In that case, my comment was perhaps stylistic rather than scientific; it read to me like "Nye" was responding directly to the claim that in "Gravity" it appears as though gravity doesn't operate off the surface of the Earth. I guess in these debates it's never quite clear what point(?) one should be arguing against. Thanks for the revision, and the fine writing overall!
Hilarious and really well-written, but PLEASE fix the description of weightlessness in orbit. It's the fact of being in orbit (hence "constantly in free fall"), not of being far from the Earth, that gives the sensation of weightlessness. Objects in orbit aren't far enough from Earth for its gravitational pull to be substantially diminished. The radius of the Earth is over 6000 kilometers. The ISS is only about 400 kilometers above the surface. 1/6000^2 and 1/6400^2 aren't all that different.
Also, "outer space" conventionally starts well below ISS's altitude, at around 100 km.
In that case, my comment was perhaps stylistic rather than scientific; it read to me like "Nye" was responding directly to the claim that in "Gravity" it appears as though gravity doesn't operate off the surface of the Earth. I guess in these debates it's never quite clear what point(?) one should be arguing against. Thanks for the revision, and the fine writing overall!
Hilarious and really well-written, but PLEASE fix the description of weightlessness in orbit. It's the fact of being in orbit (hence "constantly in free fall"), not of being far from the Earth, that gives the sensation of weightlessness. Objects in orbit aren't far enough from Earth for its gravitational pull to be substantially diminished. The radius of the Earth is over 6000 kilometers. The ISS is only about 400 kilometers above the surface. 1/6000^2 and 1/6400^2 aren't all that different.