The Flat Earth Society
Flat Earth Discussion Boards => Flat Earth Debate => Topic started by: JiffyJuff on April 09, 2013, 05:55:11 AM
-
I'm trying to be open-minded here, but what's wrong with gravity? The round-earth model and gravity have nothing wrong with them... I don't understand why people prefer FE.
-
And moreover, it is also easy to demonstrate that the gravitation is weaker at the equator than at the poles due to the centrifugal force of the earth rotation of the RE model. A 100kg object at the poles weigh slightly less than 100kg at the equator.
-
I'm trying to be open-minded here, but what's wrong with gravity? The round-earth model and gravity have nothing wrong with them... I don't understand why people prefer FE.
I see that the earth is flat, gravity doesn't make sense in the light of that.
-
And moreover, it is also easy to demonstrate that the gravitation is weaker at the equator than at the poles due to the centrifugal force or the earth rotation of the RE model. A 100kg object at the poles weigh less than 100kg at the equator.
Do you have any evidence to support this outlandish claim? Please post it if you do.
-
And moreover, it is also easy to demonstrate that the gravitation is weaker at the equator than at the poles due to the centrifugal force or the earth rotation of the RE model. A 100kg object at the poles weigh less than 100kg at the equator.
Do you have any evidence to support this outlandish claim? Please post it if you do.
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
UA
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would be constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
-
And moreover, it is also easy to demonstrate that the gravitation is weaker at the equator than at the poles due to the centrifugal force or the earth rotation of the RE model. A 100kg object at the poles weigh less than 100kg at the equator.
Do you have any evidence to support this outlandish claim? Please post it if you do.
Yes, I do. I travel every summer from "Northern Hemisphere" to equator for my holiday. You can measure that yourself too.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
At that rate, we need less than a year to reach faster than speed of light :)
-
And moreover, it is also easy to demonstrate that the gravitation is weaker at the equator than at the poles due to the centrifugal force or the earth rotation of the RE model. A 100kg object at the poles weigh less than 100kg at the equator.
Do you have any evidence to support this outlandish claim? Please post it if you do.
http://www.calpoly.edu/~gthorncr/ME236/documents/AccuracyofGravity.pdf (http://www.calpoly.edu/~gthorncr/ME236/documents/AccuracyofGravity.pdf)
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
The same question has been answered dozens of times. This site has a FAQ section.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
At that rate, we need less than a year to reach faster than speed of light :)
Relativity.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
The same question has been answered dozens of times. This site has a FAQ section.
another chicken out. I seem to be able to do this on this site frequently. when the going gets tough they either start non sequitur, divert from the question, start picking on grammer and spelling or now this. its just a trolling site. you dont see me sending you off to gravity.com. this is the Debate section not the "im a chicken shit and here is where you find the answer" section.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
The same question has been answered dozens of times. This site has a FAQ section.
I am sorry but the FAQ doesn't explain why the effect of the gravity force (or acceleration force if you prefer) is not constant throughout the surface of earth. An object is heavier at the poles than at the equator.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
At that rate, we need less than a year to reach faster than speed of light :)
Relativity.
What do you mean by relativity? Care to develop this word further?
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
The same question has been answered dozens of times. This site has a FAQ section.
another chicken out. I seem to be able to do this on this site frequently. when the going gets tough they either start non sequitur, divert from the question, start picking on grammer and spelling or now this. its just a trolling site. you dont see me sending you off to gravity.com. this is the Debate section not the "im a chicken shit and here is where you find the answer" section.
Koolkat-sorry to say but you are dead wrong. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Please read up on Special Relativity to learn more.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
The same question has been answered dozens of times. This site has a FAQ section.
another chicken out. I seem to be able to do this on this site frequently. when the going gets tough they either start non sequitur, divert from the question, start picking on grammer and spelling or now this. its just a trolling site. you dont see me sending you off to gravity.com. this is the Debate section not the "im a chicken shit and here is where you find the answer" section.
Koolkat-sorry to say but you are dead wrong. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Please read up on Special Relativity to learn more.
hey guy, where did I say anything can travel faster than the speed of light. And you can go read on gravity. I guess thats the end of the debate? lol. you guys need to call in some backup. this is ridiculous.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
The same question has been answered dozens of times. This site has a FAQ section.
another chicken out. I seem to be able to do this on this site frequently. when the going gets tough they either start non sequitur, divert from the question, start picking on grammer and spelling or now this. its just a trolling site. you dont see me sending you off to gravity.com. this is the Debate section not the "im a chicken shit and here is where you find the answer" section.
Koolkat-sorry to say but you are dead wrong. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Please read up on Special Relativity to learn more.
koolkat didn't say anything about FTL. I did say to disprove that anything can constantly accelerate at 9.8m/s^2. SR says that it is impossible to reach the speed of light, therefore, it is impossible to constantly accelerate at 9.8m/s^2
-
Cartesian, you also need to read up on Special Relativity. In your Frame of Reference, you would perceive your acceleration continuing unabated as time dilates, rulers shorten in the direction of acceleration, and your mass increases. By all measurements from your Frame of Reference, you would continue accelerating at 9.8m/s^2. This phenomena has been demonstrated experimentally.
-
I am sorry but the FAQ doesn't explain why the effect of the gravity force (or acceleration force if you prefer) is not constant throughout the surface of earth. An object is heavier at the poles than at the equator.
We only have measured results for one pole at this time. I will review your source if you post it.
-
I'm trying to be open-minded here, but what's wrong with gravity? The round-earth model and gravity have nothing wrong with them... I don't understand why people prefer FE.
I see that the earth is flat, gravity doesn't make sense in the light of that.
Can you "see" that squares A and B are different shades of grey?
(http://www.skytopia.com/project/illusion/checkershadow.jpg)
They're not.
If you think you can rely on your senses and intuiton alone to discover everything about the world that you might want to know, sorry. You can't.
http://www.skytopia.com/project/illusion/3illusion.html (http://www.skytopia.com/project/illusion/3illusion.html)
-
Cartesian, you also need to read up on Special Relativity. In your Frame of Reference, you would perceive your acceleration continuing unabated as time dilates, rulers shorten in the direction of acceleration, and your mass increases. By all measurements from your Frame of Reference, you would continue accelerating at 9.8m/s^2. This phenomena has been demonstrated experimentally.
I am measuring everything from the point of reference. If the earth keeps accelerating constantly at 9.81m/s2 from the point of reference, then within one year measured using the point of reference's time, the earth will be moving away from the point of reference with a speed faster than light. The time on moving earth may dilate (compared to the time at the point of reference) but I am talking as an observer located at the point of reference.
This discussion about the speed of FE is out of topic in this thread so let's focus back to the original question.
What's wrong with gravity theory? And how does the alternative theory (constant acceleration) explain the non constant effect between the poles and the equator?
-
This discussion about the speed of FE is out of topic in this thread so let's focus back to the original question.
What's wrong with gravity theory? And how does the alternative theory (constant acceleration) explain the non constant effect between the poles and the equator?
We only have measured results for one pole at this time. I will review your source if you post it.
-
And moreover, it is also easy to demonstrate that the gravitation is weaker at the equator than at the poles due to the centrifugal force or the earth rotation of the RE model. A 100kg object at the poles weigh less than 100kg at the equator.
Do you have any evidence to support this outlandish claim? Please post it if you do.
Yes, I do. I travel every summer from "Northern Hemisphere" to equator for my holiday. You can measure that yourself too.
Measure what myself?
Have you ever had fixed weight change weights when you take it to the equator?
-
I am sorry but the FAQ doesn't explain why the effect of the gravity force (or acceleration force if you prefer) is not constant throughout the surface of earth. An object is heavier at the poles than at the equator.
We only have measured results for one pole at this time. I will review your source if you post it.
If you don't trust the link given by a previous poster, then you can do this experiment yourself.
Weigh a kilo of metal using a scale (a digital one if you want to be very precise) where you live, after that go somewhere near the equator and bring the metal and the scale with you. Repeat the same experiment at the equator.
-
I am sorry but the FAQ doesn't explain why the effect of the gravity force (or acceleration force if you prefer) is not constant throughout the surface of earth. An object is heavier at the poles than at the equator.
We only have measured results for one pole at this time. I will review your source if you post it.
If you don't trust the link given by a previous poster, then you can do this experiment yourself.
Weigh a kilo of metal using a scale (a digital one if you want to be very precise) where you live, after that go somewhere near the equator and bring the metal and the scale with you. Repeat the same experiment at the equator.
I have never been to the equator. I do not intend to do so anytime in the near future. Here in the Western Hemisphere it is made up of third-world countries that speak no English.
-
I am sorry but the FAQ doesn't explain why the effect of the gravity force (or acceleration force if you prefer) is not constant throughout the surface of earth. An object is heavier at the poles than at the equator.
We only have measured results for one pole at this time. I will review your source if you post it.
If you don't trust the link given by a previous poster, then you can do this experiment yourself.
Weigh a kilo of metal using a scale (a digital one if you want to be very precise) where you live, after that go somewhere near the equator and bring the metal and the scale with you. Repeat the same experiment at the equator.
I have never been to the equator. I do not intend to do so anytime in the near future. Here in the Western Hemisphere it is made up of third-world countries that speak no English.
How would you know if you have never been there? ;D
-
Measure what myself?
Have you ever had fixed weight change weights when you take it to the equator?
Yes I have. I did this 3-4 years ago during our family summer holiday. I did it for fun to show to my children the effect of the centrifugal force due to the earth rotation. I also showed them the direction of water swirling out from the sink is different between in "Northern Hemisphere" and ""Southern Hemisphere".
-
If you don't trust the link given by a previous poster, then you can do this experiment yourself.
Weigh a kilo of metal using a scale (a digital one if you want to be very precise) where you live, after that go somewhere near the equator and bring the metal and the scale with you. Repeat the same experiment at the equator.
I have never been to the equator. I do not intend to do so anytime in the near future. Here in the Western Hemisphere it is made up of third-world countries that speak no English.
If the language is a barrier, then I suggest you to head for Singapore, they speak English fluently. I believe that the cost of the journey is negligible compared to that of a belief which is priceless.
-
What's wrong with gravity is that no one can fully explain where it comes from or what it really is. You say that it's a force that's caused by an object's mass? Why does mass do that? OK, mass somehow bends space and time and we feel the effect as a force? What does that happen?
Never mind that the motions of the planets, moon, stars, etc. can all be explained if you allow for a force that is proportional to the mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Even though that "works", and also happens to explain why planets are round and things fall on Earth, you can't "see" gravity, so therefore it is made up.
Of course you can do the same thing with magnetism, electricity, anything really. At some point you have to realize this is the way things behave, and these are the laws of that behaviour.
The fact that we can use these theories of gravity, electromagnetism, etc. to completely explain and accurately predict phenomena make them very robust. You can deny they have any basis in reality, but only if you continually ask "why?" until you fail to get an answer, and then conclude that because you can't get an answer at that point that the whole thing is "made up".
So what's "wrong" with gravity? Only that at the bottom of it, it's utterly mysterious, like everything else at that level. Oh well. Some of us like mystery, and some of us only like easy answers.
-
What's wrong with gravity is that no one can fully explain where it comes from or what it really is. You say that it's a force that's caused by an object's mass? Why does mass do that? OK, mass somehow bends space and time and we feel the effect as a force? What does that happen?
Never mind that the motions of the planets, moon, stars, etc. can all be explained if you allow for a force that is proportional to the mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance. Even though that "works", and also happens to explain why planets are round and things fall on Earth, you can't "see" gravity, so therefore it is made up.
Of course you can do the same thing with magnetism, electricity, anything really. At some point you have to realize this is the way things behave, and these are the laws of that behaviour.
The fact that we can use these theories of gravity, electromagnetism, etc. to completely explain and accurately predict phenomena make them very robust. You can deny they have any basis in reality, but only if you continually ask "why?" until you fail to get an answer, and then conclude that because you can't get an answer at that point that the whole thing is "made up".
So what's "wrong" with gravity? Only that at the bottom of it, it's utterly mysterious, like everything else at that level. Oh well. Some of us like mystery, and some of us only like easy answers.
Just because you don't understand gravity, doesn't mean that the law of gravity is made up. The alternative theory (constant acceleration) doesn't even live up to simple observations.
-
Cartesian-he was agreeing with you.
-
Measure what myself?
Have you ever had fixed weight change weights when you take it to the equator?
Yes I have. I did this 3-4 years ago during our family summer holiday. I did it for fun to show to my children the effect of the centrifugal force due to the earth rotation. I also showed them the direction of water swirling out from the sink is different between in "Northern Hemisphere" and ""Southern Hemisphere".
What was the differences in the weights?
The metal "lost" few grams at the equator and gained back its "lost" weight magically once I was back home.
-
Cartesian-he was agreeing with you.
Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my reply. I was expressing my disagreement with the attitude of some people he described which preferred simple answer, although completely wrong, rather than a more complicated one, but right.
-
Measure what myself?
Have you ever had fixed weight change weights when you take it to the equator?
Yes I have. I did this 3-4 years ago during our family summer holiday. I did it for fun to show to my children the effect of the centrifugal force due to the earth rotation. I also showed them the direction of water swirling out from the sink is different between in "Northern Hemisphere" and ""Southern Hemisphere".
What was the differences in the weights?
The metal "lost" few grams at the equator and gained back its "lost" weight magically once I was back home.
I assume your were using a spring scale then? You cannot lose grand as they are a measure of mass.
-
Measure what myself?
Have you ever had fixed weight change weights when you take it to the equator?
Yes I have. I did this 3-4 years ago during our family summer holiday. I did it for fun to show to my children the effect of the centrifugal force due to the earth rotation. I also showed them the direction of water swirling out from the sink is different between in "Northern Hemisphere" and ""Southern Hemisphere".
What was the differences in the weights?
The metal "lost" few grams at the equator and gained back its "lost" weight magically once I was back home.
I assume your were using a spring scale then? You cannot lose grand as they are a measure of mass.
I was using digital one which uses the same principle as spring scale which measures force or weight by balancing the force due to gravity against the force on a spring.
-
Could that not be due to expansion seeing as it's a few grams?...
As in, taking in water molecules adding weight and then returning back to it's original state?
AFAIK metal + water ends up in rust there is no way to return to exactly its original state.
-
Measure what myself?
Have you ever had fixed weight change weights when you take it to the equator?
Yes I have. I did this 3-4 years ago during our family summer holiday. I did it for fun to show to my children the effect of the centrifugal force due to the earth rotation. I also showed them the direction of water swirling out from the sink is different between in "Northern Hemisphere" and ""Southern Hemisphere".
What was the differences in the weights?
The metal "lost" few grams at the equator and gained back its "lost" weight magically once I was back home.
Could that not be due to expansion seeing as it's a few grams?...
As in, taking in water molecules adding weight and then returning back to it's original state?
Water logged metal...
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
At that rate, we need less than a year to reach faster than speed of light :)
Relativity.
I thought the point of FET was relying on observable evidence and linear thinking, not the ridiculous and unprovable Deus ex Machina that we have in relativity.
-
Observed and proven. Welcome to he 20th century! You are only 100 years late!
-
You can argue that what we call gravity on Earth is actually just acceleration, but if you want to deny gravity you still need some force to account for the motion of the planets and their moons. For example, we can see the moons of Jupiter (yes I have seen them myself) and notice that they move around in orbits (Galileo did this).
Sceptimatic, you say you believe in the laws of motion, so how do you explain the orbits of the moons of Jupiter without a force?
-
Observed and proven. Welcome to he 20th century! You are only 100 years late!
Only observed and proven by the government and their subsidiaries.
-
Which experiments were performed by the government and its subsidiaries?
-
Which experiments were performed by the government and its subsidiaries?
The experiments to "confirm" relativity were done with supercolliders (conveniently underground ones) paid for with government money, unless you have another method using a protractor, a string-bob and a stopwatch that I am unaware of.
-
I think we need some senior FE'ers to jump in the discussion :)
-
Which experiments were performed by the government and its subsidiaries?
The experiments to "confirm" relativity were done with supercolliders (conveniently underground ones) paid for with government money, unless you have another method using a protractor, a string-bob and a stopwatch that I am unaware of.
Special Relativity was confirmed before particle accelerators were used:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity#section_2 (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity#section_2)
-
He said "how" scepti, not "with what".
-
And moreover, it is also easy to demonstrate that the gravitation is weaker at the equator than at the poles due to the centrifugal force or the earth rotation of the RE model. A 100kg object at the poles weigh less than 100kg at the equator.
Do you have any evidence to support this outlandish claim? Please post it if you do.
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
You sound like you lack knowledge of FE Theory. Please educate yourself and read the FAQ.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
Once again, we have a FAQ. I suggest you read it.
-
Which experiments were performed by the government and its subsidiaries?
The experiments to "confirm" relativity were done with supercolliders (conveniently underground ones) paid for with government money, unless you have another method using a protractor, a string-bob and a stopwatch that I am unaware of.
I don't know what was proven about relativity with supercolliders, maybe you are thinking about particle physics and quantum theories?
The observations showing relativity to be correct were things like light being "bent" by the sun, shown by star observations near the edge of the sun during eclipse, precession of Mercury's orbit, and time dilation on a high speed aircraft. No secret underground facilities required. Not exactly easy observations to make either, but let's be clear about what we're talking about.
-
You can argue that what we call gravity on Earth is actually just acceleration, but if you want to deny gravity you still need some force to account for the motion of the planets and their moons. For example, we can see the moons of Jupiter (yes I have seen them myself) and notice that they move around in orbits (Galileo did this).
Sceptimatic, you say you believe in the laws of motion, so how do you explain the orbits of the moons of Jupiter without a force?
Electro magnetism.
Total non-starter and totally irrelevant. Not in any way supported by any observation of anything, ever.
-
Here (http://www.gnomeexperiment.com/) is a source that would seem to support the notion that same object weighs more at the poles [or the hub/rim] then it does at the equator.
To me this suggests that the notion of the earth-plane accelerating upward at a uniform rate is flawed.
I'm a little puzzled as to why, Zetetically, the notion of 'gravity' is needed anyhow. We're attracted to the earth-plane in the same manner as magnets attract each other. No further explanation of the phenomena is needed.
I'm certainly not loosing sleep at night about it.
-
Why does no one seem to be answering my question?
Except of the first one.
Just because you see it doesn't mean it's true. As many FEs say, the curvature of the earth can only seen at 600, 000 or something miles in the air. I personally don't believe that because I once went to Gold Coast and once I swept my eyes over the landscape, I could notice the slight curving.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
Once again, we have a FAQ. I suggest you read it.
again no answer. I can do the same and refer you to millions of documents on gravity. Read what section you're in...Debate.
-
You can argue that what we call gravity on Earth is actually just acceleration, but if you want to deny gravity you still need some force to account for the motion of the planets and their moons. For example, we can see the moons of Jupiter (yes I have seen them myself) and notice that they move around in orbits (Galileo did this).
Sceptimatic, you say you believe in the laws of motion, so how do you explain the orbits of the moons of Jupiter without a force?
Electro magnetism.
Do you realize how weak your argument is? Magnet has only two poles (N and S) which can pull metal objects. Non pole sides don't attract. When an object rotate around a magnet, at one point it will pass over the non pole side hence will lose the attraction from the magnet. The centrifugal force from the rotation will then push the object away from the magnet.
Fail!
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
Once again, we have a FAQ. I suggest you read it.
mbone99, which part of the FAQ explains why the "glue force" is not constant throughout the surface of FE, why an object can be heavier at the poles than at the equator?
That FAQ only says about constant acceleration model which cannot explain the "anomaly" I described above. But if somehow you can see the explanation hidden somewhere in the FAQ, please paste the relevant section here so everybody can read it.
-
Here (http://www.gnomeexperiment.com/) is a source that would seem to support the notion that same object weighs more at the poles [or the hub/rim] then it does at the equator.
To me this suggests that the notion of the earth-plane accelerating upward at a uniform rate is flawed.
I'm a little puzzled as to why, Zetetically, the notion of 'gravity' is needed anyhow. We're attracted to the earth-plane in the same manner as magnets attract each other. No further explanation of the phenomena is needed.
I'm certainly not loosing sleep at night about it.
The pulling force we observe on earth is certainly not due to electromagnetic force because the majority of objects is not made of metal. And then, why are all objects, regardless what they are made of and even the air we breathe, attracted to earth plane if it is not by the gravity force or by the flawed force as explained by the "constant acceleration" theory?
-
Why does no one seem to be answering my question?
Except of the first one.
Just because you see it doesn't mean it's true. As many FEs say, the curvature of the earth can only seen at 600, 000 or something miles in the air. I personally don't believe that because I once went to Gold Coast and once I swept my eyes over the landscape, I could notice the slight curving.
Shmeggley did also give an answer to your question in page 2. But obviously, there is no answer from FE'ers themselves. None of them explained why they don't like the concept of gravity.
-
Once again, we have a FAQ. I suggest you read it.
again no answer. I can do the same and refer you to millions of documents on gravity. Read what section you're in...Debate.
To be honest I am new here but I can already see the that FE followers can basically be categorized into three groups based on their reaction when faced with a difficult question:
1. Quiet ones: those who prefer to stay silent
2. Lazy ones: those who suggest to read the FAQ without bothering to understand the topic
3. Noisy ones: those who propose nonsensical argument, although so far I haven't seen anyone of this group in this thread
-
Once again, we have a FAQ. I suggest you read it.
again no answer. I can do the same and refer you to millions of documents on gravity. Read what section you're in...Debate.
To be honest I am new here but I can already see the that FE followers can basically be categorized into three groups based on their reaction when faced with a difficult question:
1. Quiet ones: those who prefer to stay silent
2. Lazy ones: those who suggest to read the FAQ without bothering to understand the topic
3. Noisy ones: those who propose nonsensical argument, although so far I haven't seen anyone of this group in this thread
Funny, I was about to write the exact same thing to you. It's just a bunch of trollers. I dont think any truly believes in Flat Earth! They think Round Earth doesn't exist. I think the Flat Earth Society doesn't exist.
-
I think the Flat Earth Society doesn't exist.
I am starting to have the same impression too
-
None of them explained why they don't like the concept of gravity.
Gravity cannot be reproduced in a laboratory. It's a theory based on a bunch of assumptions, many of which are misguided.
-
Gravity cannot be reproduced in a laboratory. It's a theory based on a bunch of assumptions, many of which are misguided.
Do you mean gravity cannot be reproduced artificially or gravitation cannot be observed?
-
None of them explained why they don't like the concept of gravity.
Gravity cannot be reproduced in a laboratory. It's a theory based on a bunch of assumptions, many of which are misguided.
Care to share which ones are misguided as example? And what glue you to earth if it wasn't the gravity force? UA?
-
None of them explained why they don't like the concept of gravity.
Gravity cannot be reproduced in a laboratory. It's a theory based on a bunch of assumptions, many of which are misguided.
But what laboratory can verify anything about the UA and the supposed dark matter? Truly nobody has any idea of what might be pushing the earth from the bottom side in a flat earth model. It could be gigantic man with a wheelbarrow pushing us along or billions of small bees.
-
Gravity cannot be reproduced in a laboratory.
No, but effects of gravity can be observed in a laboratory.
-
None of them explained why they don't like the concept of gravity.
Gravity cannot be reproduced in a laboratory. It's a theory based on a bunch of assumptions, many of which are misguided.
Can you point me to any laboratory experiments / reproductions of this UA you gibber on about?
-
Regardless, an artificial reproduction of gravity is not a requirement to prove its existence.
-
Regardless, an artificial reproduction of gravity is not a requirement to prove its existence.
You nailed it down perfectly.
-
Regardless, an artificial reproduction of ***** is not a requirement to prove its existence.
Could be any explanation for anything on this site. Gets into circular logic pretty quickly. This is a legitimate gripe that FE's have.
-
If I may, I will support this argument for gravity. If one were to refute the existence of one of the four fundamental forces of nature just to conform to a mindset, they are a very arrogant person. If gravity simply doesn't exist, then anything above the ground, such as a plane, would not experience a force perpendicular to itself on a flight path parallel to the ground. If the plane is flying in exactly the prograde direction (the direction of motion/net force) it will still have all of it's passengers feeling this force. There are glasses of water with the water staying inside them, there are people actually not being able to float about the fuselage, and many more examples. Not only does the entire world of aeronautics rely on the fundamental force, everything does, and everyone on this site who refuses to look at a SCIENTIFIC FACT is just simply closed minded.
-
If I may, I will support this argument for gravity. If one were to refute the existence of one of the four fundamental forces of nature just to conform to a mindset, they are a very arrogant person. If gravity simply doesn't exist, then anything above the ground, such as a plane, would not experience a force perpendicular to itself on a flight path parallel to the ground. If the plane is flying in exactly the prograde direction (the direction of motion/net force) it will still have all of it's passengers feeling this force. There are glasses of water with the water staying inside them, there are people actually not being able to float about the fuselage, and many more examples. Not only does the entire world of aeronautics rely on the fundamental force, everything does, and everyone on this site who refuses to look at a SCIENTIFIC FACT is just simply closed minded.
You should read up on Einstein's Equivalence Principle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle). It basically says that gravitational acceleration is equivalent to the acceleration of an inertially moving body.
In other words, if you are accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s/s, you would pulled downwards with the same force that people call gravity.
-
You should read up on Einstein's Equivalence Principle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle). It basically says that gravitational acceleration is equivalent to the acceleration of an inertially moving body.
In other words, if you are accelerating upwards at a rate of 9.8m/s/s, you would pulled downwards with the same force that people call gravity.
No, in reality it is you who should read a little bit more about that principle. It holds a single word that you, the FE'ers forget each and every time: "locally".
It is true that if all the information you can get is limited to your immediate surroundings (hence the word "locally") you cannot distinguish between gravity and acceleration. But as soon as you look at non-local objects the whole equivalence you try to make crumbles like a condemned building. Watch the stars and FE does not make sense. Watch a ship at about 20 or more kilometers, and FE does not make sense. Check the "local g" in several locations on Earth, and the whole FE... you know. And the list can go forever.
So, if you are going to lecture someone on the Equivalence Principle, please do not reinvent it to fit your needs.
-
hmmm...how about everything goes down? any explanation on flat earth how that happens? what causes an object to go down instead of any other direction with its weight?
I guess FE'ers don't disagree with the existence of 9.8 m/s force that keeps you "glued" to earth. They just don't believe that it is caused by gravitation. They said that the earth is constantly accelerating upward at a rate of 9.8 m/s. But if that was true, then that force would have been constant throughout the surface of FE which can easily be demonstrated as incorrect.
well lets see if one these jokers say that accelerating at 9.8m/s^2...hmmmm...wonder how fast we're moving...lol. what the hell is UA? United Airlines? lol use your words, muggsy
The same question has been answered dozens of times. This site has a FAQ section.
another chicken out. I seem to be able to do this on this site frequently. when the going gets tough they either start non sequitur, divert from the question, start picking on grammer and spelling or now this. its just a trolling site. you dont see me sending you off to gravity.com. this is the Debate section not the "im a chicken shit and here is where you find the answer" section.
Or because you're asking a question that has been asked a million times.
Also, as far as lack of explanations and answers, we don't know everything. We're all just ordinary people so we don't have any way to figure out what keeps us on the earth, etc. We can only theorize and thus your lack of answers.