Sorry for asking a question and then answering it ... but this question was recently posted here, and I don't think anybody had the correct answer:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Av1kU2Yg39OoMXVYoQGgszYezKIX?qid=20070104212816AAclxIj
People all correctly pointed out that the Apollo missions went to the moon. But the comment was that since the moon orbited the earth, that the Apollo missions had technically never left the earth's orbit. I disagree.
It is unclear whether being in orbit around the moon is in fact also being in orbit around the earth. But I'm not talking about that.
But what is clear to me is that *while in transit* to the moon, the Apollo spacecraft was NOT in earth's orbit by any definition of the word "orbit." It had achieved escape velocity and had escaped the earth's orbit. Had the moon not been there to *decelerate* the spacecraft (and capture it in a lunar orbit), it was gone.
Anyone disagree? If so, why?
2007-01-07
11:56:39
·
5 answers
·
asked by
secretsauce
7
in
Science & Mathematics
➔ Astronomy & Space
TJ wrote: "By your reasoning, anything caught between the moon and the earth would orbit around the earth, but that's not so."
That is NOT my reasoning. In fact, my argument is precisely the opposite ... that something in transit between the earth and the moon was clearly NOT in an earthbound orbit.
2007-01-07
13:08:08 ·
update #1
sarayu wrote: "Your contention that moon orbits earth and hence, it cannot be construed that man has left earth's orbit is not not convincing and cannot be accepted."
That is NOT my contention. In fact, I disagree with that contention.
My point was that the case was even more clear in the interval between leaving the earth's orbit and entering the moon's orbit ... during this interval, the spacecraft is not orbiting *either* body.
2007-01-07
13:20:26 ·
update #2