If you follow the Theory of Spacetime...
(Gravity is not a force. This is almost certain, regardless of whether or not the Theory of Spacetime is true.)
Mass warps the universe by space and time. Imagine the universe like a giant cloth, pulled taught. Throw a ball in the middle of the cloth, and it makes a dent. If you roll a smaller ball near it, that smaller ball will curve towards the larger one, if mass also corresponds to size, that is. This is an example of how gravity works. It requires no energy.
That example requires an already existing acceleration.
The initial acceleration and resultant movement of the larger object can be explained as part of planetary formation. The energy that caused the little comet’s acceleration is not required to be explained in this scenario, we presume it moves for the same reason that any other comet does. You do know there are things like comets don’t you?
If you follow the Theory of Spacetime...
(Gravity is not a force. This is almost certain, regardless of whether or not the Theory of Spacetime is true.)
Mass warps the universe by space and time. Imagine the universe like a giant cloth, pulled taught. Throw a ball in the middle of the cloth, and it makes a dent. If you roll a smaller ball near it, that smaller ball will curve towards the larger one, if mass also corresponds to size, that is. This is an example of how gravity works. It requires no energy.
How does space know how much to distort, based on mass and distance from the object? There must be some sort of mediating particle.
How does a piston ‘know’ its supposed to go up and down?- An lifeless object can’t know - anything!
Does a magnet work in vacuum? What mediating particles cause magnets to attract or repel each other? is it so far fetched to your mind that gravity can work by a similar field effect that negates a requirement for direct or sequential physical contact?
Maybe some FE’r can answer this. Is the flat earth “theory” falsifiable?
Tell me how can anyone present you with evidence of a round earth when you consider any such evidence as faked. It is the same attitude I have observed from the Fe’rs here reminds me of the ‘Answers in Genesis’ statement of faith (
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/about/faith.asp). “No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.”
The FE one just reads: All apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field that points to a round earth is faked. Please note I’m not saying all FE’rs are bible literalists, I’m just pointing to a similarity in the way flawed beliefs are maintained.
Please can anyone tell me if flat earth “theory” is falsifiable?