Gravity, just understood it existed

A thread made me think of my world view while growing up.  I just always understood gravity exists.  Not saying I understood the physics. But It was pretty clear why one can roll faster down hill than up hill.  Why you accelerate down when jumping up off a tree house or diving board. It’s pretty obvious you feel a force working on you peddling up hill.  It’s pretty obvious you feel the force pulling you down hill.  Even when you peddle a bike down hill in a western direction, and the wind is coming from the west up the hill at you head on.  The wind blows, but you still have weight. 


By the way. 

Etymology
edit
Learned borrowing from Latin gravitās (“weight”) (compare French gravité), from gravis (“heavy”). Doublet of gravitas. First attested in the 16th century.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/gravity

In Latin, as long as it has weight gravity exists. 

Come back again when you understand that it doesn't exist. 

Come back again when you understand that it doesn't exist. 

Why would we "understand" your fantasy?
All the evidence shows it does, and it was even used in Archimedes principle.

Come back again when you understand that it doesn't exist. 

Well.  That’s not a compelling argument at all.

The point being this.  Flat eathers claim people believe gravity because they were told.  I say gravity helps us explain and refine the reality we experience the first time we try to raise our heads up.  The first time we try to pull ourselves up to walk. The first time we fall down.  A force we experience the rest of our lives.  Why most can hold out a 5 pound dumbbell at arms length, but can’t do the same with a 75 pound dumbbell. 

When this made up force was created for their ball Earth nonsense, they had many problems to invent other excuses for, and don’t all mesh as a result.

You claim there is a force, which is unlike all other real forces, which emit energy at one level of strength, at a time, to all beyond it, equally to all beyond it.

So a force emits out at one level of energy outward, but the objects act differently to that one level of energy from the force.

To pull or move objects of more mass and density than other objects, requires a greater level of force to move out the same distance as the lighter objects need.

That’s a big problem for your made up force, since things all would fall at different rates with their different masses if a force was acting on them.

Forces are simply energy directed outward, from the source of a force, outward as one thing, one level of energy, which is all that forces CAN do, they emit energy outward at once, outward, and that’s it.

To make up a force that magically and for absolutely no reason, nor logical in any way, which explains why all actual forces don’t act that way, it’s impossible for actual forces do act that way.

Forces hold energy, and emit energy outward, they don’t act out as a proportional or variable multi-level force that adjusts in strength to their different masses or densities, that’s absurd.

It cannot pull things all down at the same rate, when they have different masses and densities, which is yet another thing that proves your force is made up nonsense.

Your force is supposedly making all things equal in mass, by ‘pulling them all down’ eliminates their unique masses into one same mass for all of them, and must work in the opposite direction of your magical force too, and lifting up all objects against that force, which equalizes mass as the same mass for all objects.

If your goofball force will pull down a ten ton block at the same rate as a 1 lb block, because they have to make their goofy force look more stupid than it already was, despite the fact that actual forces don’t care or know what their energy does, it just goes outward from them, it is only the different objects that react to the energy differently at all.

 

When this made up force was created for their ball Earth nonsense, they had many problems to invent other excuses for, and don’t all mesh as a result.

Do you mean when this very real force was labelled by the Ancient Greeks, there were no real problems with it other than a lack of explanation.
When it was refined by Newton, it was able to explain far more.
And when refined further by Einstein, it was able to explain even more.

And then when dishonest FEers get upset about it, they need to lie, to pretend there are many problems; because gravity works fine while their delusional BS does not.

You claim there is a force, which is unlike all other real forces, which emit energy at one level of strength, at a time, to all beyond it, equally to all beyond it.

No, I state there is a force, which like ALL OTHER FUNDAMENTAL FORCES (and even plenty of non-fundamental ones), will be proportional to some property of the object it is acting on.

You instead which to claim that "real forces" are pure magic, and magically exert the same force on every object.
Which is why a sheet of paper is attracted to a magnet just as much as a paperclip; and why a parachute works equally well when it is stashed in a bag, cut into shreds, a tangled mess, or deployed correctly.

Except unlike your fantasy, real forces do not work like that at all.

In reality, real forces act with a force proportional to some property of the object.
They do not magically give out a single force regardless of the object.

You are blatantly lying about reality because of how desperate you are to pretend there is a problem with gravity.

That’s a big problem for your made up force

No, your fantasy is not a problem for the real force of gravity.

Forces are simply energy directed outward

No, they aren't.
For starters, forces can be attractive or repulsive.
"simple energy directed outwards" doesn't capture that at all.

Nor does it capture why a steel paperclip will be attracted to a magnet, but a sheet of paper wont.

Your force is supposedly making all things equal in mass

Lying will not save you.
The real force of gravity, like all other real forces, is proportional to something.
The thing that gravity is proportional to is mass.
That means the more massive the object, the greater the force.
And because gravitational mass is equal to inertial mass, it results in objects accelerating the same regardless of the mass in a given gravitational field.

Again, no problem here.

Just like all objects with the same mass to charge ratio are accelerated the same by an electric field.

the fact that actual forces don’t care or know what their energy does, it just goes outward from them, it is only the different objects that react to the energy differently at all.

Or to state that without all that convoluted BS you throw in to try to pretend gravity is special:
There is some property of the object which moderates the magnitude for the force.

You can even use all that convoluted BS with gravity.
Gravity just emits energy outwards, but the objects react to that energy differently with the resulting force on each object being different.

When this made up force

Most people can hold out a 5 pound weight arms length, but not a 75 pound weight.  That is very real.

As Jack pointed out.

Like how a 5 mph wind will push something with a larger sail with more force than something like an aerodynamic car facing the wind.  Put the right sail on the same car, and the same wind can push it along  a flat surface.

Or why a car needs to burn more fuel and generate more power/energy going up hill.  Or why an airplane has to change control surfaces and increase power to gain altitude.  And why, when these objects gain altitude, they have an increase in potential energy.


Or why a rocket for stable flight has to have its center of gravity ahead of its center of pressure. 

Gravity is very real.  And is separate than atmospheric forces on something like a rocket. 

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on January 25, 2024, 06:03:28 PM

Come back again when you understand that it doesn't exist. 

Why would we "understand" your fantasy?
All the evidence shows it does, and it was even used in Archimedes principle.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever about any existence of gravity. It's a made-up word to cover for the pretence of Earth somehow being a spinning ball in apparent nothingness.

And Archimedes' principle as we're told of this apparent person is wrong because there is no upward buoyant force, only dense mass displacement of a pressure of mass.

Or why a rocket for stable flight has to have its center of gravity ahead of its center of pressure. 

Gravity is very real.  And is separate than atmospheric forces on something like a rocket.

How about you explain in simple terms what this centre of gravity on a rocket is and also a centre of pressure?
Try not to offer gobbledygook, just a simple explanation of it and how you can verify it.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on January 27, 2024, 02:57:53 AM

Or why a rocket for stable flight has to have its center of gravity ahead of its center of pressure. 

Gravity is very real.  And is separate than atmospheric forces on something like a rocket.

How about you explain in simple terms what this centre of gravity on a rocket is and also a centre of pressure?
Try not to offer gobbledygook, just a simple explanation of it and how you can verify it.

Already explained several times.  A principle that can be modeled and tested.

Why on a rocket is there a center of gravity and a separate center of pressure?

The center of pressure is the average location of where the pressure force is applied. Think of it like the center of gravity, the location where the average weight of an object is, except this time it is the location of average pressure. The center of pressure is where the forces of lift and drag are exerted. It is important for engineers to know the center of pressure since it allows them to evenly balance the lift on aircraft.

https://howthingsfly.si.edu/ask-an-explainer/what-center-pressure

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on May 12, 2023, 10:47:55 AM

3. "Center of gravity" (weight distribution)

For a rocket to have stable flight.  The center of gravity must be ahead of the center of pressure in the line of travel.

Why is the center of gravity different than the center of pressure?

Quote

Significance of Center of Gravity & Center of Pressure | Effect of CG and CP on Stability

If there is no gravity, how can a rocket have a center of gravity that is different than center of pressure?


Vs you word salad that can’t even be modeled.



You run from the ramifications why there is a separate force than atmosphere acting on objects.

The sum of the forces of atmosphere works on a rocket to form a point called the center of pressure. 

Since there is a different force than atmosphere working on the rocket at the same time called gravity, how mass is distributed throughout the rocket creates a center of mass.  The sum of gravity works on the rocket’s mass to form the center of gravity.

For stable flight, the center of mass must be ahead of the center of pressure for the direction of travel.

 

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on January 27, 2024, 02:57:53 AM

Or why a rocket for stable flight has to have its center of gravity ahead of its center of pressure. 

Gravity is very real.  And is separate than atmospheric forces on something like a rocket.

How about you explain in simple terms what this centre of gravity on a rocket is and also a centre of pressure?
Try not to offer gobbledygook, just a simple explanation of it and how you can verify it.

So.  If atmosphere is the only game in town in your delusion, why do I still weight 220 pounds even when the atmosphere is crazy like this.



Clouds moving right, left, and atmosphere pushing fog upwards?


Why is it if you put a scale and an object on that scale in a chamber and remove atmosphere, the object weight stays the same as atmospheric pressure in the chamber decreases.  Or for small objects like an empty water bottle, the weight actually increases as atmosphere is reduced along with the buoyant force of atmosphere in the chamber.

Weight in your delusional should decrees as it is shielded/ isolated from the column of atmosphere in an air tight chamber. 

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever about any existence of gravity.

You mean there is no evidence you are willing to accept; because you will reject anything that shows you are wrong.

While in reality, there is plenty.
From simple experiments measuring the weight of various objects and how it accelerates; including when it is immersed in different fluids, or as much air as possible is removed.
But also more complex experiments like the cavendish experiment.
As well as plenty of observations of things like orbits.

Your wilful rejection of it because you hate it because it destroys your fantasy, doesn't magically mean all that evidence no longer exists.

It's a made-up word to cover for the pretence of Earth somehow being a spinning ball in apparent nothingness.

As I have explained before, your delusional BS works just as well, if not better, for a round Earth in a vacuum.

And Archimedes' principle as we're told of this apparent person is wrong because there is no upward buoyant force, only dense mass displacement of a pressure of mass.

You mean you are yet again rejecting reality.

From a basic level, we know there must be a downwards force acting on objects, because of the behaviour of these objects.
We also know that this must be proportional to mass.

This kills your fantasy already, as your fantasy can only have an upwards force due to the pressure gradient, a gradient it cannot explain.
But gravity can and does explain this gradient, and the resulting upwards buoyant force.

If your delusional fantasy was true, the only force you would have is that upwards force from buoyancy which would very quickly die off as the pressure gradient is eliminated.

Quote from: DataOverFlow2022 on January 27, 2024, 02:57:53 AM

Or why a rocket for stable flight has to have its center of gravity ahead of its center of pressure. 

Gravity is very real.  And is separate than atmospheric forces on something like a rocket.

How about you explain in simple terms what this centre of gravity on a rocket is and also a centre of pressure?
Try not to offer gobbledygook, just a simple explanation of it and how you can verify it.

Nevermind that. Buoyancy offers very real reason why the whole outer space model doesn't work. But before we even get there, we have a pencil-shaped space shuttle supposedly standing perfectly upright. Yet when I try to balance a pencil, it kinda sorta fails. The thing falls over. So we have it balancing on tiny little pegs. The force of gravity should go "crunch" and the entire thing ought to fall over.

"FE guy buying a spaceship dies when it fails to launch" Hahahahaha, look at that doofus, he thought he was so brilliant but here he couldn't even make it to space! Or maybe he proved exactly that we can't make it to space because from start to finish, the entire thing is special effects.

Nevermind that. Buoyancy offers very real reason why the whole outer space model doesn't work.

No, it doesn't.
Your fantasy has no impact on reality.

You cannot explain buoyancy without gravity.

But before we even get there, we have a pencil-shaped space shuttle supposedly standing perfectly upright.

You mean on a launch tower?
Did you ignore all the points holding it up, which are released shortly before lift off?

The force of gravity should go "crunch" and the entire thing ought to fall over.

Why?
Yet again you wish to pretend gravity is pure magic that doesn't whatever you need it to to make the model wrong.

"FE guy buying a spaceship dies when it fails to launch" Hahahahaha, look at that doofus, he thought he was so brilliant but here he couldn't even make it to space! Or maybe he proved exactly that we can't make it to space because from start to finish, the entire thing is special effects.

No, he didn't prove that we can't make it to space.
His craft was no where near capable of going to space, and he died from it crashing into the ground, not a magic dome.

From a basic level, we know there must be a downwards force acting on objects, because of the behaviour of these objects.
We also know that this must be proportional to mass.

No, objects which were created to be on the surface of Earth, do not need any sort of force to exist on the surface, because all things on the ground have more mass and density than the air above the surface.

Only when they are taken off the ground and put up into air is a force required for it.

Because things have more mass than the air above, a force is required to put them upward into the air which has little mass and density.

When things of more mass are put up by a force into the air, their greater mass makes them fall freely through the air down to the more mass of the surface again.

You just need to make up TWO forces to explain it, but it still fails to explain it anyway.

Forces are never, cannot ever be, some sort of multi-variable strength machine, which automatically alters in strength to each objects mass or density, that’s a joke!

Saying there is a ‘proportional’ force, really means your force alters in strength because it wants all objects of different mass to be ‘pulled down’ at the same speed, which is ludicrous beyond belief.

After you’ve claimed that objects with MORE mass have more of your idiotic force, which would obviously mean objects of more mass within air would attract more to Earths gravity than those with less of your magical force would be pulled from air,

Again, if your goofy force adjusted in strength to all objects, they would all have equal mass acting on and above the Earth. So when they are on the ground, gravity holds them as the same mass because it pulled them down to Earth as the same mass.

Pulling down and holding down are done by gravity, in each direction, up and down.

You cannot equalize their mass one direction and take it out in the opposite direction, it must work both directions, but it’s just made up crap anyway, of course it fails to work because it doesn’t actually exist.

No, objects which were created to be

You can keep your delusional, religious BS out of the discussion.
Things do not magically go back to their origin.

things on the ground have more mass and density than the air above the surface.

Which in no way explains why they should go down; why the force should be proportional to mass; why the force varies around Earth; why there is a pressure gradient in all fluids; why this pressure gradient doesn't push everything up.

Your fantasy doesn't work.

Because things have more mass than the air above, a force is required to put them upward into the air which has little mass and density.

What you are describing here is gravity resisting you trying to move an object against it.

Even just holding it up requires a force.

You need to apply a force, because gravity is a force trying to make it go down.

You just need to make up TWO forces to explain it, but it still fails to explain it anyway.

Quite the opposite.
We need a single force, and the logical results of it.
A force which has been proven beyond any sane doubt.
A force which works to actually explain what is observed.

What you need is pure magic, pure magic which has no explanation and fails to explain anything.

Forces are never, cannot ever be, some sort of multi-variable strength machine

Instead, they will act proportional to some property of the object.
This has been explained to you repeatedly.
Forces are not magic which simply act with the same force on every object.
That is just your delusional strawman to pretend gravity isn't a force.

Saying there is a ‘proportional’ force

Is simply accepting the fact that forces are proportional to a property of the object.
Like air resistance/wind, which is proportional to area (and dependent upon shape).
Like how electromagnetism is proportional to charge, and magnetic properties of the object.

You needing to desperately deny this fact just shows desperate you are and how pathetic your position is.

After you’ve claimed that objects with MORE mass have more of your idiotic force

There is nothing idiotic about it.
Objects with a greater mass have a greater force.
This can be understood quite simply and makes sense, unlike your delusional BS.
Consider a 2 kg weight. It will have some force acting on it.
Now, cut that weight in half so you have two 1 kg objects.
What happens to the force?
In reality, we observe that each of the resulting objects has a weight of 1 half of the original, and that in total their weight, the downwards force acting on it, remains the same.
According to your delusional fantasy, with all force being the same, the two 1 kg weights should each weigh the exact same as the original, and have the exact same downwards force acting on it.
That is pure insanity.

which would obviously mean objects of more mass within air would attract more to Earths gravity than those with less of your magical force would be pulled from air,

Again, if your goofy force adjusted in strength to all objects, they would all have equal mass acting on and above the Earth. So when they are on the ground, gravity holds them as the same mass because it pulled them down to Earth as the same mass.

Pulling down and holding down are done by gravity, in each direction, up and down.

You cannot equalize their mass one direction and take it out in the opposite direction, it must work both directions, but it’s just made up crap anyway, of course it fails to work because it doesn’t actually exist.

Just what do you mean by this incoherent garbage?

Are you claiming that because the force is greater, they should accelerate faster and be heavier?
If so, no.
Yes, the force is larger, but so is the mass. These are competing effects, which results in the same acceleration.

But more massive objects are heavier. Gravity pulls them down with a greater force and you need a greater force to lift them.

Yet again, you have failed to show any fault with gravity and instead just blatantly lied about reality; repeating the same pathetic refuted lie.

No, objects which were created to be on the surface of Earth,

Can you accelerate objects with mass without a force? 

Like air resistance/wind, which is proportional to area (and dependent upon shape).

No, wind is spread over large areas as one strength of force. So an object 6 feet across is hit by MORE of this one force of wind than an object 2 feet across.

It is the same single level of force over it, only more surface area of objects are hit by it.

Wind is not proportional in any way at all, it is the same one strength over a whole area or section of air.

Wind isn’t stronger when it hits more surface area, more of the same force hits the greater surface of the object than a smaller surface area is hit by the wind.


Again, no actual forces are ever proportional or vary in strength to each object, it’s completely ridiculous.

How can a force, which constantly emits energy outward, as one strength of energy, like a magnet or a wind or any other force does, alter in strength over millions of various levels after its beyond its source, gone outward at one level of strength?  The force has no idea what it hits, after it has been emitted outward from its source. Forces are energy directed outward from their sources, as one thing, one strength outward to all beyond it. No magically multi-million variable strength levels happening here. I know you need a magically adjustable strength force for all objects to fall through air at the same speed, but that is what proves there IS no force pulling them down at variable strength levels, for no possible reason making them equal in speed of fall, or your ‘pull down speed’ your made up force would need as a ridiculously impossible excuse.

No, wind is spread over large areas

i.e. the force is proportional to area.

Just like with gravity, the force is spread over mass, so an object with a mass of 6 kg is hit by more of this force than an object with a mass of 1 kg.
It is the same single level of force over it, only more mass of objects are hit by it.

This means they are proportional.
Wind is proportional to area, gravity is to mass.

Wind isn’t stronger when it hits more surface area, more of the same force hits the greater surface of the object than a smaller surface area is hit by the wind.

Which results in a greater force on the object.
Just like the strength of the gravitational field is not stronger when it hits more mass. "more of the same force hits the greater mass of the object than a smaller mass is hit by gravity"

Again, no actual forces are ever proportional or vary in strength to each object, it’s completely ridiculous.

Again, all the evidence shows that is pure BS.
You can define the strength of the field, which can tell you the force per unit something.
But the actual force on the object is proportional to some property of the object.
For wind it is area.
For gravity it is mass.

The only thing ridiculous here, is the loads of BS you are spouting to pretend forces can't be proportional to a property of the object which faced with such obvious evidence that they are.
All the mental gymnastics you need to go through to pretend wind is magically applying the same force on every object, even though it clearly doesn't. While also ignoring the fact that those mental gymnastics works equally well for gravity.

How can a force, which constantly emits energy outward, as one strength of energy

How about we stick to reality, where that doesn't happen?

I know you need a magically adjustable strength force

No more so than you need it for the wind to explain why a parachute only works when deployed; or countless other examples.

that is what proves there IS no force pulling them down at variable strength levels

No more so than the parachute example prove there is no wind or air resistance.

All this proves is how pathetic your position is; and how desperate and dishonest you are.

Wind is also one level of strength over an area of air, which explains why objects with more surface area are being hit by the one same force spread over the area. The force is the one strength throughout the time, more of this one force hits more of the object of more surface area at once.

The wind doesn’t vary in strength at all, it is the same strength throughout. It is the object that hits more of the force at one time that happens here. No more or less strength of force, that’s utter nonsense.

When you need to account for how an actual force would ever measure or somehow identify every objects mass, from all distances away, before instantly emitting out the level of pulling down strength needed for its specific mass, which equalizes their various masses to one rate that they will all be pulled down from air at, for absolutely no possible reason at all, but equalizing their speed of falling in air, or their pulling down speed, that is….

What you have is more than just a ‘proportional’ force that varies to properties of objects, which you wrongly attribute to wind, but that’s been explained to you already, so moving on

That force you have balances its level of strength to every objects mass, to equalize their speed of falling through air as being at the exact same speed for all of them.

How amazing is THAT for a force to do now!!??

That’s amazing in itself, but that force has many more amazing things beyond that.  It’s the greatest force ever invented, that’s for sure!!

.

Wind

Results in a force on the object which is proportional to the area.

Again, it doesn't matter what convoluted BS you wish to invoke, the force on the object is proportional to the area.
Just like the force on an object due to gravity is proportional to mass.

Continuing with this dishonest BS of yours just shows your position is based upon blatant lies.

Again, the same dishonest BS you use for the wind can be used equally well for gravity.

Gravity is also one level of strength over a mass of object, which explains why objects with more mass are being hit by the one same force spread over the mass. The force is the one strength throughout the time, more of this one force hits more of the object of more mass at once.
Gravity doesn’t vary in strength at all, it is the same strength throughout. It is the object that hits more of the force at one time that happens here. No more or less strength of force, that’s utter nonsense.

When you need to account for how an actual force would ever measure or somehow identify every objects mass

Again, I no more need to do this for gravity than you need to do for the wind or for magnets.

What you have is more than just a ‘proportional’ force

No, that is what I have.
A force proportional to mass.
Just like wind is proportional to area.

Because the force is proportional to mass, the acceleration, which is force divided by mass, is the same (assuming no other forces act).

Nothing more complex than that.
Just a simple proportional force.

If you want it to be more complicated, then you can deal with the curvature of space-time, but considering you are trying to reject a proportional force at all costs, I doubt you would have any chance of understanding that.

Again, it doesn't matter what convoluted BS you wish to invoke, the force on the object is proportional to the area.
Just like the force on an object due to gravity is proportional to mass.

Continuing with this dishonest BS of yours just shows your position is based upon blatant lies.

Again, the same dishonest BS you use for the wind can be used equally well for gravity.

Gravity is also one level of strength over a mass of object, which explains why objects with more mass are being hit by the one same force spread over the mass. The force is the one strength throughout the time, more of this one force hits more of the object of more mass at

No force is proportional, which really means that it adds or reduces how much force to use for each object by some property of them.

Wind is a spread out force, how much of the area that is hit by objects, is their surface area that is hit by that force, it is not proportional in how much force is applied to the surface area of objects, the wind is spread out over an area and anything in that area is hit by the wind, the entire area of that wind, it doesn’t act in proportion of how much of its force is used for each object it hits, it is the object that is hit by more of the entire wind that’s spread out which dictates that. The force does nothing at all, it is simply emitted outward, it doesn’t care what their mass is, or how much surface area there is on an object, these objects are hit over more of the whole force of a wind at once, over larger areas of the wind or less of it is hit by the force of the wind, over smaller sections of the wind.

You cannot say that if you grab a charged wire with both hands, and then one hand, that it is not YOU who makes more of the same electrical force apply more or less of it’s one same level of force, it is you who adds more or less of its force with your hands contacting it in two places of this force at the same time, the force doesn’t change anything at all.

Forces do not act out differently or in proportion of how much of its force it will use, it simply used one level of force outward, it doesn’t use different amounts of force, it has nothing to do with what their mass is, and uses more or less of its one level of force, if it doesn’t hit the whole object or all of an object, that doesn’t happen in the real world, only in your made up world with your made up force could such nutty things happen.

Wind does not act in proportion of surface areas, it is the surface area which is hit more or less by that wind, it is not applying more force or less force, the object is what is hit by more or less of that one same spread out force of a wind.

You’ve really tried to argue that actual forces are proportional, but you’re simply changing how much of the one same level of force is hit by the objects, they are proportional to how much of their surface area gets hit by a wind, it is not the wind that acts proportionally to objects.

You obviously would need a force to act proportionaly to objects with different masses, but the objects of more mass require more force to move them and less force to move those of lesser mass. There is no actual force that applies more of its strength to objects with more mass and less strength of force to lighter objects, just because the force wants them to balance out equally for some stupid reason that doesn’t happen in the real world.

Your made up force does everything that all actual forces NEVER do, this is yet another example of it.

How could your made up force apply more of that force to an object of two tons, then know directly above it, is a 1 lb rock, and bend that force around the two ton object, and apply less force to it?

What mechanism would make such things happen? Why would all actual forces never act proportionally, is because making up a force never holds up as legitimate, it always fails in the end.

You cannot explain how your made up force can emit its force outward from within a made up ball Earth, since it cannot be measured at all with any instruments. That is another thing all actual forces have, they are actually MEASURED as a force by instruments, unlike your hopeless one that never acts like the real forces.

Forces cannot add or reduce how much force to use on objects, that is nonsense.

When your made up force is emitted from the Earth, at the one strength or level of force, why would it care what an objects mass is, when it hits or pulls down at one level of strength, and how could it build up more strength than is the same everywhere it is, instantly, from plucking some of the force beside it, creating a larger force than before that?

Adding more force makes it NOT the same strength, it is more strength from adding more force to the first force. 

They do not balance in strength by each one hitting half the object, or 200 more forces bunch together for a 2 ton block to be pulled as an army of 200 force units taken in for miles around. These areas have lost their gravity slice, good one

No force is proportional, which really means that it adds or reduces how much force to use for each object by some property of them.

Wind is a spread out force

Again, it doesn't matter what dishonest, convoluted BS you try to wrap it up in.
The force on the object due to the wind is proportional to area. Just like gravity is proportional to mass.

Saying no force is proportional is just a blatant lie.

Again, if you want to appeal to the dishonest BS of saying the wind is just how much area is hit, you can use the same BS to say gravity is just how much mass is hit.

Ignoring this and repeating the same dishonest BS just shows your dishonesty.

Forces don’t vary in strength to specific features of objects.

A wind doesn’t use more force hitting objects with more surface area than small surface areas, the objects get hit by more of this one force.

A force applies more of its one force if an object is open to more of the force hitting it.

Your made up force does not make any sense.

Every actual force requires more strength to act on heavier masses than lighter masses, it is always so.

A wind can’t blow around heavier objects regardless of how large its surface area is, where more wind hits it, as the one force over more area hits it

Forces cannot vary in strength by what the mass of an object is, then equalize all to be one thing!!

Forces don’t vary in strength to specific features of objects.

Again, it doesn't matter what dishonest BS you want to wrap it up in, the force acting to accelerate an object will vary.
For the wind, this vary with area. That can either be because you are honest and accept that the force on the object is proportional to area; or it can be with dishonest convoluted BS where it is the same force acting on a larger area resulting in a greater force on the object.
Likewise, with gravity, this varies with mass. That can either be because you are honest and accept that the force on the object is proportional to mass; or it can be with dishonest convoluted BS where it is the same force acting on a larger mass resulting in a greater force on the object.

The only way for you to say gravity can't work due to the different force on different objects, is if you skip all that dishonest BS and just claim that regardless of what the object is, what its area is, what its shape is and so on, it is the exact same force acting on it with the wind, such that making cars aerodynamic is a pointless waste because the same force acts on the car, and opening a parachute is a waste because the same force acts regardless of if it is deployed or stowed.

Your made up force does not make any sense.

It makes perfect sense, and you can't show any fault with it.
As clearly demonstrated with the levels of desperation you need to go to to pretend it doesn't work.

Your made up force does not make any sense.

Then how does an object of mass accelerate down with no unbalanced forces acting on it? 

Quote from: JackBlack on February 10, 2024, 03:16:54 AM

Again, it doesn't matter what convoluted BS you wish to invoke, the force on the object is proportional to the area.
Just like the force on an object due to gravity is proportional to mass.

Continuing with this dishonest BS of yours just shows your position is based upon blatant lies.

Again, the same dishonest BS you use for the wind can be used equally well for gravity.

Gravity is also one level of strength over a mass of object, which explains why objects with more mass are being hit by the one same force spread over the mass. The force is the one strength throughout the time, more of this one force hits more of the object of more mass at

No force is proportional, which really means that it adds or reduces how much force to use for each object by some property of them.

Wind is a spread out force, how much of the area that is hit by objects, is their surface area that is hit by that force, it is not proportional in how much force is applied to the surface area of objects, the wind is spread out over an area and anything in that area is hit by the wind, the entire area of that wind, it doesn’t act in proportion of how much of its force is used for each object it hits, it is the object that is hit by more of the entire wind that’s spread out which dictates that. The force does nothing at all, it is simply emitted outward, it doesn’t care what their mass is, or how much surface area there is on an object, these objects are hit over more of the whole force of a wind at once, over larger areas of the wind or less of it is hit by the force of the wind, over smaller sections of the wind.

You cannot say that if you grab a charged wire with both hands, and then one hand, that it is not YOU who makes more of the same electrical force apply more or less of it’s one same level of force, it is you who adds more or less of its force with your hands contacting it in two places of this force at the same time, the force doesn’t change anything at all.

Forces do not act out differently or in proportion of how much of its force it will use, it simply used one level of force outward, it doesn’t use different amounts of force, it has nothing to do with what their mass is, and uses more or less of its one level of force, if it doesn’t hit the whole object or all of an object, that doesn’t happen in the real world, only in your made up world with your made up force could such nutty things happen.

Wind does not act in proportion of surface areas, it is the surface area which is hit more or less by that wind, it is not applying more force or less force, the object is what is hit by more or less of that one same spread out force of a wind.

You’ve really tried to argue that actual forces are proportional, but you’re simply changing how much of the one same level of force is hit by the objects, they are proportional to how much of their surface area gets hit by a wind, it is not the wind that acts proportionally to objects.

You obviously would need a force to act proportionaly to objects with different masses, but the objects of more mass require more force to move them and less force to move those of lesser mass. There is no actual force that applies more of its strength to objects with more mass and less strength of force to lighter objects, just because the force wants them to balance out equally for some stupid reason that doesn’t happen in the real world.

Your made up force does everything that all actual forces NEVER do, this is yet another example of it.

How could your made up force apply more of that force to an object of two tons, then know directly above it, is a 1 lb rock, and bend that force around the two ton object, and apply less force to it?

What mechanism would make such things happen? Why would all actual forces never act proportionally, is because making up a force never holds up as legitimate, it always fails in the end.

You cannot explain how your made up force can emit its force outward from within a made up ball Earth, since it cannot be measured at all with any instruments. That is another thing all actual forces have, they are actually MEASURED as a force by instruments, unlike your hopeless one that never acts like the real forces.

you measure the force ever time you step on a bath room scale that is applied to your body.