ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist

Quote from: JackBlack on February 15, 2021, 04:13:12 AM

As explained repeatedly, it is not merely resistance. It is specifically resistance to a change in motion.
That is what you need to explain.

Resistance is resistance, no matter how you try to dress it up.
If inertia is resistance then I'm onboard with inertia.
Is this the case?

Again, NO IT ISN'T!

There are fundamentally different types of resistance.
I know you want to pretend they are all the same so you can pretend to explain it by explaining something completely different, like how you tried to pass it off as increasing the pressure in a sealed tube.
But it simply is not the case.

So can you actually explain inertia, i.e. a resistance to change in motion, or are you only capable of continuing this dishonest BS?

Likewise, can you explain what magic provides the extra force needed to create your pressure gradient?

Quote from: Unconvinced on February 14, 2021, 07:08:06 AM

Why don't you go and actually try to learn this yourself, you lazy sod?

Maybe if you could be bothered to spend a fraction of the time on it that you spend repeating your nonsense, you might understand how it works, and why your ideas very clearly don't. 

Instead you use the product of advanced physics and engineering to arrogantly claim you know better than every single physicist and engineer who's lived for hundreds of years.

Ok I'll try and learn.
First of all I need to actually know what I'm learning. I mean, learning.
I don't want stories of old, told as stories of new.

Great, you want to learn, but you’ve already fallen at the first hurdle by deciding beforehand what you want it be.

I’m not even suggesting you accept it as true, just to learn the physics that everyone else learns, so you understand how it works.  Because only then can you begin to find problems with it, if there are any.

I don't want to be told gravity is, so there. I want to learn what this gravity actually is in real time.
I want to know what it is and how it can be explained to become the force to do what it supposedly does.

And this is all backwards. Every scientific discovery has come from observing and experimenting with the effects first.  eg. people understood that fire was hot long before they’d figured out the mechanics of exothermic chemical reactions.  With gravity, we know what it does which is observed and measured, but the precise mechanism is still up for debate.

Nobody's explained it in any realistic terms.

How do you judge what’s realistic? 

It'sd absolutely fine to go on about advanced physics...but show what that is by dumbing it right down to the basics of explanation instead of simply copy/paste what is to be parroted.

I’m not here to explain it to you.  I’m suggesting you find out yourself.  Basic physics first though.  The point is that our technology is built on these principles, which is a pretty good way of knowing that they work.

And as for me claiming to know better. No I don't. You people make that claim about me due to frustrations of not being able to batter the stuff you follow, into my head. You then claim I know I think I know better than scientists of hundreds of years, rather than just saying...today.
It's always harking back.

Why?

You may not use those words, but you claim that the physics that everyone uses to make all the technology we rely on is all just indoctrination.  Pretty much the same thing.

I have all the information I need already to calculate the Earths mass by just measuring my weight.  That's the difference.

First of all, you don't.
You need to understand what weight is before you even go near what you think Earth's mass is.
This is the utter nonsense that appears to look ok on paper for anyone who does not need to bother thinking logically on the reality.
Basically 1+1 can be made into 5  if enough utter gobbledygook is applied

I can use information I have measured myself to verify known (or you would say given) information.

The only thing you can measure is what a scale shows you.
The rest is all added in bits of reality and nonsense to make it appear like it's worthwhile scientific theoretical so people can hide behind letters on the  external breast pocket.

  F=GMm/r2.  I know G and I can calculate F (my weight) and from that m (my mass) and so from that I can measure M (mass of the Earth) and r (radius of the Earth).  Since F is a function of M, m and r if I was to change M or r then that would also alter the value of F to something other than my measured value.  That's how I can verify that the figures for M and r that I am 'given' are correct. Why would anyone lie about the mass or the radius of the Earth?

You don't know your mass by using so called G and you certainly do not know what Earth is in its entirety. You believe you know because you were massively indoctrinated. Accept that as a truth if you care to be honest about it.

This can work with any mass. Take a 1kg mass used in school science lab or a 10kg weight used in a gym.  They are called weights in the gym but it is actually a 10kg mass. Now place the 'weight' on some scales and from that you can read off the downward force (it's actual weight) in Newtons. Since we know g we can predict what the weight will be even before we use the scales to confirm our prediction. From there we can use the equation to work out r (radius of the Earth).  You can use whatever mass you like you will always get the same value for r.  However since I don't know anything about your big block in the road I cannot work out anything from that unless you provide me with some information about it.

You can't call anything a weight until it's showing a scale measurement readout. Until then, it's a mass.

There is only one Earth as far as I know so there is only one mass value associated with the Earth.

Yep, if you look at it that way.......but, it's knowing what Earth is in its entirety of mass and that is something you will never be able to measure.

  Just like there is only one of you and so you have a certain mass.

Yep...and because of man made scales with man made measurements on a readout, you can measure your mass by displacement against atmosphere and the resulting reaction of that compression of it back onto you.
No need for G and what not unless it's used to actually cater for the reality, which is what we are under.

When you're served up the nonsense on a platter from cradle to present, you will naturally argue for the reality you think it presents but you know in your mind that you are doing nothing more than learning to parrot.

  But you are made up of a myriad of different materials aren't you.

As it appears....yes. Different densities of make up.

  If you want to break it down to the atomic level you are made of a lot of oxygen, hydrogen, calcium, carbon atoms etc etc.

We could do but it would end up as one basic ingredient, so we have to deal with what we're basically told to go with and decipher from all that.

If someone asked you what your mass was you wouldn't say to them 'What mass do you want.. the mass of all the oxygen atoms or the mass of all the hydrogen atoms or calcium atoms or carbon atoms?' Well you could but you would get some very bemused expressions!

Does that help?

If someone asked me what my mass was I'd ask, in what way.
If they say kg, I'd use a scale.

A good teacher will always try to assess the level of their students knowledge so they can relate to them at a level appropriate to them.  So when you start to ask grown up questions about whatever it is that you want to try and prove then you will get grown up explanations.  But if you think the Earth has different masses for the different materials it is made up of... well that doesn't bode well does it.

A good protocol teacher will follow protocol. A curriculum. Anyone not onboard with it will be left behind to fend for themselves.......gradeless in terms of worth .....certificate shy.....drone material.

A good teacher is one who teaches reality or potential. A logical approach and a patient approach to all those who are not as quick as the better absorbent parrots/mimics.
Someone who doesn't cloak reality in favour of handed down fiction.
If someone can't do their 2x table, you start them at one and make them feel like they're making progress, amid, maybe those on their 4x table.

The complicated will always be complicated to anyone who is shown the complicated way. The strip down of the complicated can reveal the simplicity of anything.
Reverse engineer the conundrum.

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 15, 2021, 09:14:21 AM

Quote from: JackBlack on February 15, 2021, 04:13:12 AM

As explained repeatedly, it is not merely resistance. It is specifically resistance to a change in motion.
That is what you need to explain.

Resistance is resistance, no matter how you try to dress it up.
If inertia is resistance then I'm onboard with inertia.
Is this the case?

Again, NO IT ISN'T!

There are fundamentally different types of resistance.
I know you want to pretend they are all the same so you can pretend to explain it by explaining something completely different, like how you tried to pass it off as increasing the pressure in a sealed tube.
But it simply is not the case.

So can you actually explain inertia, i.e. a resistance to change in motion, or are you only capable of continuing this dishonest BS?

Likewise, can you explain what magic provides the extra force needed to create your pressure gradient?

Ok, let's deal with inertia.

You say it's a resistance to change in motion.

Ok, let's see where we go.

Does a  change in motion mean the object with inertia is in motion?......Or does it also mean the object resists any force that attempts to create a motion.


Let's sort this bit out before we move on.
We are going child like on this so we can get a proper explanation.

You say it's a resistance to change in motion.

Ok, let's see where we go.

Does a  change in motion mean the object with inertia is in motion?......Or does it also mean the object resists any force that attempts to create a motion.


Let's sort this bit out before we move on.
We are going child like on this so we can get a proper explanation.

Do you not understand change?
It means the object resists any change in motion such that a force needs to be applied to change its motion.
This applies regardless of if the object is at rest and you try to make it move, or if it is moving and you try to make it stop, or if it is moving and you try to change its speed or direction (or both).

Quote from: Solarwind on February 15, 2021, 09:25:45 AM

I have all the information I need already to calculate the Earths mass by just measuring my weight.  That's the difference.

First of all, you don't.
You need to understand what weight is before you even go near what you think Earth's mass is.

You need to understand what it is before spouting so much nonsense about it.
You sure do love claiming things with absolutely certainty far too much for someone who claims to have no idea.

This is the utter nonsense

Do you have anything at all to indicate it is nonsense?
Because you continually dismissing it as nonsense because you don't like it does not help your case at all.
It just shows you have no case.

You can't call anything a weight until it's showing a scale measurement readout. Until then, it's a mass.

Unless it is floating, it has weight.
The force that makes things fall is weight, no matter how much you want to reject reality.

you can measure your mass by displacement against atmosphere

No, you can't. Not unless this mass floats and you can measure the volume of atmosphere (and thus mass) displaced.
Otherwise, until you can justify your garbage, the atmosphere does not cause weight.

 and the resulting reaction of that compression of it back onto you.
No need for G and what not unless it's used to actually cater for the reality, which is what we are under.

When you're served up the nonsense on a platter from cradle to present, you will naturally argue for the reality you think it presents but you know in your mind that you are doing nothing more than learning to parrot.

Quote from: Solarwind

If someone asked you what your mass was you wouldn't say to them 'What mass do you want.. the mass of all the oxygen atoms or the mass of all the hydrogen atoms or calcium atoms or carbon atoms?' Well you could but you would get some very bemused expressions!
Does that help?

If someone asked me what my mass was I'd ask, in what way.
If they say kg, I'd use a scale.

And notice how you ignored the main point.
You aren't just focusing on one part of you.
Likewise, we can just consider Earth as a hole rather than trying to focus on one part.

A good teacher is one who teaches reality or potential.

No it isn't, and even you implicitly accept that. That is the kind of teacher you hate.
A good teacher makes sure the student understands, rather than just teaching them reality.
When they are a horrible teacher and just teach reality without any understanding, we end up with people like you who dismiss reality as fictional nonsense, without any ability to justify their dismissal.

Do you not understand change?
It means the object resists any change in motion such that a force needs to be applied to change its motion.
This applies regardless of if the object is at rest and you try to make it move, or if it is moving and you try to make it stop, or if it is moving and you try to change its speed or direction (or both).

Let's get this right. Correct me if I'm wrong and or there's something needs to be added.
I'm stood still (ish) and you go to push me. I resist that push from you. Is this inertia?

Or I'm stood there. do I have inertia at that point and if so, why?

Just explain it like I'm a retard   you think I am or a child you may think I show the mentality of.
This might make it easier for me to understand, rather than all the gobbledygook I keep seeing.


And....from now on, treat me like a retard and a child, when explaining.

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 16, 2021, 01:13:16 AM

Quote from: Solarwind on February 15, 2021, 09:25:45 AM

I have all the information I need already to calculate the Earths mass by just measuring my weight.  That's the difference.

First of all, you don't.
You need to understand what weight is before you even go near what you think Earth's mass is.

You need to understand what it is before spouting so much nonsense about it.
You sure do love claiming things with absolutely certainty far too much for someone who claims to have no idea.

Ok, as above, explain it like I'm a retard or a child. Real simple.
Let's see where we get.

Considering how clever you seem to think you are why should I have to explain it to you like you are someone with learning difficulties or a child.  After all someone who thinks they have successfully completely re-invented the laws of physics self-handedly is certainly not someone who should be treated as a child.

Considering how clever you seem to think you are why should I have to explain it to you like you are someone with learning difficulties or a child.  After all someone who thinks they have successfully completely re-invented the laws of physics self-handedly is certainly not someone who should be treated as a child.

And why would someone so capable even need it explained by random people on the internet?  Couldn't he just read this all himself?

I mean, if his ideas were correct he would rank as one of the greatest minds in history, single handedly able to piece the veil of indoctrination that fools us all, and discover the truth of the world around us by thought and intuition alone.  Pretty impressive feat. 

I would think that someone capable of that would have no problem picking up basic concepts on their own.  But no, it turns out the most amazing intellect we have ever been privileged to speak with cant even understand grade school geometry without needing a dozen people patiently explaining and re-explaining simple concepts over weeks or months. 

You need to understand what weight is before you even go near what you think Earth's mass is.

Ah so that's where I am going wrong is it.  So despite having a degree in physics and astrophysics, I don't understand a simple concept like weight.  OK Sceptimatic I bow to your superior knowledge so tell me exactly what weight is and how I can measure weight.  Tell me and I will do the experiment to verify what you say.  Weight is a numerical value though of course so I need some figures to work with.

You can't call anything a weight until it's showing a scale measurement readout.

And where does this scale measurement come from? How do you work it out?

OK let's try a different and very simple experiment. I have an apple tree in my garden and one day I pick up an apple from the ground.  Being the simpleton that I am and based on the fact that the apple is lying directly under an apple tree which is still full of apples, I make an assumption that the apple has fallen from the tree onto the ground.  I hold the apple in my hand and then open my hand.  The apple falls to the ground. 

What has caused the apple to fall to the ground?

Considering how clever you seem to think you are why should I have to explain it to you like you are someone with learning difficulties or a child.  After all someone who thinks they have successfully completely re-invented the laws of physics self-handedly is certainly not someone who should be treated as a child.

I would find it odd that you can't explain it, simply. However, I think I know the real reason.

Quote from: Solarwind on February 16, 2021, 04:27:32 AM

Considering how clever you seem to think you are why should I have to explain it to you like you are someone with learning difficulties or a child.  After all someone who thinks they have successfully completely re-invented the laws of physics self-handedly is certainly not someone who should be treated as a child.

And why would someone so capable even need it explained by random people on the internet?  Couldn't he just read this all himself?

I mean, if his ideas were correct he would rank as one of the greatest minds in history, single handedly able to piece the veil of indoctrination that fools us all, and discover the truth of the world around us by thought and intuition alone.  Pretty impressive feat. 

I would think that someone capable of that would have no problem picking up basic concepts on their own.  But no, it turns out the most amazing intellect we have ever been privileged to speak with cant even understand grade school geometry without needing a dozen people patiently explaining and re-explaining simple concepts over weeks or months.

You people don't do simple logic, do you?
You can't simply explain this stuff because all your efforts are spent copying and pasting or simply referencing what's put out there on a plate for you.
This is how I find that out.

No lay people among you?

Quote

You need to understand what weight is before you even go near what you think Earth's mass is.

Ah so that's where I am going wrong is it.  So despite having a degree in physics and astrophysics, I don't understand a simple concept like weight.

I believe you don't, no.
Your belief in gravity tells me all I need to know about that. And also your belief in astro physics....but....we won't go into that bit.....yet.

  OK Sceptimatic I bow to your superior knowledge so tell me exactly what weight is and how I can measure weight.  Tell me and I will do the experiment to verify what you say.  Weight is a numerical value though of course so I need some figures to work with.

Weight is the man made scale measurement by numbers, of mass of any object capable of being pushed down against it's own push/resistance of atmosphere.
Basically and simply speaking, the object uses the man made scale plate as a leverage. A foundation to push/resist the atmospheric crush back by its own displacement, of it.

Gravity has no such luck in showing anything, because it's fictional.

Quote

You can't call anything a weight until it's showing a scale measurement readout.

And where does this scale measurement come from? How do you work it out?

You measure any mass, as above.

OK let's try a different and very simple experiment. I have an apple tree in my garden and one day I pick up an apple from the ground.  Being the simpleton that I am and based on the fact that the apple is lying directly under an apple tree which is still full of apples, I make an assumption that the apple has fallen from the tree onto the ground.  I hold the apple in my hand and then open my hand.  The apple falls to the ground. 

What has caused the apple to fall to the ground?

First off all the apple is held up by the tree branch and the stem on that branch.
Weakness of that stem means the mass of the apple displacing the atmosphere it was held in, is crushed down to the ground by the above stacking and the actual compression of its own mass that overcomes the stacking below it.

No gravity pull and no such thing as pull in reality. Nothing can pull. It just appears so because we're accustomed to the word, pull...which is fine to use to simply explain stuff in every day life. It just doesn't work when fictional gravity and such, is used.

Quote from: Solarwind on February 16, 2021, 08:20:07 AM

Quote

You need to understand what weight is before you even go near what you think Earth's mass is.

Ah so that's where I am going wrong is it.  So despite having a degree in physics and astrophysics, I don't understand a simple concept like weight.

I believe you don't, no.
Your belief in gravity tells me all I need to know about that. And also your belief in astro physics....but....we won't go into that bit.....yet.

Quote from: Solarwind

  OK Sceptimatic I bow to your superior knowledge so tell me exactly what weight is and how I can measure weight.  Tell me and I will do the experiment to verify what you say.  Weight is a numerical value though of course so I need some figures to work with.

Weight is the man made scale measurement by numbers, of mass of any object capable of being pushed down against it's own push/resistance of atmosphere.
Basically and simply speaking, the object uses the man made scale plate as a leverage. A foundation to push/resist the atmospheric crush back by its own displacement, of it.

Gravity has no such luck in showing anything, because it's fictional.

Quote from: Solarwind

Quote

You can't call anything a weight until it's showing a scale measurement readout.

And where does this scale measurement come from? How do you work it out?

You measure any mass, as above.

Quote from: Solarwind

OK let's try a different and very simple experiment. I have an apple tree in my garden and one day I pick up an apple from the ground.  Being the simpleton that I am and based on the fact that the apple is lying directly under an apple tree which is still full of apples, I make an assumption that the apple has fallen from the tree onto the ground.  I hold the apple in my hand and then open my hand.  The apple falls to the ground. 

What has caused the apple to fall to the ground?

First off all the apple is held up by the tree branch and the stem on that branch.
Weakness of that stem means the mass of the apple displacing the atmosphere it was held in, is crushed down to the ground by the above stacking and the actual compression of its own mass that overcomes the stacking below it.

No gravity pull and no such thing as pull in reality. Nothing can pull. It just appears so because we're accustomed to the word, pull...which is fine to use to simply explain stuff in every day life. It just doesn't work when fictional gravity and such, is used.

Total rubbish.  Atmospheric (or any gas) pressure just doesn’t work like that. 

And it would be blindingly obvious that it can’t possibly work like that, if you had the first clue what you’re talking about.

I believe you don't, no.

That doesn't surprise me in the least.  (that you believe I don't that is)

First off all the apple is held up by the tree branch and the stem on that branch.

I wasn't talking about the apples that are still on the tree. I said I picked an apple up that was on the ground.  I hold the apple in my hand with the palm pointing downwards and the apple remains in my hand (because I am holding it).  I open my hand and the apple falls to the ground.  According to your laws of physics, why does the apple fall to the ground? Why doesn't the apple fall through my fingers while they are still closed around the apple?  Explain it like I'm a retard or a child. Real simple. (yes I copied and pasted that last sentence)

Weight is the man made scale measurement by numbers, of mass of any object capable of being pushed down against it's own push/resistance of atmosphere.

OK you have used the word push in that sentence.  In school we are 'told' that a force is a push or a pull.  So you are implying there is a force involved here.  Where is that force coming from?  If you read your own sentence you are also implying that the push is acting on the mass of an objects.  So again what causes this. Mass is just mass.  The weight aspect only comes into play when combined with what you are calling a push or resistance of atmosphere.  So what causes this resistance you are talking about?

You measure any mass, as above.

How?

Your belief in gravity tells me all I need to know about that. And also your belief in astro physics

No I study astrophysics.  It is not something you believe or don't believe in.  I don't believe in certain interpretations of God but I believe in religion.

Atmospheric (or any gas) pressure just doesn’t work like that.

Sceptimatic keeps in talking about this pressure thing.  But where does the pressure come from.  What generates the pressure in the first place?

Let's get this right. Correct me if I'm wrong and or there's something needs to be added.
I'm stood still (ish) and you go to push me. I resist that push from you. Is this inertia?

Or I'm stood there. do I have inertia at that point and if so, why?

You ALWAYS have inertia. This is why you don't just randomly start flying around all over the place, and why accelerating something takes a force.

Instead of thinking of it as a resistance to the push, think of it as the resistance to a change in motion which requires that push.

i.e. if you stand in front of a ball and try to move your hand or foot through it, you don't just move your hand or foot as if the object wasn't there with the object moving with your hand/foot. Instead when your hand/foot reaches the object you need to apply an additional force to accelerate it, with the force required based upon the mass of the object and how quickly you are accelerating it.

Likewise, if an object is thrown to you, it doesn't just hit you and stop. Instead you need to apply a force to stop it, and again, depending on the mass and how quickly you try to slow it down the force varies.


As for the why, that is what you need to explain with how your air causes inertia in complete defiance of the known laws of aerodynamics.

Ok, as above, explain it like I'm a retard or a child. Real simple.
Let's see where we get.

And like I said, describe your standard for an explanation, because so far you just reject everything as a non-explanation (or just ignore it) unless it uses your air, and you are happy to accept it if it uses your air.

Especially when I have already provided explanations and you just ignore them or try to twist them, like here:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=87840.msg2304389#msg2304389

Quote from: Solarwind on February 16, 2021, 08:20:07 AM

Quote

You need to understand what weight is before you even go near what you think Earth's mass is.

Ah so that's where I am going wrong is it.  So despite having a degree in physics and astrophysics, I don't understand a simple concept like weight.

I believe you don't, no.
Your belief in gravity tells me all I need to know about that.

The problem is that you cannot justify your irrational hatred of gravity and are unable to show a single fault with it.
So it is really your irrational hatred which tells us what we need to know about that.
Either you don't understand physics or your just reject what you hate.

Weight is the man made scale measurement by numbers, of mass

Stop just repeating the same BS.
Weight is the downwards force experienced by an object.

This is separate from mass and allows a simple way to measure mass as weight is proportional to mass if you ignore the effects of buoancy, but both are still there even when not measured.

Again, if weight didn't exist unless it was measured, nothing would fall.
It is weight that makes things fall.

Basically and simply speaking, the object uses the man made scale plate as a leverage.

How does it do that in mid air?

And even when it is on that plate, as far as the air is concerned, the object is being "crushed" against the plate and the air is on the underside of that plate crushing right back.
It doesn't push the entire top plate down.

Again, that would require the scale and object to be placed in an airtight bag with as much air removed as possible. Then we see a much larger reading, which remains roughly the same regardless of the orientation.

Gravity has no such luck in showing anything, because it's fictional.

It seems to work just fine, unlike your delusional nonsense with the air.
You are yet to provide any fault with it and instead just repeatedly dismiss the explanations provided, while being unable to explain your garbage at all.

Weakness of that stem means the mass of the apple displacing the atmosphere it was held in, is crushed down to the ground by the above stacking and the actual compression of its own mass that overcomes the stacking below it.

WHY?
Why doesn't it get pushed back up into that stem?
Why doesn't it get pushed up based upon the higher pressure air below?
Why doesn't it get pushed in any random direction?

This is one of the keys parts of your garbage you are unable to explain.
The air is all around.
The only exception is where the apple joins the stem which is above the apple.
Thus if you want to appeal to that, like you try to do so with an object on the ground, then
You have no reason at all for the air to preferentially push objects down.
In fact, due to the pressure gradient in the atmosphere, which even you accept even though you cannot explain it, the pressure is greater a the bottom than the top, and thus this should push the apple upwards.

no such thing as pull in reality. Nothing can pull.

Except the countless things that do which you can't explain otherwise.

Remember this diagram:
https://imgur.com/QCW82GY
Showing a simple chain, with you unable to explain how the force to move it to the right is transferred through the chain without needing the right side to pull the left side?

But regardless, this "pull" is just semantics.
When you get down to it, there is very little (if any) difference between the actual physics behind pushing and pulling.

Despite all this 'I don't believe this' and 'I don't believe that' he has yet to provide anything other than his opinions.  He cannot provide any actual evidence that he is correct about any of what he believes and without that evidence none of his opinions count for anything.

With a simple pair of bathroom scales I can easily obtain an actual value for my weight and then show how I can use that to reach figures for the Earths radius and mass that agree with the quoted values. 

I guess it is just a bit beyond Sceptimatics ability to comprehend that.  But then he does have the mind of a child or 'retard' apparently to use his words.  He obviously hates anything he cannot understand and so he hits the deny its true button and invent his own version of physics rather than making any sort of attempt to try and understand it.

Quote from: sobchak on February 16, 2021, 06:07:36 AM

Quote from: Solarwind on February 16, 2021, 04:27:32 AM

Considering how clever you seem to think you are why should I have to explain it to you like you are someone with learning difficulties or a child.  After all someone who thinks they have successfully completely re-invented the laws of physics self-handedly is certainly not someone who should be treated as a child.

And why would someone so capable even need it explained by random people on the internet?  Couldn't he just read this all himself?

I mean, if his ideas were correct he would rank as one of the greatest minds in history, single handedly able to piece the veil of indoctrination that fools us all, and discover the truth of the world around us by thought and intuition alone.  Pretty impressive feat. 

I would think that someone capable of that would have no problem picking up basic concepts on their own.  But no, it turns out the most amazing intellect we have ever been privileged to speak with cant even understand grade school geometry without needing a dozen people patiently explaining and re-explaining simple concepts over weeks or months.

You people don't do simple logic, do you?

Oh come on, and you do? What's the "simple logic" behind your graphite carbonite electrode beneath a layer of crystal at the North Pole projecting holographic Sun, Moon, and stars onto a breathing melting & freezing dome heating the earth, causing night and day and seasons? Seriously.

The point is, stop asking for all of these explanations as:

A) Everything has been explained to you a million times
B) Go bone up on Globe Earth features and functions yourself (We would with your stuff, but there are zero places in the world to find out other than from you, and you alone)
C) Stop playing the "I'm just caveman..explain it to me..." trope

I'm assuming that Sceptimatic is actually an adult with no diagnosed learning difficulties despite his claims. In which case there is nothing contained in what I have said on here which I haven't also explained to the primary school kids that I work with.  They seem to be able to make sense of what I say. I can tell that from the answers to the questions I get from them.

So come on Sceptimatic... stop playing the 'Duh... I'm thick' card and put some effort into actually trying to understand something about what we are trying to explain to you. Rather than just burying your head in the sand and denying everything as you seem to like to do so much.  As my parents always told me, the world is not going to adapt to the way you think it should be you so you had better learn to adapt to the world as it is.

We would with your stuff, but there are zero places in the world to find out other than from you, and you alone

Well actually Sceptimatic insists that all that he believes in has been fully documented 'elsewhere' but whenever I have asked me where 'elsewhere' actually is he can't seem to be able to tell me.

Quote from: sobchak on February 16, 2021, 06:07:36 AM

Quote from: Solarwind on February 16, 2021, 04:27:32 AM

Considering how clever you seem to think you are why should I have to explain it to you like you are someone with learning difficulties or a child.  After all someone who thinks they have successfully completely re-invented the laws of physics self-handedly is certainly not someone who should be treated as a child.

And why would someone so capable even need it explained by random people on the internet?  Couldn't he just read this all himself?

I mean, if his ideas were correct he would rank as one of the greatest minds in history, single handedly able to piece the veil of indoctrination that fools us all, and discover the truth of the world around us by thought and intuition alone.  Pretty impressive feat. 

I would think that someone capable of that would have no problem picking up basic concepts on their own.  But no, it turns out the most amazing intellect we have ever been privileged to speak with cant even understand grade school geometry without needing a dozen people patiently explaining and re-explaining simple concepts over weeks or months.

You people don't do simple logic, do you?

Seems like simple logic that someone who can single-handedly figure out the hidden nature of the world around us using thought and intuition alone should be able to understand circles and triangles. 

I guess you disagree.  Oh well.

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 16, 2021, 09:35:37 AM

Quote from: sobchak on February 16, 2021, 06:07:36 AM

Quote from: Solarwind on February 16, 2021, 04:27:32 AM

Considering how clever you seem to think you are why should I have to explain it to you like you are someone with learning difficulties or a child.  After all someone who thinks they have successfully completely re-invented the laws of physics self-handedly is certainly not someone who should be treated as a child.

And why would someone so capable even need it explained by random people on the internet?  Couldn't he just read this all himself?

I mean, if his ideas were correct he would rank as one of the greatest minds in history, single handedly able to piece the veil of indoctrination that fools us all, and discover the truth of the world around us by thought and intuition alone.  Pretty impressive feat. 

I would think that someone capable of that would have no problem picking up basic concepts on their own.  But no, it turns out the most amazing intellect we have ever been privileged to speak with cant even understand grade school geometry without needing a dozen people patiently explaining and re-explaining simple concepts over weeks or months.

You people don't do simple logic, do you?

Oh come on, and you do? What's the "simple logic" behind your graphite carbonite electrode beneath a layer of crystal at the North Pole projecting holographic Sun, Moon, and stars onto a breathing melting & freezing dome heating the earth, causing night and day and seasons? Seriously.

lol, dont forget the vortex of some hydrogen-mineral slurry as an energy source, or the worldwide whirlwind of energy that pushes masses towards each other.

Simple logic.    

Total rubbish.  Atmospheric (or any gas) pressure just doesn’t work like that. 

And it would be blindingly obvious that it can’t possibly work like that, if you had the first clue what you’re talking about.

You think it's magical gravity so I don't expect you to accept it.

Quote from: Stash on February 16, 2021, 01:07:32 PM

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 16, 2021, 09:35:37 AM

Quote from: sobchak on February 16, 2021, 06:07:36 AM

Quote from: Solarwind on February 16, 2021, 04:27:32 AM

Considering how clever you seem to think you are why should I have to explain it to you like you are someone with learning difficulties or a child.  After all someone who thinks they have successfully completely re-invented the laws of physics self-handedly is certainly not someone who should be treated as a child.

And why would someone so capable even need it explained by random people on the internet?  Couldn't he just read this all himself?

I mean, if his ideas were correct he would rank as one of the greatest minds in history, single handedly able to piece the veil of indoctrination that fools us all, and discover the truth of the world around us by thought and intuition alone.  Pretty impressive feat. 

I would think that someone capable of that would have no problem picking up basic concepts on their own.  But no, it turns out the most amazing intellect we have ever been privileged to speak with cant even understand grade school geometry without needing a dozen people patiently explaining and re-explaining simple concepts over weeks or months.

You people don't do simple logic, do you?

Oh come on, and you do? What's the "simple logic" behind your graphite carbonite electrode beneath a layer of crystal at the North Pole projecting holographic Sun, Moon, and stars onto a breathing melting & freezing dome heating the earth, causing night and day and seasons? Seriously.

lol, dont forget the vortex of some hydrogen-mineral slurry as an energy source, or the worldwide whirlwind of energy that pushes masses towards each other.

Simple logic.   

Oops, forgot about those. 

Quote

I believe you don't, no.

That doesn't surprise me in the least.  (that you believe I don't that is)

Quote

First off all the apple is held up by the tree branch and the stem on that branch.

I wasn't talking about the apples that are still on the tree. I said I picked an apple up that was on the ground.  I hold the apple in my hand with the palm pointing downwards and the apple remains in my hand (because I am holding it).  I open my hand and the apple falls to the ground.  According to your laws of physics, why does the apple fall to the ground? Why doesn't the apple fall through my fingers while they are still closed around the apple?  Explain it like I'm a retard or a child. Real simple. (yes I copied and pasted that last sentence)

The apple doesn't fall because you have it gripped in your fingers.
Try and think of something else.

Quote

Weight is the man made scale measurement by numbers, of mass of any object capable of being pushed down against it's own push/resistance of atmosphere.

OK you have used the word push in that sentence.  In school we are 'told' that a force is a push or a pull.  So you are implying there is a force involved here.  Where is that force coming from?  If you read your own sentence you are also implying that the push is acting on the mass of an objects.  So again what causes this. Mass is just mass.  The weight aspect only comes into play when combined with what you are calling a push or resistance of atmosphere.  So what causes this resistance you are talking about?

Atmosphere.

Quote

You measure any mass, as above.

How?

Pay attention.

Quote

Your belief in gravity tells me all I need to know about that. And also your belief in astro physics

No I study astrophysics.  It is not something you believe or don't believe in.  I don't believe in certain interpretations of God but I believe in religion.

Of course you believe in religion. Most of your theoretical science acceptance, is like a religion.

Quote

Atmospheric (or any gas) pressure just doesn’t work like that.

Sceptimatic keeps in talking about this pressure thing.  But where does the pressure come from.  What generates the pressure in the first place?

Stacking and anything within it being crushed by it, by their own displacement of it, like I already told you.

Quote from: sceptimatic on February 16, 2021, 03:43:54 AM

Let's get this right. Correct me if I'm wrong and or there's something needs to be added.
I'm stood still (ish) and you go to push me. I resist that push from you. Is this inertia?

Or I'm stood there. do I have inertia at that point and if so, why?

You ALWAYS have inertia. This is why you don't just randomly start flying around all over the place, and why accelerating something takes a force.

Instead of thinking of it as a resistance to the push, think of it as the resistance to a change in motion which requires that push.

i.e. if you stand in front of a ball and try to move your hand or foot through it, you don't just move your hand or foot as if the object wasn't there with the object moving with your hand/foot. Instead when your hand/foot reaches the object you need to apply an additional force to accelerate it, with the force required based upon the mass of the object and how quickly you are accelerating it.

Likewise, if an object is thrown to you, it doesn't just hit you and stop. Instead you need to apply a force to stop it, and again, depending on the mass and how quickly you try to slow it down the force varies.


As for the why, that is what you need to explain with how your air causes inertia in complete defiance of the known laws of aerodynamics.

So, inertia is the obstacle to a force until it becomes resistant to that force?
Is this what you are saying?

The problem is that you cannot justify your irrational hatred of gravity and are unable to show a single fault with it.
So it is really your irrational hatred which tells us what we need to know about that.
Either you don't understand physics or your just reject what you hate.

It's got nothing to do with any irrational hatred of physics from my side. I don't believe gravity exists so I can hardly hate it. I just have to argue against the magical story of it, against people who buy into it for no other reason than to follow mass indoctrination of stuff like this.

If I spent my life believing in something that is put out as a theory, only to be told it's been found to be something else and the theory I held onto now holds no water....what have I actually learned up until that point?

If I spent my life believing in something that is put out as a theory, only to be told it's been found to be something else and the theory I held onto now holds no water....what have I actually learned up until that point?

If nothing else, you should have learned that it is a mistake to "believe" in a theory.  You can accept theories as provisionally true, you can think they are good or even great explanations for a set of facts, but dont "believe" in them.  Any theory, no matter how well it represents what we know, can be disproven with additional data.

Once you have learned that, you at least have a chance of understanding how science works.

Quote from: Unconvinced on February 16, 2021, 10:37:03 AM

Total rubbish.  Atmospheric (or any gas) pressure just doesn’t work like that. 

And it would be blindingly obvious that it can’t possibly work like that, if you had the first clue what you’re talking about.

You think it's magical gravity so I don't expect you to accept it.

Sceptimatic, just so you know - the reason people don't accept your musings is that they are actually incredibly bad abstractions of what we know.  They exclude known facts, they are non-predictive and non-quantitative, they can not be readily shared with others, they continually require ad-hoc addendums, and they have no demonstrated value to anyone other than yourself.

They are worst type of explanatory conjectures - confused, opaque, and completely without use. 

You are of course welcome to hold them, but you are doing yourself a delusional disservice pretending that the only reason people reject your ideas is because of their own held beliefs.

The failing is yours, not ours.  You should learn from that failure and try to grow, instead of simply failing again and again and again. 

Unless you like failure - in which case I say keep on with what you are doing!