1

**Flat Earth General / Re: Is the Earth stationary or rising up at 9.8 m/s?**

« **on:**June 16, 2024, 10:03:46 AM »

We are not talking about F=ma. We are talking about this equation:

http://cosmoschool2018.oa.uj.edu.pl/pdfs/day3/CosmoSchool_Cracow2018_PiorkowskaKurpas.pdf

Although "Equivalence Principle" is something that Albert Einstein coined and he referred to for his theories, Newton's equivalency of inertial and gravitational mass is sometimes called the Newtonian equivalence principle.

Bravo, Tom. You got it eventually, and are now linking sources that directly refute your ridiculous earlier claims made here:

In the above the girl's hair become weightless. However, if there was something invisible pulling every atom of the hair "down," it should not become weightless.

For example, consider if we had a horizontal length of rope on one of the zero-g aircraft flights. While the cabin is falling there should still be "gavity" pulling every point of the rope "down" as in the left hand side of the below image. Parts of the rope should not be able to float and deform upwards weightlessly without resistance against gravity, as in the right hand side of the image.

Hence, we have a demonstration that reality acts as if freefalling bodies are inert and the earth is accelerating upwards.

So you now accept that the equivalence of inertial mass and gravitational mass is a feature of classical (Newtonian) mechanics, as everyone was trying to tell you. That due to Galilean/Newtonian equivalence, objects fall at the same rate in classical mechanics and your earlier claims above were bollocks.

PS. The above equation is derived from the law of universal gravitation and Newton’s second law, F=ma.

Quote

From University of Pittsburgh:

https://sites.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/general_relativity/QuoteEinstein's reinterpretation eradicates an awkwardness of Newtonian theory. That theory had to posit that increases in gravitational mass in bodies are perfectly and exactly compensated by corresponding increases in inertial mass, so that the uniqueness of free fall can be preserved. Einstein's redescription does away with that coincidence and even the very idea of distinct inertial and gravitational masses.In his theory, bodies now just have mass, or, in the light of special relativity, mass-energy. For Einstein the primitive notion is the geometrical structure of spacetime with the curved trajectories traced out by all freely falling bodies, independently of their mass.

So, you're wrong. Newtonian theory proposed an absurd coincidence.

The “absurd coincidence” was what gave Einstein the idea that maybe the equivalence principle would apply to all laws of physics, not just the laws of motion. It was the beginning of his work on general relativity, not the end of it.

I will overlook your desperate attempt to save face.

Therefore, on behalf of real (round earth) science, I hereby accept your unconditional surrender, subject to the following terms;

- Immediate cessation of all hostilities against science.

- Withdrawal of all illegitimate claims on the field of Newtonian mechanics and gravity.

- Reparations to be paid by means of monetary donation to your local school physics department.

This matter is now closed. Good day to you sir!