Newtonian Gravity

  • 86 Replies
  • 12949 Views
?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« on: September 15, 2009, 04:17:07 PM »
That formula was an educated guess by Issac Newton. Later Einstein "proved him wrong"; although due to my belief in FE, I disagree with einstein.

Einstein never "proved him wrong" because Isaac Newton "wasn't" wrong in the "first place". Newton is only "wrong" in a few "exceptional" circumstances, such "as" high speed, or large "gravitational" fields. These were "not" scenarios Newton was aware, nor "ones" that he claimed to "solve".

Unless you can say how or why its incorrect, you're post is a waste of our earth's precious internetz.

PS. Your profile says you're 19. You got you're major early. Wow. Achiever.

PPS I suspect you're Robosteve's alt.

*

Username

  • President of The Flat Earth Society
  • Administrator
  • 18223
  • +41/-81
  • Most Accurate Scientist Ever
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #1 on: September 16, 2009, 05:19:20 AM »
Isaac Newton "wasn't" wrong in the "first place".

Newton is only "wrong" in a few "exceptional" circumstances
Newton wasn't wrong, he was just wrong sometimes?

Whether he was aware if he was wrong or not is not relevant.
If you can't argue bth sides, you undestand neither

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #2 on: September 16, 2009, 06:57:13 AM »
Are there any FEers out there that'll answer the questions? If not I really don't think that the creator of this thread asked for a debate on anything. If that had been the case I'm sure they'd have put it in the Debate subforum. Now FEers... what about those questions?


His questions are being answered. Several people have taken the time to answer him, despite the fact that many ofhis questions are answered by the FAQ.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #3 on: September 16, 2009, 11:47:18 AM »
Newton wasn't wrong, he was just wrong sometimes?

No reread my post:

Newton is only wrong in a few exceptional circumstances, such as high speed, or large gravitational fields. These were not scenarios Newton was aware of, nor ones that he claimed to solve.

As it stands, Newtonian gravity is reasonably robust. Despite all your squealing I've yet to see flat earthers put anything better on the table.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2009, 12:47:15 PM »
So in certain circumstances, Newton's theories don't work. Which would mean his theories don't reflect reality. Which would mean he was wrong about how 'gravity' worked.


Newton. Wrong.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45158
  • +98/-136
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #5 on: September 16, 2009, 01:27:02 PM »
So in certain circumstances, Newton's theories don't work. Which would mean his theories don't reflect reality. Which would mean he was wrong about how 'gravity' worked.


Newton. Wrong.

Newton never tried to explain how gravity works.  He only attempted to describe its effects.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

HTD

  • 28
  • +0/-0
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #6 on: September 16, 2009, 01:54:42 PM »
Are there any FEers out there that'll answer the questions? If not I really don't think that the creator of this thread asked for a debate on anything. If that had been the case I'm sure they'd have put it in the Debate subforum. Now FEers... what about those questions?


His questions are being answered. Several people have taken the time to answer him, despite the fact that many ofhis questions are answered by the FAQ.

Only one has been answered...and argued about. And which are located in the FAQ? I didn't see them any of the several times I looked through it.

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #7 on: September 16, 2009, 03:24:04 PM »
So in certain circumstances, Newton's theories don't work. Which would mean his theories don't reflect reality. Which would mean he was wrong about how 'gravity' worked.


Newton. Wrong.

Once again, reread my post.

As it stands, Newtonian gravity is reasonably robust. Despite all your squealing I've yet to see flat earthers put anything better on the table.

*

Kathleen Wilcox

  • 102
  • +0/-0
  • Lux sit
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #8 on: September 16, 2009, 04:05:51 PM »
So in certain circumstances, Newton's theories don't work. Which would mean his theories don't reflect reality. Which would mean he was wrong about how 'gravity' worked.


Newton. Wrong.

Once again, reread my post.

As it stands, Newtonian gravity is reasonably robust. Despite all your squealing I've yet to see flat earthers put anything better on the table.
Newtonian gravity doesn't even explain the orbit of mercury according to RE.
"My soul finds rest in God alone: My salvation comes from Him."

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #9 on: September 16, 2009, 04:11:22 PM »
Newtonian gravity doesn't even explain the orbit of mercury according to RE.

"Doesn't even". You selected the one case where it failed and presented it as the lowest barrier to entry.

Go away lame alt. We can debate this when you logon with your real account.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #10 on: September 16, 2009, 04:39:30 PM »
Newtonian gravity doesn't even explain the orbit of mercury according to RE.

"Doesn't even". You selected the one case where it failed and presented it as the lowest barrier to entry.

Go away lame alt. We can debate this when you logon with your real account.

All it takes is one inconsistency to completely falsify a theory.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Kakatary

  • 14
  • +0/-0
  • Open minded. I'm one of those rare people...
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #11 on: September 16, 2009, 05:08:57 PM »
Are there any FEers out there that'll answer the questions? If not I really don't think that the creator of this thread asked for a debate on anything. If that had been the case I'm sure they'd have put it in the Debate subforum. Now FEers... what about those questions?


His questions are being answered. Several people have taken the time to answer him, despite the fact that many ofhis questions are answered by the FAQ.

Which ones? O.o
"We sell our skills, not our bodies.
We create another secret world, a place only of beauty.
The very word "geisha" means artist and to be a geisha
is to be judged as a moving work of art."

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #12 on: September 16, 2009, 06:33:00 PM »
All it takes is one inconsistency to completely falsify a theory.

Please reread my post. I've already explained this enough times now.

And despite all your squealing I've yet to see flat earthers put anything better on the table.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45158
  • +98/-136
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #13 on: September 16, 2009, 06:43:18 PM »
Newtonian gravity doesn't even explain the orbit of mercury according to RE.

"Doesn't even". You selected the one case where it failed and presented it as the lowest barrier to entry.

Go away lame alt. We can debate this when you logon with your real account.

All it takes is one inconsistency to completely falsify a theory.

So Newton's gravity can't predict the trajectory of a bomb dropped from 10,000 feet at 600 mph?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #14 on: September 16, 2009, 06:52:08 PM »
Newtonian gravity doesn't even explain the orbit of mercury according to RE.

"Doesn't even". You selected the one case where it failed and presented it as the lowest barrier to entry.

Go away lame alt. We can debate this when you logon with your real account.

All it takes is one inconsistency to completely falsify a theory.

So Newton's gravity can't predict the trajectory of a bomb dropped from 10,000 feet at 600 mph?

I can't imagine it could do so exactly.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45158
  • +98/-136
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #15 on: September 16, 2009, 07:27:31 PM »
So Newton's gravity can't predict the trajectory of a bomb dropped from 10,000 feet at 600 mph?

I can't imagine it could do so exactly.

How exact would it need to be?  Feet, inches, microns?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #16 on: September 17, 2009, 05:42:22 AM »
Newton was wrong because his theory of how the universe works does not reflect how it actually works, and this can be proven by the many scenarios where it fails to account for observable phenomona.


You guys can spin this as many ways as you want, but Newton was wrong. Predictive power can be an indicator of a theory's validity, but ultimately, if the theory does not reflect reality, then that theory cannot be 'true' or 'right' in any meaningful sense.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45158
  • +98/-136
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #17 on: September 17, 2009, 06:08:54 AM »
Newton's gravity works and is very useful as a general case approximation.  Not bad for being completely and utterly wrong.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #18 on: September 17, 2009, 06:12:01 AM »
Newton was wrong because his theory of how the universe works does not reflect how it actually works, and this can be proven by the many scenarios where it fails to account for observable phenomona.

Once again, please reread my post:

Quote
Newton is only wrong in a few exceptional circumstances, such as high speed, or large gravitational fields. These were not scenarios Newton was aware of, nor ones that he claimed to solve.

You guys can spin this as many ways as you want, but Newton was wrong. Predictive power can be an indicator of a theory's validity, but ultimately, if the theory does not reflect reality, then that theory cannot be 'true' or 'right' in any meaningful sense.

Despite all your squealing I've yet to see flat earthers put anything better on the table.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #19 on: September 17, 2009, 06:43:31 AM »
Newton was wrong because his theory of how the universe works does not reflect how it actually works, and this can be proven by the many scenarios where it fails to account for observable phenomona.

Once again, please reread my post:

Quote
Newton is only wrong in a few exceptional circumstances, such as high speed, or large gravitational fields. These were not scenarios Newton was aware of, nor ones that he claimed to solve.

You guys can spin this as many ways as you want, but Newton was wrong. Predictive power can be an indicator of a theory's validity, but ultimately, if the theory does not reflect reality, then that theory cannot be 'true' or 'right' in any meaningful sense.

Despite all your squealing I've yet to see flat earthers put anything better on the table.


What point are you trying to make? ???


Nothing in your posts changes the fact that Newton was wrong. His being 'unaware' of certain things doesn't make his theory 'right'.


Newton's gravity works and is very useful as a general case approximation.  Not bad for being completely and utterly wrong.


I can agree to that. The point we are making is not s slight against Newton. All current theories are probably wrong on some level. GR and QM will probably be overturned in time as well.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #20 on: September 17, 2009, 07:06:30 AM »
What point are you trying to make? ???

The point I've been making all along. That Newton is quite robust, works for the vast majority of circumstances, and successfully tackles the problems it set out to solve.

Nothing in your posts changes the fact that Newton was wrong. His being 'unaware' of certain things doesn't make his theory 'right'.

Actually it does. If Newton had claimed to be solving the problems of hyper speed space ships, or photons around black holes then he would have been wrong. As it is he describes simple celestial mechanics. And does it well.


Unless you can put something on the table, which given the presumption of a flat earth, solves these hindrances then all I'm reading is a load of BAAAWWWW.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #21 on: September 17, 2009, 07:38:46 AM »
The point I've been making all along. That Newton is quite robust, works for the vast majority of circumstances, and successfully tackles the problems it set out to solve.


You may be shocked by what I'm about to say, but 'reality' involves all circumtances, not just the majority. Newton's theories do not reflect reality, end of story. A theory about how the universe works, which is incorrect in that regard, is wrong.


Actually it does. If Newton had claimed to be solving the problems of hyper speed space ships, or photons around black holes then he would have been wrong. As it is he describes simple celestial mechanics. And does it well.


No, his theories can be used to predict simple celestial mechanics, but they do not explain them. There is a big difference. Relativity applies to all celestial mechanics, not just exceptional ones. It's just that Newton's work is 'good enough' to produce accurate results at the basic level. However, the fact remains that the universe does not work in the way he thought it does, and that as such, Newton was wrong.


The universe doesn't generally work as Newton thought, and then suddenly become relativistic once you get near a black hole. His theory can produce accurate predictions in many scenarios, but they cannot explain those scenarios. He was wrong about how the universe worked, because though his theory produces accurate predictions, it does not accurately explain the process.


Unless you can put something on the table, which given the presumption of a flat earth, solves these hindrances then all I'm reading is a load of BAAAWWWW.


Unless you can show why Newtonian physics should never have been overturned, and show that Einstein was wrong...
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #22 on: September 17, 2009, 08:00:11 AM »
No, his theories can be used to predict simple celestial mechanics, but they do not explain them.

And neither I nor he said that they "explained" them (in terms of the underlying mechanics I assume?). This is all weak stuff Wilmore.

He was wrong about how the universe worked, because though his theory produces accurate predictions, it does not accurately explain the process.

Once again, Newton never claimed to explain the process, he simply defined the rules of its effects. This seems to be something you find hard to grasp.

The universe doesn't generally work as Newton thought.

Wrong. The universe generally works as Newton thought, with a few exceptions. *sigh*

Unless you can show why Newtonian physics should never have been overturned, and show that Einstein was wrong...

I'm not saying Newton should never have been overturned. Please don't twist my words. It makes you look pathetic.

If you want to insist that Newton is so wrong that it's unusable then you have to give us something better (with a dependence on a flat earth).

I've yet to see you do that. :(

?

Squat

Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #23 on: September 17, 2009, 09:02:47 AM »
Was Newton's Calculus wrong?

Are Newtons Laws of Motion wrong?

Bearing in mind he died 282 years ago I think he did OK. To just turn round and say he is wrong is just wrong. Some of his work has been overtaken - big deal. Darwin didn't decode the human genome. was he wrong?

If you want to see some wrong 'science' read Earth Not a Globe by Samuel Birley Rowbotham. If Newton is wrong then Rowbotham is completely hopeless.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45158
  • +98/-136
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #24 on: September 17, 2009, 09:04:28 AM »
Newton's gravity works and is very useful as a general case approximation.  Not bad for being completely and utterly wrong.

I can agree to that. The point we are making is not s slight against Newton. All current theories are probably wrong on some level. GR and QM will probably be overturned in time as well.

But every time you say that Newton was wrong, you make it sound like he was wrong about everything and his equations are utterly useless.  The fact is, that when relativistic conditions do not apply, Newton's gravity has more than sufficient predictive powers for almost anything that engineers run into.  When relativistic conditions do apply (such as Mercury's orbit), only then you need to invoke Einstein.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

?

HTD

  • 28
  • +0/-0
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #25 on: September 17, 2009, 02:07:15 PM »
Well, I have yet to see any FEers answer the rest of the questions asked in this thread :/

Lol yeah. It turned into a competition that I can't follow well as I'm not well versed in gravity apart from Fg = Gm1m2/r^2, which I learned in Physics.

*

Lord Wilmore

  • Vice President
  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 12086
  • +3/-3
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #26 on: September 17, 2009, 02:16:33 PM »
But every time you say that Newton was wrong, you make it sound like he was wrong about everything and his equations are utterly useless.  The fact is, that when relativistic conditions do not apply, Newton's gravity has more than sufficient predictive powers for almost anything that engineers run into.  When relativistic conditions do apply (such as Mercury's orbit), only then you need to invoke Einstein.


I simply say that he was wrong, which he is. What you read into it is your own business.


And neither I nor he said that they "explained" them (in terms of the underlying mechanics I assume?).


So what, he didn't think gravity existed either? ???


Are you seriously suggesting Newton invented the law of universal gravitation without seriously believing that it was the explanation for planetary movements? If you are, then I have news for you- Newton very firmly defended the idea of gravity as a force. Of course it isn't, and that's why he was wrong.


Wrong. The universe generally works as Newton thought, with a few exceptions. *sigh*


Please inform us at what point the universe stops being relativistic, and starts being Newtonian.
"I want truth for truth's sake, not for the applaud or approval of men. I would not reject truth because it is unpopular, nor accept error because it is popular. I should rather be right and stand alone than run with the multitude and be wrong." - C.S. DeFord

*

Kathleen Wilcox

  • 102
  • +0/-0
  • Lux sit
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #27 on: September 17, 2009, 03:06:18 PM »
So Newton's gravity can't predict the trajectory of a bomb dropped from 10,000 feet at 600 mph?

I can't imagine it could do so exactly.

How exact would it need to be?  Feet, inches, microns?
No one has dropped a bomb at 10,000 feet in a vacuum. The fact is, Newton is always wrong, because relativity always applies.
"My soul finds rest in God alone: My salvation comes from Him."

?

Thermal Detonator

  • 3125
  • +0/-0
  • Definitively the best avatar maker.
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #28 on: September 17, 2009, 03:55:13 PM »
I think what nobody has pointed out here is that yes, Newton was wrong, but for most real world systems and events occurring in our day to day experiences his laws are so close to what is observable as to be indistinguishable from being correct.
If one cannot distinguish the difference between what is predicted by Einstein and what is predicted by Newton in a given situation, without measurements that are more precise than are needed or capable of being obtained, then one set of laws is as good as another.
Gayer doesn't live in an atmosphere of vaporised mustard like you appear to, based on your latest photo.

?

Crustinator

  • 7783
  • +0/-0
  • Bamhammer horror!
Newtonian Gravity
« Reply #29 on: September 17, 2009, 05:11:31 PM »
And neither I nor he said that they "explained" them (in terms of the underlying mechanics I assume?).


So what, he didn't think gravity existed either? ???

No. He provided laws which govern the observation of the effects of gravity, not the possible underlying cause(s). You still don't understand this. It's not too hard but we'll have to leave it be. Drop me a PM if it still troubles you.

Please inform us at what point the universe stops being relativistic, and starts being Newtonian.

I'm sorry but this is just gibberish.

No one has dropped a bomb at 10,000 feet in a vacuum.

That's nice. What does that have to do with anything?

...

I have to restate, because you guys seem to be shying away from this:

Despite all your squealing I've yet to see flat earthers put anything better on the table.