« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

UA vs gravity

  • 106 Replies
  • 12553 Views
?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #30 on: June 21, 2010, 08:16:03 PM »
I asked you first.
Logged
Quote from: Thork on April 02, 2012, 01:56:05 AM
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #31 on: June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM »
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?
Logged
?

SSSavio

  • 223
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #32 on: June 22, 2010, 12:56:34 AM »
Quote from: parsec on June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?

Light path distortion you troll. Stop trolling.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2010, 05:10:15 AM by SSSavio »
Logged
?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #33 on: June 22, 2010, 03:54:00 AM »
Quote from: Jack on June 21, 2010, 07:54:12 PM
Quote from: Crustinator on June 21, 2010, 05:25:41 AM
Your statement directly disproves FET. You invoke Special Relativity to do it. Which part don't you understand? Since they're your own posts I thought you understood them. How wrong of me.
Which part of Special Relativity disproves FET?

Jack doesn't say. Perhaps you can ask him to expand on his answer.
Logged
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #34 on: June 22, 2010, 11:50:29 AM »
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 12:56:34 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?

Light path distortion you troll. Stop trolling.
wat?
Logged
?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #35 on: June 22, 2010, 11:54:18 AM »
Quote from: General Disarray on June 21, 2010, 07:57:52 PM
What makes the matter in the earth non-gravitational?
Logged
Quote from: Thork on April 02, 2012, 01:56:05 AM
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.
?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #36 on: June 22, 2010, 12:16:20 PM »
Quote from: General Disarray on June 22, 2010, 11:54:18 AM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 21, 2010, 07:57:52 PM
What makes the matter in the earth non-gravitational?
the same thing that lets thing reflect light, yet not be made of matter.
the FE'ers have gone to complete speculation that is wrong. any thing that reflects light must have electrons, as they are the carriers of the photon. electrons have gravitational mass along with the nucleus. inb4 the case against the nuclear atom
Logged
?

SSSavio

  • 223
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #37 on: June 22, 2010, 01:25:55 PM »
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 11:50:29 AM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 12:56:34 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?

Light path distortion you troll. Stop trolling.
wat?

Huge masses cause space distortion. In fact, if you look at the light path near the sun, is curved. But i know what are you telling now: prove it.
Logged
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #38 on: June 22, 2010, 02:48:13 PM »
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 01:25:55 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 11:50:29 AM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 12:56:34 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?

Light path distortion you troll. Stop trolling.
wat?

Huge masses cause space distortion. In fact, if you look at the light path near the sun, is curved. But i know what are you telling now: prove it.
No, I will simply ask you to elaborate on the notion of curved light paths near the Sun. How does one measure a curvature in a light path?
Logged
?

SSSavio

  • 223
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #39 on: June 23, 2010, 01:17:47 AM »
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 02:48:13 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 01:25:55 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 11:50:29 AM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 12:56:34 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?

Light path distortion you troll. Stop trolling.
wat?

Huge masses cause space distortion. In fact, if you look at the light path near the sun, is curved. But i know what are you telling now: prove it.
No, I will simply ask you to elaborate on the notion of curved light paths near the Sun. How does one measure a curvature in a light path?

http://www.1919eclipse.org/

I think this can satisfy roughly your request. If you wanna know more use google. This is only a simple experiment, that was confirmed by many others, more and more accurate.
Logged
*

Raver

  • 777
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #40 on: June 23, 2010, 03:47:51 AM »
So much beating around the bushes and so few answers being given by the FE'ers. For instance, I would like the cavendish experiment explained to me.

Matter in earth turns into magic matter the moment I turn it into a ball? As to your statement Jack of effects from outside, how do you explain that these "effects" affect the "cavendish matter" and not the "earthly matter"? Oh wait, I see, we have wizzards using their spells, and I thought Harry Potter was fiction, silly me...
Logged
Quote from: Gen. Douchebag
Quote from: Raver
Why? You a pedo out for delicious loli?
Sure, whatever
?

Anorthosite

  • 109
  • Riding the crest of the awesomeness of the Hoff
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #41 on: June 23, 2010, 01:46:26 PM »
Quote from: Raver on June 23, 2010, 03:47:51 AM
So much beating around the bushes and so few answers being given by the FE'ers. For instance, I would like the cavendish experiment explained to me.

There's also the Schiehallion experiment. I live just down the road from the mountain, so I guess in theory I could go and do the experiment myself.
Logged
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2010, 04:52:59 PM »
Quote from: SSSavio on June 23, 2010, 01:17:47 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 02:48:13 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 01:25:55 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 11:50:29 AM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 12:56:34 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?

Light path distortion you troll. Stop trolling.
wat?

Huge masses cause space distortion. In fact, if you look at the light path near the sun, is curved. But i know what are you telling now: prove it.
No, I will simply ask you to elaborate on the notion of curved light paths near the Sun. How does one measure a curvature in a light path?

http://www.1919eclipse.org/

I think this can satisfy roughly your request. If you wanna know more use google. This is only a simple experiment, that was confirmed by many others, more and more accurate.
Regarding your link, this has been popular a few years back:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=did-researchers-cook-data-from-first-general-relativity-test
Logged
?

SSSavio

  • 223
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #43 on: June 24, 2010, 12:28:15 AM »
Quote from: parsec on June 23, 2010, 04:52:59 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 23, 2010, 01:17:47 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 02:48:13 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 01:25:55 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 11:50:29 AM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 12:56:34 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?

Light path distortion you troll. Stop trolling.
wat?

Huge masses cause space distortion. In fact, if you look at the light path near the sun, is curved. But i know what are you telling now: prove it.
No, I will simply ask you to elaborate on the notion of curved light paths near the Sun. How does one measure a curvature in a light path?

http://www.1919eclipse.org/

I think this can satisfy roughly your request. If you wanna know more use google. This is only a simple experiment, that was confirmed by many others, more and more accurate.
Regarding your link, this has been popular a few years back:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=did-researchers-cook-data-from-first-general-relativity-test


"It has been claimed that Eddington's observations were of poor quality and he had unjustly discounted simultaneous observations at Sobral, Brazil which appeared closer to the Newtonian model[2]. The quality of the 1919 results was indeed poor compared to later observations, but was sufficient to persuade contemporary astronomers. The rejection of the results from the Brazil expedition was due to a defect in the telescopes used which, again, was completely accepted and well-understood by contemporary astronomers.[3]. The myth that Eddington's results were fraudulent is a modern invention."

Anyway, today more experiments have been done, confirming the theory.
Logged
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #44 on: June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM »
Quote from: SSSavio on June 24, 2010, 12:28:15 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 23, 2010, 04:52:59 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 23, 2010, 01:17:47 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 02:48:13 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 01:25:55 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 22, 2010, 11:50:29 AM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 22, 2010, 12:56:34 AM
Quote from: parsec on June 21, 2010, 10:19:03 PM
Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.

How?

Light path distortion you troll. Stop trolling.
wat?

Huge masses cause space distortion. In fact, if you look at the light path near the sun, is curved. But i know what are you telling now: prove it.
No, I will simply ask you to elaborate on the notion of curved light paths near the Sun. How does one measure a curvature in a light path?

http://www.1919eclipse.org/

I think this can satisfy roughly your request. If you wanna know more use google. This is only a simple experiment, that was confirmed by many others, more and more accurate.
Regarding your link, this has been popular a few years back:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=did-researchers-cook-data-from-first-general-relativity-test


"It has been claimed that Eddington's observations were of poor quality and he had unjustly discounted simultaneous observations at Sobral, Brazil which appeared closer to the Newtonian model[2]. The quality of the 1919 results was indeed poor compared to later observations, but was sufficient to persuade contemporary astronomers. The rejection of the results from the Brazil expedition was due to a defect in the telescopes used which, again, was completely accepted and well-understood by contemporary astronomers.[3]. The myth that Eddington's results were fraudulent is a modern invention."

Anyway, today more experiments have been done, confirming the theory.
Or, fabricating data.
Logged
?

SSSavio

  • 223
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #45 on: June 24, 2010, 01:27:31 PM »
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM
Or, fabricating data.

Ok, you are just wasting my time. FEs does not show data or experiments or formulas or proof. And you claim to us "fabricating data".
Logged
?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #46 on: June 24, 2010, 02:18:39 PM »
Quote from: SSSavio on June 24, 2010, 01:27:31 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM
Or, fabricating data.

Ok, you are just wasting my time. FEs does not show data or experiments or formulas or proof. And you claim to us "fabricating data".
that's because Zeteticism is one of the biggest trolling devices ever. when they state a theory, it is already proven by "logic". no data is needed, because if it shows a round earth, it must be fake. they say they hate predisposed conclusions, but their theories are only hypothesis, they allow for no change this way. its worse than dianetics and thetan science
Logged
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #47 on: June 24, 2010, 04:39:17 PM »
Quote from: SSSavio on June 24, 2010, 01:27:31 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM
Or, fabricating data.

Ok, you are just wasting my time. FEs does not show data or experiments or formulas or proof. And you claim to us "fabricating data".
If you don't want your time wasted, you are free to leave at any time. As for the topic at hand, nice to see that you don't have any proof for this claim:

Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.
Logged
?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #48 on: June 24, 2010, 07:01:29 PM »
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 04:39:17 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 24, 2010, 01:27:31 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM
Or, fabricating data.

Ok, you are just wasting my time. FEs does not show data or experiments or formulas or proof. And you claim to us "fabricating data".
If you don't want your time wasted, you are free to leave at any time. As for the topic at hand, nice to see that you don't have any proof for this claim:

Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.


cavendish
Logged
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #49 on: June 24, 2010, 07:05:04 PM »
Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 24, 2010, 07:01:29 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 04:39:17 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 24, 2010, 01:27:31 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM
Or, fabricating data.

Ok, you are just wasting my time. FEs does not show data or experiments or formulas or proof. And you claim to us "fabricating data".
If you don't want your time wasted, you are free to leave at any time. As for the topic at hand, nice to see that you don't have any proof for this claim:

Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.


cavendish

the dubiousness of the experiment performed by Lord Cavendish has been debated time and again on these fora. Use the s
Logged
?

Thevoiceofreason

  • 1792
  • Bendy Truth specialist
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #50 on: June 24, 2010, 07:30:18 PM »
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:05:04 PM
Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 24, 2010, 07:01:29 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 04:39:17 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 24, 2010, 01:27:31 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM
Or, fabricating data.

Ok, you are just wasting my time. FEs does not show data or experiments or formulas or proof. And you claim to us "fabricating data".
If you don't want your time wasted, you are free to leave at any time. As for the topic at hand, nice to see that you don't have any proof for this claim:

Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.


cavendish

the dubiousness of the experiment performed by Lord Cavendish has been debated time and again on these fora. Use the s
replications of cavedish
Logged
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #51 on: June 24, 2010, 07:33:19 PM »
Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 24, 2010, 07:30:18 PM
replications of cavedish

fragment. consider revising.
Logged
?

SSSavio

  • 223
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #52 on: June 25, 2010, 12:46:13 AM »
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 04:39:17 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 24, 2010, 01:27:31 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM
Or, fabricating data.

Ok, you are just wasting my time. FEs does not show data or experiments or formulas or proof. And you claim to us "fabricating data".
If you don't want your time wasted, you are free to leave at any time. As for the topic at hand, nice to see that you don't have any proof for this claim:

Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.


I have proofs, but why i have to posted here. You are too stupid or too troolish to understand it. Anyway, here it is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity

Study something, if you want, or stay in your ignorance, but stop trolling.
Logged
?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #53 on: June 25, 2010, 03:07:27 AM »
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:05:04 PM
the dubiousness denial of the experiment performed by Lord Cavendish has been debated time and again on these fora.

When in doubt, deny everything.

There's nothing really wrong with the Cavendish experiment, and it has only been improved since its inception. It is accepted as the world over.
Logged
*

parsec

  • 6196
  • 206,265
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #54 on: June 25, 2010, 08:05:03 PM »
Quote from: Crustinator on June 25, 2010, 03:07:27 AM
It is accepted as the world over.

So was Christian dogma throughout Europe before the Renaissance.
Logged
?

General Disarray

  • Official Member
  • 5039
  • Magic specialist
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #55 on: June 25, 2010, 09:59:58 PM »
Quote from: parsec on June 25, 2010, 08:05:03 PM
Quote from: Crustinator on June 25, 2010, 03:07:27 AM
It is accepted as the world over.

So was Christian dogma throughout Europe before the Renaissance.

Then by all means, prove it wrong.
Logged
Quote from: Thork on April 02, 2012, 01:56:05 AM
You don't want to make an enemy of me. I'm very powerful.
?

Crustinator

  • 7813
  • Bamhammer horror!
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #56 on: June 26, 2010, 09:17:33 AM »
Quote from: parsec on June 25, 2010, 08:05:03 PM
So was Christian dogma throughout Europe before the Renaissance.

I see where your confusion lies.

Christian dogma /= objective, verifiable, falsifiable science.
Logged
*

three-dimensional-world

  • 771
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #57 on: June 28, 2010, 10:51:43 AM »
Quote from: Raver on June 18, 2010, 04:14:38 AM
if I go out and measure the acceleration of a falling object on earth, I can observe that the number differs from area to area

actually it's wind resistance and experimental error
Logged
*

Raver

  • 777
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #58 on: June 28, 2010, 11:13:14 PM »
Quote from: three-dimensional-world on June 28, 2010, 10:51:43 AM
Quote from: Raver on June 18, 2010, 04:14:38 AM
if I go out and measure the acceleration of a falling object on earth, I can observe that the number differs from area to area

actually it's wind resistance and experimental error

And the wind resistance and experimental error decided to give the same errors year in year out, lol, stop trolling...
Logged
Quote from: Gen. Douchebag
Quote from: Raver
Why? You a pedo out for delicious loli?
Sure, whatever
*

Raver

  • 777
Re: UA vs gravity
« Reply #59 on: June 28, 2010, 11:21:18 PM »
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:05:04 PM
Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 24, 2010, 07:01:29 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 04:39:17 PM
Quote from: SSSavio on June 24, 2010, 01:27:31 PM
Quote from: parsec on June 24, 2010, 07:51:16 AM
Or, fabricating data.

Ok, you are just wasting my time. FEs does not show data or experiments or formulas or proof. And you claim to us "fabricating data".
If you don't want your time wasted, you are free to leave at any time. As for the topic at hand, nice to see that you don't have any proof for this claim:

Quote from: General Disarray on June 18, 2010, 08:22:59 AM
Things with mass have been demonstrated to cause gravitation.


cavendish

the dubiousness of the experiment performed by Lord Cavendish has been debated time and again on these fora. Use the s

Oh I am sorry, I didn't realize I can make any statement I wish and then make it true by linking everyone to the search option of said statement. There is nothing to be found of which one can say that it is seriously disputing the cavendish experiment (well of course there is the "NOU argument") on this forum. So you have yet to show us why the cavendish experiment is to be considered "dubious".

Basically you have done this:

Santa exists as shown by several topics on these fora http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?action=search2
Logged
Quote from: Gen. Douchebag
Quote from: Raver
Why? You a pedo out for delicious loli?
Sure, whatever
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
« previous next »