow slowly overcome the coefficient of friction.<br />
- an object with a relatively significant mass doesn&#8217;t win, causing both of them to move towards that object instead. </p>
<p>Otherwise, if they&#8217;re in a vacuum, it will only take them hours to minutes if:<br />
- an object with a relatively significant mass again doesn&#8217;t interfere</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: f241vc15</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1376</link>
		<dc:creator>f241vc15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:44:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1376</guid>
		<description>Aawww, isn&#039;t that romantic? The two of you plummeting together towards an asteroid. Clasped hands towards your honeymoon! :D

Keep them coming guys. I&#039;ll then try to update my article, maintaining its non-technicality, but still catering to correct approximations via our equations&#039; solutions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aawww, isn&#8217;t that romantic? The two of you plummeting together towards an asteroid. Clasped hands towards your honeymoon! <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Keep them coming guys. I&#8217;ll then try to update my article, maintaining its non-technicality, but still catering to correct approximations via our equations&#8217; solutions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wes</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1374</link>
		<dc:creator>wes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:41:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1374</guid>
		<description>plus you have to make sure that you&#039;re light-years away from the nearest celestial body, else their mass will overshadow yours and your date will  gravitate toward an asteroid instead of into your arms, hehe</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>plus you have to make sure that you&#8217;re light-years away from the nearest celestial body, else their mass will overshadow yours and your date will  gravitate toward an asteroid instead of into your arms, hehe</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: f241vc15</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1371</link>
		<dc:creator>f241vc15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:33:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1371</guid>
		<description>Haha nice one @wes! :D

Wait there&#039;s more! Since you&#039;re in a vacuum, nobody can hear you make out! :D

But oh crap, no good background music for you guys then too. :D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Haha nice one @wes! <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Wait there&#8217;s more! Since you&#8217;re in a vacuum, nobody can hear you make out! <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>But oh crap, no good background music for you guys then too. <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wes</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1370</link>
		<dc:creator>wes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:27:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1370</guid>
		<description>now all we torpes have to do is to get the girl of our dreams floating in the vacuum of space and wait for gravitational forces to pull us together.

I smell a hollywood date-movie in the making :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>now all we torpes have to do is to get the girl of our dreams floating in the vacuum of space and wait for gravitational forces to pull us together.</p>
<p>I smell a hollywood date-movie in the making <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: f241vc15</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1363</link>
		<dc:creator>f241vc15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 01:37:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1363</guid>
		<description>@Pecier

Hehe Thanks for the nice technical comment. I should have mentioned that two people A and B will only &quot;gravitate&quot; towards each other as I have mentioned, if they&#039;re in a vacuum (!) making this even funnier and more ridiculous in my opinion. :D Not even in a frictionless surface, but in a bloody vacuum! :)

Regarding the 3rd law, yes the forces of &quot;attraction&quot; are equal, but the less massive one will have a higher acceleration due to the 2nd law, where F = m*a.

Oh and perhaps by static friction you specifically mean the coefficient of static friction no? I think one has to bypass that one.

Regarding the computation using Newton&#039;s law of gravity, did you use the gravitational constant in this formula (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant)? Where 

F = G*(m1*m2)/r^2 

G being equal to approximately 6.673×10−11 N* m^2 /kg^2? If so, and with m1 and m2 being both equal to 50kg and r = 0.5m, I got a value of 66.7x10^-8 N, after which I divide 50kg to remove the mass (kg) and I get 1.33x10^-8 m/s^2 no? What do you think?

And regarding the time it will take B to accelerate and reach A, won&#039;t it only take B

sq. root of (0.5 m / 1.33x10^-8 m/s^2)

seconds to reach A? This is approximately 6,132 seconds.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Pecier</p>
<p>Hehe Thanks for the nice technical comment. I should have mentioned that two people A and B will only &#8220;gravitate&#8221; towards each other as I have mentioned, if they&#8217;re in a vacuum (!) making this even funnier and more ridiculous in my opinion. <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif' alt=':D' class='wp-smiley' />  Not even in a frictionless surface, but in a bloody vacuum! <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Regarding the 3rd law, yes the forces of &#8220;attraction&#8221; are equal, but the less massive one will have a higher acceleration due to the 2nd law, where F = m*a.</p>
<p>Oh and perhaps by static friction you specifically mean the coefficient of static friction no? I think one has to bypass that one.</p>
<p>Regarding the computation using Newton&#8217;s law of gravity, did you use the gravitational constant in this formula (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant)?" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant)?</a> Where </p>
<p>F = G*(m1*m2)/r^2 </p>
<p>G being equal to approximately 6.673×10−11 N* m^2 /kg^2? If so, and with m1 and m2 being both equal to 50kg and r = 0.5m, I got a value of 66.7&#215;10^-8 N, after which I divide 50kg to remove the mass (kg) and I get 1.33&#215;10^-8 m/s^2 no? What do you think?</p>
<p>And regarding the time it will take B to accelerate and reach A, won&#8217;t it only take B</p>
<p>sq. root of (0.5 m / 1.33&#215;10^-8 m/s^2)</p>
<p>seconds to reach A? This is approximately 6,132 seconds.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pecier</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1356</link>
		<dc:creator>Pecier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:40:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1356</guid>
		<description>@f241vc15

Let A be in love with B. Let B be likewise in love with A. Now suppose that A and B sit on the brand of  a tree (not yet doing the k-i-s-s-i-n-g thing) some distance d apart from each other. The force of (gravitational) attraction between them is very small indeed, but it is non-zero. However, it will not take &quot;millions to billions&quot; of years for the heavier to attract the other. Here&#039;s why. 

First, they attract each other with the an equal albeit opposite force (3rd Law of Newton), so no one will be more attracted to anyone, they will attract each other equally. (So love is blind?)

Second, A and B&#039;s butts will have a friction with the tree branch. This kind of friction is static friction, since none of them are moving yet. When an object has a static friction f with a surface, one would have to push the object with a force greater than f in a direction parallel to the surface in order to get the object moving. In short, since the static friction between butt A and the tree branch (likewise with butt B) far exceeds the force of attraction between A and B, thanks to gravity&#039;s legendary weakness, if no one will make a move, nothing will happen. Not in a billion years. Not in a gazillion. (Bad news for torpes.)

However, make A and B sit on a frictionless surface and they would start accelerating towards each other. (Yey! Happy ending!) Suppose A&#039;s butt is glued to the surface. (Ohh..) Let B slide freely. (Unfair.) Let there be no third party. (No threesome?) By Newton&#039;s law of gravity, if both A and B are 50 kg each, and if they are initially situated a distance of 0.5 meters apart, then B will start to accelerate at 1.33E-8 ms^-2. Assuming B will continue to accelerate at this pace as she approaches A (not a bad assumption, really) then by the 2nd law which says that F = ma, the time it will take for B to finally reach A is approximately 8,658 years. (A good lesson for torpes, isn&#039;t  it?)

I hope you&#039;ve learned from my comment. (I enjoyed writing it!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@f241vc15</p>
<p>Let A be in love with B. Let B be likewise in love with A. Now suppose that A and B sit on the brand of  a tree (not yet doing the k-i-s-s-i-n-g thing) some distance d apart from each other. The force of (gravitational) attraction between them is very small indeed, but it is non-zero. However, it will not take &#8220;millions to billions&#8221; of years for the heavier to attract the other. Here&#8217;s why. </p>
<p>First, they attract each other with the an equal albeit opposite force (3rd Law of Newton), so no one will be more attracted to anyone, they will attract each other equally. (So love is blind?)</p>
<p>Second, A and B&#8217;s butts will have a friction with the tree branch. This kind of friction is static friction, since none of them are moving yet. When an object has a static friction f with a surface, one would have to push the object with a force greater than f in a direction parallel to the surface in order to get the object moving. In short, since the static friction between butt A and the tree branch (likewise with butt B) far exceeds the force of attraction between A and B, thanks to gravity&#8217;s legendary weakness, if no one will make a move, nothing will happen. Not in a billion years. Not in a gazillion. (Bad news for torpes.)</p>
<p>However, make A and B sit on a frictionless surface and they would start accelerating towards each other. (Yey! Happy ending!) Suppose A&#8217;s butt is glued to the surface. (Ohh..) Let B slide freely. (Unfair.) Let there be no third party. (No threesome?) By Newton&#8217;s law of gravity, if both A and B are 50 kg each, and if they are initially situated a distance of 0.5 meters apart, then B will start to accelerate at 1.33E-8 ms^-2. Assuming B will continue to accelerate at this pace as she approaches A (not a bad assumption, really) then by the 2nd law which says that F = ma, the time it will take for B to finally reach A is approximately 8,658 years. (A good lesson for torpes, isn&#8217;t  it?)</p>
<p>I hope you&#8217;ve learned from my comment. (I enjoyed writing it!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: f241vc15</title>
		<link>http://filipinofreethinkers.org/2009/10/12/falling-in-love-the-physics-of-attraction/comment-page-1/#comment-1332</link>
		<dc:creator>f241vc15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 09:48:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://filipinofreethinkers.org/?p=737#comment-1332</guid>
		<description>@Rydex

Can you please be more specific, like by providing links? I&#039;m very much interested in looking into your suggestion but I&#039;m pretty busy and I don&#039;t have a lot of time to look around for that particular BBC documentary.

Oh and I don&#039;t think I mentioned anything about M-theory, just General relativity in general [sic]. And you mentioned describing the 4th dimension. You have to realize describing something doesn&#039;t necessarily translate to us visualizing it. Get it? :)

Oh and about the documentary not having any hints of love in it,  it&#039;s likely I can find some out of it. ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Rydex</p>
<p>Can you please be more specific, like by providing links? I&#8217;m very much interested in looking into your suggestion but I&#8217;m pretty busy and I don&#8217;t have a lot of time to look around for that particular BBC documentary.</p>
<p>Oh and I don&#8217;t think I mentioned anything about M-theory, just General relativity in general [sic]. And you mentioned describing the 4th dimension. You have to realize describing something doesn&#8217;t necessarily translate to us visualizing it. Get it? <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>Oh and about the documentary not having any hints of love in it,  it&#8217;s likely I can find some out of it. <img src='http://filipinofreethinkers.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
