Gravitational pull.

Oh god, How did mix up South America with Africa. Man regardless of how hard it is to read that map in the faq it was stupid that even I laughed at my mistake. Next time I'll look at a real map before I start making statements. Anyways the last topic went way to far off topic. So here's a new thread.

Please note that I do not want to be told to search the forums. Either you answer the question or link me to said thread.

In your FAQ you state the earth is accelerating up at 9.8m/s. Then how is that the gravitational pull differs around the world? Why would something fall faster in
Copenhagen, where the gravitational pull is 9.815 m/s? compared to Singapore which has a gravitational pull of 9.781 m/s?? If your theory were correct then everything would
fall the same rate, yet that's not how it is.

I'm not convinced that such local deviations exist.  If they were actually measured, such variations could well be due to the gravitational influence of the heavens.
Not to drag the thread off-topic, but I'm of the minority opinion that the earth does produce gravitation (though I believe it to be imperceptible or nearly so). It must, in my opinion,  because it contributes to the stress-energy tensor.

I'm not convinced that such local deviations exist.  If they were actually measured, such variations could well be due to the gravitational influence of the heavens.
Not to drag the thread off-topic, but I'm of the minority opinion that the earth does produce gravitation (though I believe it to be imperceptible or nearly so). It must, in my opinion,  because it contributes to the stress-energy tensor.

It has been proven that the gravitational pull differs across the earth. I thought FE didn't believe in gravity at all.

There are a few FE'ers who believe in an infinite earth and gravitation. I believe in a finite earth that produces indiscernible gravitation. None of them believe in gravity to my knowledge.

Quote from: Ski on February 03, 2009, 06:11:40 PM

I'm not convinced that such local deviations exist.  If they were actually measured, such variations could well be due to the gravitational influence of the heavens.
Not to drag the thread off-topic, but I'm of the minority opinion that the earth does produce gravitation (though I believe it to be imperceptible or nearly so). It must, in my opinion,  because it contributes to the stress-energy tensor.

It has been proven that the gravitational pull differs across the earth. I thought FE didn't believe in gravity at all.

This is one of those places where you cannot interchange the 2 terms, even though they are interchangeable everywhere else in the world

...such variations could well be due to the gravitational influence of the heavens...

So now the heavens have a gravitational pull?

What kind of gravitation do you guys believe in?

Energy that pushes the earth and everything else constantly up, and gravitation some how pulling up on earth from the stars and other planets?

bump

So now the heavens have a gravitational pull?

They always have. This is not something we just pulled out of our asses. Many threads have detailed this.

What kind of gravitation do you guys believe in?

Energy that pushes the earth and everything else constantly up, and gravitation some how pulling up on earth from the stars and other planets?

Energy from the UA likely causes the gravitational pull of heavenly bodies, but it is so far speculation.

I can almost feel my IQ lowering from being on this site. This is the last you'll see of me as I doubt my questions will ever be logically answered.

I can almost feel my IQ lowering from being on this site. This is the last you'll see of me as I doubt my questions will ever be logically answered.

I'm sure your IQ was low enough to start that you would see this being an imminent danger.  Farewell.

I'm not convinced that such local deviations exist.  If they were actually measured, such variations could well be due to the gravitational influence of the heavens.
Not to drag the thread off-topic, but I'm of the minority opinion that the earth does produce gravitation (though I believe it to be imperceptible or nearly so). It must, in my opinion,  because it contributes to the stress-energy tensor.

Sure it could be possible, however there is direct evidence against this.

Using these devices that can measure the strength of the gravitational field, they have placed object above the divice and seen that they effect the strength of the gravitational field.

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

This has also been show to occur with lumps of the Earth.

As the size of these objects are known, and the distances top them, we can therefore work out the actual strength of the gravitational field due to the mass of the objects.

If you then extend this to the known size of the Earth to work out the mass fo the Earth, then the gravity (or at least the effects of attraction caused by mass) is enough to colapse the material of the Earht into a sphere.

So, based on these devices, we can conclude that the Mass of the Earth is more than enough to cause it to become a Sphere, and therefore can not be flat.

The Earth is not flat.

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

yep, a few hundred tons of people will make a gravitational difference.

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 05, 2009, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

yep, a few hundred tons of people will make a gravitational difference.

To a sensitive enough device, why not? 

Quote from: Raist on February 05, 2009, 07:23:41 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 05, 2009, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

yep, a few hundred tons of people will make a gravitational difference.

To a sensitive enough device, why not? 

Even if there were a million killograms of people, that would still only be 1/(5.97*10¹⁸) of the earth. That can't be a very strong tug especially spread out as they are.

Quote from: markjo on February 05, 2009, 07:35:38 PM

Quote from: Raist on February 05, 2009, 07:23:41 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 05, 2009, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

yep, a few hundred tons of people will make a gravitational difference.

To a sensitive enough device, why not? 

Even if there were a million killograms of people, that would still only be 1/(5.97*10¹⁸) of the earth. That can't be a very strong tug especially spread out as they are.

It doesn't have to be a very strong tug to be measurable.  To be honest, I don't know if there is equipment sensitive enough to pick up that small of a variation, but I wouldn't be surprised if there is.

Possibly, but they wouldn't put it in any place that has that much traffic and people. Anything that sensitive would be out in an unused area.

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 05, 2009, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

yep, a few hundred tons of people will make a gravitational difference.

Actually, that claim might be pretty true.

Out in the ocean, large, undersea mountains have been shown to exert small gravitational pull.  Water actually slowly pulls towards it and creates a mound of water directly over the spot where the undersea mountain is.  Thus, the sea is not flat.

So, if massive undersea mountains can do that, then it'd make sense that enough people condensed in one location would create a very slight gravitational pull.

Quote from: Raist on February 05, 2009, 07:23:41 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 05, 2009, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

yep, a few hundred tons of people will make a gravitational difference.

Actually, that claim might be pretty true.

Out in the ocean, large, undersea mountains have been shown to exert small gravitational pull.  Water actually slowly pulls towards it and creates a mound of water directly over the spot where the undersea mountain is.  Thus, the sea is not flat.

So, if massive undersea mountains can do that, then it'd make sense that enough people condensed in one location would create a very slight gravitational pull.

1. a massive mountain is not on the same order of magnitude as 100,000 people.
2. moving water does not mean that it's gravity is detectable by any instruments we use.
3. all objects have some gravitational force.

Quote from: tehflatearth on February 05, 2009, 11:08:16 PM

Quote from: Raist on February 05, 2009, 07:23:41 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 05, 2009, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

yep, a few hundred tons of people will make a gravitational difference.

Actually, that claim might be pretty true.

Out in the ocean, large, undersea mountains have been shown to exert small gravitational pull.  Water actually slowly pulls towards it and creates a mound of water directly over the spot where the undersea mountain is.  Thus, the sea is not flat.

So, if massive undersea mountains can do that, then it'd make sense that enough people condensed in one location would create a very slight gravitational pull.

2. moving water does not mean that it's gravity is detectable by any instruments we use.

So it's just coincidence that massive mountains underwater have mysterious increases in sealevel above them?  Okay.

Oceanography 101 might be a good course for you.

Also, when did you all decide that gravity does indeed exist?  Make up your minds.  I feel like you all just go in circles non-stop.

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

Since your User name is TheEngineer, I assume you have some knowledge of engineering?

Well, in FE (or RE) will an object "fall" the same rate in a vacuum?

If it does, then I can prove that there is an attraction between Masses (which we call gravity), although the equipment is probably a bit hard to build yourself, but if you have enough technical engineering expertise, then you could make one.

The device is simple really.

All you need to do is have a vertical column (the longer the better, but the more effort it will take to extract the air form it)

Inside this column is a mirror and a winch attached to this mirror.

The mirror is raised up to the top of the column and the air is evacuated form the column. This will allow the mirror to free fall without air resistance.

Next, at the bottom of the column is a laser range finder that measures the distant a beam of light travels form the laser, to the mirror then down to a detector.

The mirror is released and allowed to fall, the laser range finder tracks the motion of the mirror, specifically its velocity and acceleration.

Now, according to the theory that Masses exert a force of attraction between them, then if you place a large mass above or below this detector, then if Masses exert this force, then the mirror's acceleration (and hence velocity) will be different form when the mass was not there.

If on the other hand there is no such thing as an attractive force between masses (gravity) then this will have absolutely no effect on the equipment at all.

There are also other machines that measure gravity and are accurate down to one thousandth of one billionth of the Earth surface gravity. that is it can detect variation in force 0.000 000 000 0001 of 1 G.

See here for a start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravimeter

That is easily enough to measure the masses of 100,000 people.

So the sensitivity of these machines are enough to detect the variations.

And not only that, they are easily able to do this for known masses. Using this we can determine the strength of this attractive force for a given mass.

Now, lets assume that the Earth is Flat. We know that it must have a certain minimum depth or the mines we have dug would have broken through to the other side. This is about 1km

The Area of the FE is estimated (using the data from the FAQ) at around 155,002,503 square miles (usign Pi * R², where R is equal to approximately 12,450 miles).

As rock has an approximate density of the Earth is around 5515kg/m³

So lets calculate the amount of attraction (as confirmed by direct experiment as to the amount of force/unit of mass):

Approximate Radius of the Flat Earth: 20,036km
Minimum depth of the Flat Earth: 1km

Area of the FE: 401,441,299km²

Area in metres: 401,441,299,000 m²

Minimum Volume of a Flat Earth: 401,441,299,000,000 m³

multiplied by density: 2,213,948,763,985,000,000 kg

At the known strength of the attractive force, this would cause the Earth to collapse into a ball. So as Mass has been experimentally determined, and that this mass has an attractive force between other masses, then by this, the Earth can not possibly be flat, and would ahve to be Round.

 Maybe it's better to consider about 12 km for minimum depth because Marianas trench is about 11 km deep.

Out in the ocean, large, undersea mountains have been shown to exert small gravitational pull.  Water actually slowly pulls towards it and creates a mound of water directly over the spot where the undersea mountain is.  Thus, the sea is not flat.

Source, please.

Since your User name is TheEngineer, I assume you have some knowledge of engineering?

I would like to think so.

Well, in FE (or RE) will an object "fall" the same rate in a vacuum?

Yes.

If it does, then I can prove that there is an attraction between Masses (which we call gravity)

I would love for you to prove that to me.

according to the theory that Masses exert a force of attraction between them

There is your problem.

Quote from: Raist on February 05, 2009, 11:11:06 PM

Quote from: tehflatearth on February 05, 2009, 11:08:16 PM

Quote from: Raist on February 05, 2009, 07:23:41 PM

Quote from: TheEngineer on February 05, 2009, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Edtharan on February 05, 2009, 06:28:34 PM

For instance in once such occurrence, there was a periodic fluctuation in the strength of the gravitational field at one of these detectors. It occurred exactly the same time as the local university held its football match. As the device was located underneath the stadium, it was determined that the mass of the people above in the stadium was actually effecting the gravitational field enough to be detected by this device.

Those are some dumb scientists.  I would not trust anything they say.

yep, a few hundred tons of people will make a gravitational difference.

Actually, that claim might be pretty true.

Out in the ocean, large, undersea mountains have been shown to exert small gravitational pull.  Water actually slowly pulls towards it and creates a mound of water directly over the spot where the undersea mountain is.  Thus, the sea is not flat.

So, if massive undersea mountains can do that, then it'd make sense that enough people condensed in one location would create a very slight gravitational pull.

2. moving water does not mean that it's gravity is detectable by any instruments we use.

So it's just coincidence that massive mountains underwater have mysterious increases in sealevel above them?  Okay.

Oceanography 101 might be a good course for you.

Also, when did you all decide that gravity does indeed exist?  Make up your minds.  I feel like you all just go in circles non-stop.

You might want to take reading comprehension 84, it's the slow learners class. Undetectable by any instrument we use =/ nonexistant.

Quote from: tehflatearth on February 05, 2009, 11:08:16 PM

Out in the ocean, large, undersea mountains have been shown to exert small gravitational pull.  Water actually slowly pulls towards it and creates a mound of water directly over the spot where the undersea mountain is.  Thus, the sea is not flat.

Source, please.

Invitation to Oceanography by Paul R. Pinet  for example. It's also mentioned in "ESA's Ice Mission" - http://www.esa.int/esapub/br/br199/br199.pdf and if you just bother to search little you can find more.

Show it, please.

 I gave you the title of book and author name. Just go to amazon or library or google books and read the book.

No.  I am not going to read a book to corroborate your story.  Provide the passage that backs your claim.

No.  I am not going to read a book to corroborate your story.  Provide the passage that backs your claim.

I don't claim anything I just gave you the title of book which among the other things talks about that undersea mountains draw water near itself because gravitational attraction. And because of this there are mound of water directly over the spot where the undersea mountain is and thus, the sea is not flat.
 It's a book for christ sake. I can't give you a book through cables and why do I have to force feed you with something anyway. If you are not interested in that then don't read it but also don't say that the book doesn't talk about it. And if you are interested you can buy it from amazon http://www.amazon.com/Invitation-Oceanography-Third-Paul-Pinet/dp/0763721360/ref=sr_11_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1234009273&sr=11-1 or get the info from there and go to the library. Or devise some other options for getting it.