Gravity

Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 06, 2013, 07:16:30 PM

No one knows the mechanism of magnetism. it is just as mysterious as gravity. Magnetic photons are a hypothesis.

This is the kind of hilarious posts that only Tom Bishop can do. He destroys all the foundation of the FE "theory" in one simple, short sentence and does not even grasp the enormity of his contribution to real science.

As Tom Bishop clearly implies, we don't need any of the four basic forces of nature to be non-mysterious. We can work with them just fine as they are.

And just as Tom Bishop tells us, gravity is mysterious, not non-existent. Forces can be as mysterious as gravity or magnetism, pushing and pulling objects at a distance without us knowing how, and still be as real as the coin I am holding in my hand.

I have talked to Tom about magnetic photons before. If he would bother to look in to them, he would quickly realize they are not the hypothesized carrier of all magnetic fields. Magnetic photons are required for magnetic monopoles only and magnetic monopoles are also hypothetical!

Leave that red herring out of this discussion.

Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 06, 2013, 07:16:30 PM

No one knows the mechanism of magnetism. it is just as mysterious as gravity. Magnetic photons are a hypothesis.

This is the kind of hilarious posts that only Tom Bishop can do. He destroys all the foundation of the FE "theory" in one simple, short sentence and does not even grasp the enormity of his contribution to real science.

As Tom Bishop clearly implies, we don't need any of the four basic forces of nature to be non-mysterious. We can work with them just fine as they are.

And just as Tom Bishop tells us, gravity is mysterious, not non-existent. Forces can be as mysterious as gravity or magnetism, pushing and pulling objects at a distance without us knowing how, and still be as real as the coin I am holding in my hand.

I don't follow. I didn't say gravity was mysterious, but not non-existent.

Tom, you are conflating a lack of precision in the two predictions, which requires estimations which will of course make room for error, with a falsification of the theory. Here is a lisylt of some areas gravity is very accurate in its description:

1. Kepler's laws work extremely well and accurately and you may recall being handled by Major Twang on this front last year.

Kepler's theories involve the motion of planets around the sun. The Flat Earth model has planets revolving around the sun. His theories of planetary motion aren't totally inapplicable.

2. Calculation of the tides, also works.

Actually, Newton himself said that the tides was the least satisfactory portion of his theory of gravity.

The USGS makes predictions of the tides via current trending tides and tables of previous occurrences throughout the seasons, by the way.

3. The successful prediction of the local gravity of the moon (I would not expect you to cite this, but I sure will).

There is sure some #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">funny gravity on the moon.

4. Relativistic frame-dragging by the Earth's rotation.

Frame dragging is part of Special Relativity, which is not General Relativity. One is a theory of motion and the other is a theory of gravity.

5. The motion of all falling bodies.

Einstein's Equivalence Principle says that the motion of falling bodies would be the same on an upwardly accelerating platform and by "gravity".

Quote

2. Calculation of the tides, also works.

Actually, Newton himself said that tide prediction was the least satisfactory portion of his theory of gravity.

So you have a theory for why there are two high-tides on the Earth at all times, one opposite the other? Because gravity explains that perfectly.

Or why tides are higher when the Earth, the Sun, and the Moon are generally lined up than when they're not?

There is sure some #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">funny gravity on the moon.

Because this thread does indeed have to do with gravity, I'll disassemble your video. In the first clip, the selenaut posing for the salute just turned around. As he spins, notice he stays on his tip-toes. It's easier to turn around on your toes, especially if you're wearing a motion-restrictive suit. Is there a reason people on the moon wouldn't be able to stand on their toes?

In the second clip, the one selenaut is on the ground, with the other standing beside him. The uploader cut the audio from that clip, but if you hear the original, the one standing beside says, "Let me help you up," or something to that affect. Regardless of whether you believe that, you can clearly see the standing person taking in his right hand the left hand of the person on the ground.

Kepler's theories involve the motion of planets around the sun. The Flat Earth model has planets revolving around the sun. His theories of planetary motion aren't totally inapplicable.

Kepler's Laws are equivalent to Newton's Laws.

Actually, Newton himself said that the tides was the least satisfactory portion of his theory of gravity.

The USGS makes predictions of the tides via current trending tides and tables of previous occurrences throughout the seasons, by the way.

Least satisfactory is not the same as not working.

There is sure some #ws" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">funny gravity on the moon.

Those apollo debunking videos are the worst.

Frame dragging is part of Special Relativity, which is not General Relativity. One is a theory of motion and the other is a theory of gravity.

Frame-dragging is an effect of general relativity.  Do your homework.

Einstein's Equivalence Principle says that the motion of falling bodies would be the same on an upwardly accelerating platform and by "gravity".

Quote the entirety of the Equivalence Principle please.  Pretty please.

This is a new trend amongst FEer. They start to believe in gravity to explain phenomena that can't be catered for just by UA. muggsy hasn't joined the train though

Quote from: RealScientist on September 06, 2013, 08:36:37 PM

Quote from: Tom Bishop on September 06, 2013, 07:16:30 PM

No one knows the mechanism of magnetism. it is just as mysterious as gravity. Magnetic photons are a hypothesis.

This is the kind of hilarious posts that only Tom Bishop can do. He destroys all the foundation of the FE "theory" in one simple, short sentence and does not even grasp the enormity of his contribution to real science.

As Tom Bishop clearly implies, we don't need any of the four basic forces of nature to be non-mysterious. We can work with them just fine as they are.

And just as Tom Bishop tells us, gravity is mysterious, not non-existent. Forces can be as mysterious as gravity or magnetism, pushing and pulling objects at a distance without us knowing how, and still be as real as the coin I am holding in my hand.

I don't follow. I didn't say gravity was mysterious, but not non-existent.

So, you are saying that gravity has every mysterious quality that magnetism has, but that gravity does not exist and magnetism does. Should we help you count the logical fallacies you are making, or do you want to count them by yourself?

PS. Of course, if something is clearly non-existent it is also non-mysterious. Like the dragons, once you are sure they do not exist (and never did) the only remaining mystery is... why some people were so superstitious that they believed they exist?

Quote from: muggsybogues1 on September 06, 2013, 08:55:55 AM

Quote from: Galactian on September 06, 2013, 08:31:45 AM

What do you consider accurate? I think our measurements of the value are rather precise, though they can be improved upon. The reason it is extremely difficult to measure is because you can't cancel gravity like, say, the electromagnetic force. Everything in the lab, as well as the entire universe, is effecting the results.

I think the reason it is difficult to measure is that there is no proof that it exists in the first place.

Saying that scientists cannot measure the exact value of G is not the same as saying that scientists can not measure G at all or that the value of G measured is not useful.

Furthermore, we do not know any physical constant exactly. The whole charade about G being "inaccurate" without saying what is considered "accurate" is just a sophism of distraction. If we were incapable of finding G to a precision better than 50% or so we could ask ourselves if it exists at all, but when we have known G to a precision better than 0.01% for more than 200 years we can safely declare that it exists and has a value close to 6.67 x 10^-11 in mks units.

And while we are critiquing constants, do you know what value the Bishop Constant has? Maybe somebody can give a value with better than 1000% accuracy? In fact, does anyone have an actual formula that we can use to calculate it at all? I didn't think so.

Gravity does not exist. It is atmospheric pressure.
The tides are due to the same thing, by huge high and low temperature changes created by energy (sun) in the centre of what people believe is the north pole.
This high pressure pushes down on the sea as the  energy (sun) slowly pulsates down and releases the pressure on the sea as it rises. Also known as electro magnetism.
That's my thought, anyway.

Gravity does not exist. It is atmospheric pressure.
The tides are due to the same thing, by huge high and low temperature changes created by energy (sun) in the centre of what people believe is the north pole.
This high pressure pushes down on the sea as the  energy (sun) slowly pulsates down and releases the pressure on the sea as it rises. Also known as electro magnetism.
That's my thought, anyway.

Except that we would be able to measure such a collossal pressure difference.

Gravity does not exist. It is atmospheric pressure.
The tides are due to the same thing, by huge high and low temperature changes created by energy (sun) in the centre of what people believe is the north pole.
This high pressure pushes down on the sea as the  energy (sun) slowly pulsates down and releases the pressure on the sea as it rises. Also known as electro magnetism.
That's my thought, anyway.

Atmospheric pressure acts in all directions so forces cancel out

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:21:31 AM

Gravity does not exist. It is atmospheric pressure.
The tides are due to the same thing, by huge high and low temperature changes created by energy (sun) in the centre of what people believe is the north pole.
This high pressure pushes down on the sea as the  energy (sun) slowly pulsates down and releases the pressure on the sea as it rises. Also known as electro magnetism.
That's my thought, anyway.

Atmospheric pressure acts in all directions so forces cancel out

Scepti thinks that scientists are lying about how air pressure works.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:21:31 AM

Gravity does not exist. It is atmospheric pressure.
The tides are due to the same thing, by huge high and low temperature changes created by energy (sun) in the centre of what people believe is the north pole.
This high pressure pushes down on the sea as the  energy (sun) slowly pulsates down and releases the pressure on the sea as it rises. Also known as electro magnetism.
That's my thought, anyway.

Atmospheric pressure acts in all directions so forces cancel out

It doesn't act equally in all directions though.

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:25:14 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:21:31 AM

Gravity does not exist. It is atmospheric pressure.
The tides are due to the same thing, by huge high and low temperature changes created by energy (sun) in the centre of what people believe is the north pole.
This high pressure pushes down on the sea as the  energy (sun) slowly pulsates down and releases the pressure on the sea as it rises. Also known as electro magnetism.
That's my thought, anyway.

Atmospheric pressure acts in all directions so forces cancel out

It doesn't act equally in all directions though.

Incorrect.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:28:37 AM

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:25:14 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:21:31 AM

Gravity does not exist. It is atmospheric pressure.
The tides are due to the same thing, by huge high and low temperature changes created by energy (sun) in the centre of what people believe is the north pole.
This high pressure pushes down on the sea as the  energy (sun) slowly pulsates down and releases the pressure on the sea as it rises. Also known as electro magnetism.
That's my thought, anyway.

Atmospheric pressure acts in all directions so forces cancel out

It doesn't act equally in all directions though.

Incorrect.

No. It's absolutely correct.

You can try this at home scepti

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Can Crushed by Air Pressure

You can try this at home scepti

#" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Can Crushed by Air Pressure

What are you proving here?

It shows air pressure at least acts side ways

It shows air pressure at least acts side ways

It acts all ways, but that wasn't what I was on about, was it.

If it is caused by air pressure, we become lighter as we go higher (less air pressure) and heavier as we go lower. Is that what you're saying.

If it is caused by air pressure, we become lighter as we go higher (less air pressure) and heavier as we go lower. Is that what you're saying.

Totally different scenario.

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:44:30 AM

If it is caused by air pressure, we become lighter as we go higher (less air pressure) and heavier as we go lower. Is that what you're saying.

Totally different scenario.

Explain

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:46:02 AM

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:44:30 AM

If it is caused by air pressure, we become lighter as we go higher (less air pressure) and heavier as we go lower. Is that what you're saying.

Totally different scenario.

Explain

We are talking about sea level atmospheric pressure.

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:46:49 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:46:02 AM

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:44:30 AM

If it is caused by air pressure, we become lighter as we go higher (less air pressure) and heavier as we go lower. Is that what you're saying.

Totally different scenario.

Explain

We are talking about sea level atmospheric pressure.

What about people not living at sea level? Explain in detail

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:49:16 AM

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:46:49 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:46:02 AM

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:44:30 AM

If it is caused by air pressure, we become lighter as we go higher (less air pressure) and heavier as we go lower. Is that what you're saying.

Totally different scenario.

Explain

We are talking about sea level atmospheric pressure.

What about people not living at sea level? Explain in detail

We are talking about pressures and you are saying they are equal all round. I'm saying they are not equal, all round.

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:28:37 AM

Quote from: Cartesian on September 07, 2013, 06:25:14 AM

Quote from: sceptimatic on September 07, 2013, 06:21:31 AM

Gravity does not exist. It is atmospheric pressure.
The tides are due to the same thing, by huge high and low temperature changes created by energy (sun) in the centre of what people believe is the north pole.
This high pressure pushes down on the sea as the  energy (sun) slowly pulsates down and releases the pressure on the sea as it rises. Also known as electro magnetism.
That's my thought, anyway.

Atmospheric pressure acts in all directions so forces cancel out

It doesn't act equally in all directions though.

Incorrect.

Please do not feed the trolls. We have dozens of threads with no more than "yes, it is atmospheric pressure"... "no, it is not"... "yes, it is"... "no, it is not"....

We are not just inundated with inane threads where only sceptimatic "comments" (a.k.a. trolls) the FE side, but we now have these threads with sceptimatic's comments deleted.

He deleted his posts from my thread too. But are you sure he's a troll? Or is he just ... ignorant?

Here's a major challenge for the Cult of Gravity:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/09/high-gravitational-constant/

For 200 years, they've been trying to figure out how to measure something that doesn't exist.

If a 0.024% error is enough to be a major challenge to the idea of gravity. Imagine what people must feel like when FE can't even agree on what the map of the Earth looks like... or why the moon glows... or how far away the sun is... ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC...

Quote from: muggsybogues1 on September 06, 2013, 06:58:26 AM

Here's a major challenge for the Cult of Gravity:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/09/high-gravitational-constant/

For 200 years, they've been trying to figure out how to measure something that doesn't exist.

If a 0.024% error is enough to be a major challenge to the idea of gravity. Imagine what people must feel like when FE can't even agree on what the map of the Earth looks like... or why the moon glows... or how far away the sun is... ETC, ETC, ETC, ETC...

This wasn't always the error though. Gravity has been championed for quite a while, so their error in its measurement has been refined. But take a more recent theory, say modern FE theory, which has no scientific funding, it really is no surprise that the development is slow. This doesn't mean its wrong, right? All theories are poor in their infancy.

To give you a hilarious (but true) example: The bible gives the value of pi to be 3. Precisely. In all of recorded history this is the WORST calculation of this constant. But what if we had thrown the idea of pi away just because it was measured poorly? A few thousand years later....and we know pi to millions of decimal places.