Gravity proven false

  • 28 Replies
  • 4671 Views
?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Gravity proven false
« on: April 05, 2007, 04:31:28 PM »
Gravity Force, according to your Isaac Newton:
F = Gm1m2/r2

Therefore
Limr->0[Gm1m2/r2] = Inf

So If I walk over to my TV, and reduce the distance that separates us from 10m to 0m, the gravitational force will become infinite (assuming both me and my TV have a mass greater than 0). This is not the case. Even at a distance of 0m from my TV, I feel no force. In fact, the only force I feel is towards the earth, down. As if it were accelerating towards me.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2007, 04:40:32 PM by narcberry »

?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #1 on: April 05, 2007, 04:52:39 PM »
Finally, some thought amongst the round-earthers?

?

jizzmaster

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #2 on: April 05, 2007, 04:55:22 PM »
You are right.

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #3 on: April 05, 2007, 04:58:25 PM »
Gravity is heavily also bawsed on mass, which you seem to ahve forgotten. Earth would also hide any other gravitational pull within earths own force.

*

sokarul

  • 17480
  • Discount Chemist
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #4 on: April 05, 2007, 05:01:32 PM »
R never reaches zero due to the uncertainty principle.
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

Run Sandokhan run

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #5 on: April 05, 2007, 05:01:43 PM »
Based*

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #6 on: April 05, 2007, 05:02:19 PM »
The earth's gravity attracts both you and your television. This mass is much greater than both your masses combined and tripled. The force of gravity keeps the TV in place even when you get within 2 nanometers of it. Bring your TV to the interstellar medium outside the solar system and perform the same thing, and you will be attracted to each other.  This isn't feasible however. Narc gets an D for the intellegence of the question and a C+ for trying to act like he knows what he's talking about.
Plato: People are inherently bad.
Aristotle: People are inherently good.
Me: People are inherently stupid.

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #7 on: April 05, 2007, 05:06:33 PM »
Amazing you've outwitted Newton and Einstien... Dingleberry your a genius.

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #8 on: April 05, 2007, 05:56:21 PM »
r remains greater than 0 fuckstick. division of 0 comes out undefined. who says infinity?

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #9 on: April 05, 2007, 07:09:24 PM »
Gravity Force, according to your Isaac Newton:
F = Gm1m2/r2

Therefore
Limr->0[Gm1m2/r2] = Inf

So If I walk over to my TV, and reduce the distance that separates us from 10m to 0m, the gravitational force will become infinite (assuming both me and my TV have a mass greater than 0). This is not the case. Even at a distance of 0m from my TV, I feel no force. In fact, the only force I feel is towards the earth, down. As if it were accelerating towards me.

In order to make r=0 in the sense given by the equation, you'd need to have compacted either the TV or yourself into a singularity. (Since r is the distance between the two centres of mass) And even then, you'd still be dealing with a finite r (Albeit on the scale of plank lengths)


Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #10 on: April 05, 2007, 07:34:36 PM »
Gravity Force, according to your Isaac Newton:
F = Gm1m2/r2

Therefore
Limr->0[Gm1m2/r2] = Inf

So If I walk over to my TV, and reduce the distance that separates us from 10m to 0m, the gravitational force will become infinite (assuming both me and my TV have a mass greater than 0). This is not the case. Even at a distance of 0m from my TV, I feel no force. In fact, the only force I feel is towards the earth, down. As if it were accelerating towards me.

you have just made a fundamental error dear foe... you forgot that this is only the equation used for long distance gravity, between two celestial bodies, as that was what it was intended for, now if want to disprove the existance of celestial bodies of significant mass, then don't use this equation.

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #11 on: April 06, 2007, 10:10:28 AM »
Sorry for my ignorance but what is Gm1m2. I wasn't paying attention in class yesterday

?

Erasmus

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4242
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #12 on: April 06, 2007, 11:07:23 AM »
In order to make r=0 in the sense given by the equation, you'd need to have compacted either the TV or yourself into a singularity. (Since r is the distance between the two centres of mass) And even then, you'd still be dealing with a finite r (Albeit on the scale of plank lengths)

This has been the only response worth reading so far.  I would point out, of course, that narcbery was not concerned with the state of things when r=0, but rather, the state of things as r approaches 0 (GroundControl's response partially covers this, since r is not allowed to arbitrarily approach 0).

narcberry: G, m1, and m2 in the case of you and the T.V. are very very small.  Use the radius of a T.V. for r and actually compute the resulting F, and you will find that as close as you can get to the T.V., the force of gravitational attraction between you and it will still be minuscule.

As a side note, every object has a Schwartzschild radius related to its mass, much like a black hole does.  What makes a black hole different from other objects is that its physical extent is smaller than its Schwartzschild radius.  The Schwartzschild radius of your television set is practically indistinguishable from zero; by the time you got to it, you would be well inside the T.V., and the gravitational field would have dropped off linearly and not, as you suggest, approached infinity.
Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip?

?

akira

  • 415
  • Round Earth Proponent
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #13 on: April 07, 2007, 12:17:30 AM »
If Gravity is proven false, then there's no such thing as your so-called Acceleration.
GPS does not require satellites, fortunately it uses it.

?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #14 on: April 09, 2007, 07:34:25 AM »
In order to make r=0 in the sense given by the equation, you'd need to have compacted either the TV or yourself into a singularity. (Since r is the distance between the two centres of mass) And even then, you'd still be dealing with a finite r (Albeit on the scale of plank lengths)

This has been the only response worth reading so far.  I would point out, of course, that narcbery was not concerned with the state of things when r=0, but rather, the state of things as r approaches 0 (GroundControl's response partially covers this, since r is not allowed to arbitrarily approach 0).

narcberry: G, m1, and m2 in the case of you and the T.V. are very very small.  Use the radius of a T.V. for r and actually compute the resulting F, and you will find that as close as you can get to the T.V., the force of gravitational attraction between you and it will still be minuscule.

I should rephrase and speak only of the surface of my hand and the surface of my tv. Regardless, the uncertainty principle and significant figures both file this under, intentional ignorance. But only 3 of us understand that, so I'm sure there will be more idiotic explanations why there actually is gravity. And I look forward to that.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2007, 07:36:00 AM by narcberry »

?

∂G/∂x

  • 1536
  • All Rights Reversed
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #15 on: April 09, 2007, 09:18:22 AM »
You can't actually 'touch' your TV, neither can you touch any other object in the sense of a zero distance between you. The reason you can press against its surface without passing through it is because the electrons that orbit the atoms in your hand and the TV are negatively charged, and when they get near each other the electromagnetic force (which is at that scale many many times stronger than gravity) causes the like charges to repel each other. Atoms are made of mostly space, so without this effect you would find it quite easy to walk through walls, but then of course your body and everything in the universe would fall apart also...Your gravity equation proof falls apart because of this very small, but nonetheless significant distance between all atoms in the universe.

Incidentally, where the electrons are not present to provide this useful service, or example in neutron stars, gravitational attraction is indeed almost infinite causing the star to collapse into an ultra dense ball a few kilometres across but containing the mass of an entire star. A pinhead of this material would weigh over 500,000 tonnes.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
The universe has already expanded forever

Quote from: Proverbs 24:17
Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth.

?

Erasmus

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4242
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2007, 12:00:32 PM »
I should rephrase and speak only of the surface of my hand and the surface of my tv.

What do you mean by "surface"?  I think you cannot find any material objects that, in ordinary circumstances, can get arbitrarily close to one another.

Quote
Regardless, the uncertainty principle and significant figures both file this under, intentional ignorance. But only 3 of us understand that,

I'm obviously not one of them; that sentence is incoherent to me.
Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip?

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10061
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #17 on: April 09, 2007, 03:26:41 PM »
In order for you to be 0 distance from the television, you must be in the same position as the television.  You are extremely dimwitted.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 27043
  • I'm the boss.
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #18 on: April 09, 2007, 03:33:01 PM »
In order for you to be 0 distance from the television, you must be in the same position as the television.  You are extremely dimwitted.

Yes he is, but don't let that influence your opinion of him.  He's a lot of fun.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #19 on: April 10, 2007, 08:13:18 AM »
I can't believe I read through the comments of this beyond stupid post.  Wow, this is a new low...

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #20 on: April 10, 2007, 08:30:01 AM »
Gravity Force, according to your Isaac Newton:
F = Gm1m2/r2

Therefore
Limr->0[Gm1m2/r2] = Inf

So If I walk over to my TV, and reduce the distance that separates us from 10m to 0m, the gravitational force will become infinite (assuming both me and my TV have a mass greater than 0). This is not the case. Even at a distance of 0m from my TV, I feel no force. In fact, the only force I feel is towards the earth, down. As if it were accelerating towards me.
Q: "If the Earth was indeed a flat disc, wouldn't the whole planet crunch up into itself and eventually transform into a ball?"

A1: If the Earth generated a gravitational field, yes, it would eventually happen, after a billion years maybe. FE assumes that the Earth does not generate a gravitational field. Also, I'm not sure what FE's stance on the age of the world is, but it's plausible that it's a younger estimation than the RE claim. Um . . . if there is no gravitational field why  do i fall out of my computer chair when i lean to the right or left to much  Shocked ?  yeah do i have to say more?

?

narcberry

  • 5566
  • Reason > RET
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #21 on: April 10, 2007, 08:43:59 AM »
There is no gravity, or gravitational field. The earth accelerates upwards, you fall down.

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #22 on: April 10, 2007, 08:44:12 AM »
Gravity Force, according to your Isaac Newton:
F = Gm1m2/r2

Therefore
Limr->0[Gm1m2/r2] = Inf

So If I walk over to my TV, and reduce the distance that separates us from 10m to 0m, the gravitational force will become infinite (assuming both me and my TV have a mass greater than 0). This is not the case. Even at a distance of 0m from my TV, I feel no force. In fact, the only force I feel is towards the earth, down. As if it were accelerating towards me.
Q: "If the Earth was indeed a flat disc, wouldn't the whole planet crunch up into itself and eventually transform into a ball?"

A1: If the Earth generated a gravitational field, yes, it would eventually happen, after a billion years maybe. FE assumes that the Earth does not generate a gravitational field. Also, I'm not sure what FE's stance on the age of the world is, but it's plausible that it's a younger estimation than the RE claim. Um . . . if there is no gravitational field why  do i fall out of my computer chair when i lean to the right or left to much  Shocked ?  yeah do i have to say more?

Do you really think this hasn't been answered?  Ask yourself, "Would this be a frequently asked question?".  I think you know the answer.  Go to where the answers are, the FAQ.

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #23 on: April 10, 2007, 11:44:37 AM »
There is no gravity, or gravitational field. The earth accelerates upwards, you fall down.
prove the earth is moving "up" i want to read this lol. oh and if the Earth is moving "up" would we run into the sun no? or at lest wouldn’t  the sun be gone for good.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2007, 11:48:09 AM by Knoll »

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #24 on: April 10, 2007, 11:49:32 AM »
Gravity Force, according to your Isaac Newton:
F = Gm1m2/r2

Therefore
Limr->0[Gm1m2/r2] = Inf

So If I walk over to my TV, and reduce the distance that separates us from 10m to 0m, the gravitational force will become infinite (assuming both me and my TV have a mass greater than 0). This is not the case. Even at a distance of 0m from my TV, I feel no force. In fact, the only force I feel is towards the earth, down. As if it were accelerating towards me.
Q: "If the Earth was indeed a flat disc, wouldn't the whole planet crunch up into itself and eventually transform into a ball?"

A1: If the Earth generated a gravitational field, yes, it would eventually happen, after a billion years maybe. FE assumes that the Earth does not generate a gravitational field. Also, I'm not sure what FE's stance on the age of the world is, but it's plausible that it's a younger estimation than the RE claim. Um . . . if there is no gravitational field why  do i fall out of my computer chair when i lean to the right or left to much  Shocked ?  yeah do i have to say more?

Do you really think this hasn't been answered?  Ask yourself, "Would this be a frequently asked question?".  I think you know the answer.  Go to where the answers are, the FAQ.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=12344.0 been there done that . . . gone over it  3 times and laughed the first 2.

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #25 on: April 10, 2007, 12:14:45 PM »
One more thing if the earth is moving up to make "Gravity" on your earth why do things fall at different rates if its moving not force of mass/weight? everything would fall at the same rates no?  ???

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #26 on: April 10, 2007, 12:16:50 PM »
One more thing if the earth is moving up to make "Gravity" on your earth why do things fall at different rates if its moving not force of mass/weight? everything would fall at the same rates no?  ???
What things, exactly?


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

CommonCents

  • 1779
  • ^_^
Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #27 on: April 10, 2007, 12:20:22 PM »
Ok first of all things DO fall at the same rate....even with my basic physics knowledge I know that and have a way to prove it.  Secondly according to Tom's Universal Accelerator bullshit things with more mass would fall slower than things with less mass because he says that the UA affect is stronger on objects of higher mass so they would accelerate up, not as significantly as the earth however, but still slowing their fall.
OMG!

Re: Gravity proven false
« Reply #28 on: April 10, 2007, 12:39:15 PM »
Ok first of all things DO fall at the same rate....even with my basic physics knowledge I know that and have a way to prove it.  Secondly according to Tom's Universal Accelerator bullshit things with more mass would fall slower than things with less mass because he says that the UA affect is stronger on objects of higher mass so they would accelerate up, not as significantly as the earth however, but still slowing their fall.
thank you . . . said what i was trying to say.