Gravity is real, get over it

Gravity has been studied for a long time. Newton came up with the theories about gravity in the 1600's. However Henry Cavendish did an experiment that proved all mass has gravity in 1797. The experiment is simple enough even you can do it.

There is 100% proof that gravity exists.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavendish_experiment

What about the The Tamarack Mines Experiments?

Maybe we should organize our own experiment.

Two cables dropped 4000 feet drifting apart almost a foot validates the Cavendish experiment which proves gravity can pull things sideways towards solid mass.

How does two things repelling each other prove that two things should be attracting each other?  You roundies almost seem like you just make up your act as you go along.  You can't even get your stories together, let alone make a coherent statement. 

Who said the cables are repelling each other???

The cables are attracted to the sides of the mine shaft by gravity. Everything with mass is attracted to everything else with mass. The cables have mass and the earth has mass. They are attracted to each other. This isn't rocket science.

Who said the cables are repelling each other???

The cables are attracted to the sides of the mine shaft by gravity. Everything with mass is attracted to everything else with mass. The cables have mass and the earth has mass. They are attracted to each other. This isn't rocket science.

Cables should be attracted to the center of mass, dummy.  In other words, the middle of the Earth.  They do not do that, as explained in the experiment.  What are you going to make up next to explain that?  Air currents or the sides of the shaft holes?  Oh, wait, you people are already claiming those as excuses. 

Cables should be attracted to the center of mass, dummy.  In other words, the middle of the Earth.

I assume you are not familiar with the Cavendish experiment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavendish_experiment

Look it up on YouTube. Or better yet do the experiment yourself

Quote from: jroa on August 24, 2015, 09:23:09 PM

Cables should be attracted to the center of mass, dummy.  In other words, the middle of the Earth.

I assume you are not familiar with the Cavendish experiment.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavendish_experiment

Look it up on YouTube. Or better yet do the experiment yourself

I already countered your century old experiment with another one.  Perhaps you have some kind of learning disability or a form of autism? 

I already countered your century old experiment with another one.  Perhaps you have some kind of learning disability or a form of autism?

You didn't counter anything. You only proved that you lack critical thinking skills.

The Cavendish experiment explains the Tamarack Mines Experiments!
Watch this short video and tell me what you see:

Why did you make me waste my time watching that video?  It had nothing to do with the Tamarack Mines Experiment.  It was simply a novelty sideshow demonstration.  Perhaps now, you can explain your position without resorting to childish demonstrations?  Just wondering. 

The moon goes around the Earth. If the theory of gravity were true, it would mean that the sun's gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the Earth's gravitational force on the moon, so the moon would go around the sun. Do you see that happening? if gravity was working on the early Earth, then Earth's gravity would have caused Earth to have been bombarded out of existence with asteroids, meteors, comets, and other space junk being attracted to it. Then there is the question about tides. If the moon's "gravity" were responsible for a bulge underneath the water, then how can anyone explain a high tide on the opposite side of the Earth at the same time? Anyone can observe that there are two — not one — high tides every day.

The moon goes around the Earth. If the theory of gravity were true, it would mean that the sun's gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the Earth's gravitational force on the moon, so the moon would go around the sun. Do you see that happening? if gravity was working on the early Earth, then Earth's gravity would have caused Earth to have been bombarded out of existence with asteroids, meteors, comets, and other space junk being attracted to it. Then there is the question about tides. If the moon's "gravity" were responsible for a bulge underneath the water, then how can anyone explain a high tide on the opposite side of the Earth at the same time? Anyone can observe that there are two — not one — high tides every day.

Sun's gravitational pull on the moon is nothing compared to earth's gravitational pull on the moon. Sun has greater mass but also a ridiculously great distance to both the moon and the earth.

Quote from: Yendor on August 25, 2015, 08:34:01 AM

The moon goes around the Earth. If the theory of gravity were true, it would mean that the sun's gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the Earth's gravitational force on the moon, so the moon would go around the sun. Do you see that happening? if gravity was working on the early Earth, then Earth's gravity would have caused Earth to have been bombarded out of existence with asteroids, meteors, comets, and other space junk being attracted to it. Then there is the question about tides. If the moon's "gravity" were responsible for a bulge underneath the water, then how can anyone explain a high tide on the opposite side of the Earth at the same time? Anyone can observe that there are two — not one — high tides every day.

Sun's gravitational pull on the moon is nothing compared to earth's gravitational pull on the moon. Sun has greater mass but also a ridiculously great distance to both the moon and the earth.

True, that's why the theory of gravity is untrue. The Sun is 864,400 miles (1,391,000 kilometers) across. This is about 109 times the diameter of Earth. The Sun weighs about 333,000 times as much as Earth. It is so large that about 1,300,000 planet Earths can fit inside of it. With a mass that much larger than the Earth, common sense should tell you the moon should be orbiting the sun.

Quote from: Master_Evar on August 25, 2015, 08:38:50 AM

Quote from: Yendor on August 25, 2015, 08:34:01 AM

The moon goes around the Earth. If the theory of gravity were true, it would mean that the sun's gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the Earth's gravitational force on the moon, so the moon would go around the sun. Do you see that happening? if gravity was working on the early Earth, then Earth's gravity would have caused Earth to have been bombarded out of existence with asteroids, meteors, comets, and other space junk being attracted to it. Then there is the question about tides. If the moon's "gravity" were responsible for a bulge underneath the water, then how can anyone explain a high tide on the opposite side of the Earth at the same time? Anyone can observe that there are two — not one — high tides every day.

Sun's gravitational pull on the moon is nothing compared to earth's gravitational pull on the moon. Sun has greater mass but also a ridiculously great distance to both the moon and the earth.

True, that's why the theory of gravity is untrue. The Sun is 864,400 miles (1,391,000 kilometers) across. This is about 109 times the diameter of Earth. The Sun weighs about 333,000 times as much as Earth. It is so large that about 1,300,000 planet Earths can fit inside of it. With a mass that much larger than the Earth, common sense should tell you the moon should be orbiting the sun.

Science isn't about common sense. That's another point. THe moon orbits the Earth the same way the earth orbits around the sun. Keeping that in mind, the Moon DOES Orbit the Sun. Correctly, because Sun has that much mass it keeps earth and planets together in orbit. If that didn't happen, t here wouldn't be life here.

Why did you make me waste my time watching that video?  It had nothing to do with the Tamarack Mines Experiment.  It was simply a novelty sideshow demonstration.  Perhaps now, you can explain your position without resorting to childish demonstrations?  Just wondering. 

Wow, you are slow. The Cavendish experiment proves that gravity pulls sideways. In the video you saw the weights on the string move sideways towards the lead bricks. Can you think of anything else that moved sideways? Don't hurt yourself trying to figure it out.

I'll just tell you since you won't get it. The weights that were hanging from 5 feet of fishing line moved a few inches. How far did the 4000 foot cable move that was dropped down a mine shaft? Can you connect the dots yet?

Here's more information. Skip to 3:00.

" class="bbc_link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">

What about the The Tamarack Mines Experiments?

Why do you always use that particular link?  You know it is debunked in the article itself:

At the present time I have been unable to locate any solid evidence that the proposed experiment using two mine shafts 3,200 feet apart was ever performed.

Quote from: jroa on August 24, 2015, 06:39:15 AM

What about the The Tamarack Mines Experiments?

Why do you always use that particular link?  You know it is debunked in the article itself:

Quote

At the present time I have been unable to locate any solid evidence that the proposed experiment using two mine shafts 3,200 feet apart was ever performed.

The author was being honest.  That is a good trait to see in a RE'er, which we do not see often around here.  He did not debunk the article.  He simply gave a little commentary about the evidence he has seen.  How is this a bad thing?  Were you expecting him to lie? 

There is no evidence the The Tamarack Mines Experiments ever took place...so it's pointless bringing them up.

Next.

Even if the Tamarack Mines are proven to be true the results are expected to occur on a round earth. The Cavendish experiment proves the events at the Tamarack Mines are completely normal and to be expected.

Skip to 3:00 and watch

Even if the Tamarack Mines are proven to be true the results are expected to occur on a round earth. The Cavendish experiment proves the events at the Tamarack Mines are completely normal and to be expected.

Skip to 3:00 and watch

The Cavendish experiment suggests that the weights should be attracted to each other, no repelled away from each other, lying disinformation agent. 

Quote from: Earth_is_a_sphere_1 on August 26, 2015, 09:42:22 AM

Even if the Tamarack Mines are proven to be true the results are expected to occur on a round earth. The Cavendish experiment proves the events at the Tamarack Mines are completely normal and to be expected.

Skip to 3:00 and watch

The Cavendish experiment suggests that the weights should be attracted to each other, no repelled away from each other, lying disinformation agent.

What has more mass and more gravitational force? The steel balls or the earth? The steel balls were 12 feet apart from each other. How close were they to the sides of the mine shaft? I'm assuming closer than 12 feet.



If both lines were dropped 2 feet apart and the walls were 20 feet apart the lines would be attracted to each other like this:
|       \ /       |

But because they were closer to the walls than each other they were attracted to the walls, at least that's my theory
|  /           \  |

 The concept of gravity seems to be the magic bullet explanation for all that science can not explain. Yes, dropping an object will cause it to fall. Simple enough, but gravity then goes on to become the glue that holds all the pieces together in the current scientific round earth model. This force is strong enough to keep the oceans from sliding down to the south pole, but not so strong as to pull the moon down to earth. The Sun which is supposed to have such a massive gravitational pull and is powerful enough to cause Pluto to orbit around it, is somehow not powerful enough to pull Mercury close enough to get sucked in. And then we are supposed to believe how gravity works with concepts such as normal force where you are standing because gravity is pushing you down, but the earth is "pushing" you back up.   

The concept of gravity seems to be the magic bullet explanation for all that science can not explain. Yes, dropping an object will cause it to fall. Simple enough, but gravity then goes on to become the glue that holds all the pieces together in the current scientific round earth model. This force is strong enough to keep the oceans from sliding down to the south pole, but not so strong as to pull the moon down to earth. The Sun which is supposed to have such a massive gravitational pull and is powerful enough to cause Pluto to orbit around it, is somehow not powerful enough to pull Mercury close enough to get sucked in. And then we are supposed to believe how gravity works with concepts such as normal force where you are standing because gravity is pushing you down, but the earth is "pushing" you back up.

Read up on orbital mechanics, and then try again.

The concept of gravity seems to be the magic bullet explanation for all that science can not explain. Yes, dropping an object will cause it to fall. Simple enough, but gravity then goes on to become the glue that holds all the pieces together in the current scientific round earth model. This force is strong enough to keep the oceans from sliding down to the south pole, but not so strong as to pull the moon down to earth. The Sun which is supposed to have such a massive gravitational pull and is powerful enough to cause Pluto to orbit around it, is somehow not powerful enough to pull Mercury close enough to get sucked in. And then we are supposed to believe how gravity works with concepts such as normal force where you are standing because gravity is pushing you down, but the earth is "pushing" you back up.

Gravity is far from magical.  All of it's properties including orbital mechanics and tides can be derived from the equasion F=(mMg)/d².

It keeps the oceans from sliding off because there is no downward force for it to fight against, it does in fact pull in the Moon but the Moon's momentum keeps it in a doable orbit, Mercury is being pulled far stronger then Pluto but it's also moving many times faster so the additional centripetal force can fight against the stronger gravity to create a stable orbit, ect.  I have personally programmed a basic orbital simulator and given only Newtonian laws of motion and gravity I can make a virtual ship get into various orbits and follow orbital mechanics.

There are actually many flat earthers that use magical forces such as aether as a magical explenation and they donNt have any math behind it at all.  If your own point is any indication flat Earth theory is false.

I have never read any convincing evidence to support all the things that the theory of gravity is supposed to be responsible for. All the equations regarding gravity were easy to come up with, since modern scientists already knew the results they wanted and worked their way backwards. It seems to me that this argument will soon become irrelevant in any case once the great scientific minds of our day achieve their new goal of "proving" our universe is just a hologram.

once the great scientific minds of our day achieve their new goal of "proving" our universe is just a hologram.

Really?

I have never read any convincing evidence to support all the things that the theory of gravity is supposed to be responsible for. All the equations regarding gravity were easy to come up with, since modern scientists already knew the results they wanted and worked their way backwards. It seems to me that this argument will soon become irrelevant in any case once the great scientific minds of our day achieve their new goal of "proving" our universe is just a hologram.

Refer to the quote in my forum signature.  "Science is not to prove yourself right, but to make you right."  Scientists have no emd goal other then understanding how the universe works.  Hologram universe is just one of many hypothisises and the goal of science is not to prove it but to learn if it's correct or not.

You are right in that gravity was post-dicted by observation, but even ignoring all experiments on Earth proving gravity what was found is extremely convincing.  Here I will give you a brief history of gravity:

For thousands of years it was known that Earth was round (even in the days before science there were few people so gullible that they believed Earth was flat) and it was thought that it was the center of the universe with everything orbiting it in a model first proposed by Socrates.  That model didn't confirm with observations though and eventually it had to be modified very heavily to the extent that it was horrifically complicated.  Then Copernicus proposed that the sun was the center and the planets orbited it, and this model matched observations amazingly and was much simpler then the geocentric model.  Then Keppler compared the most precise observations of the time with the model and he found a bit of inconsistency, and after a lot of trial and error he learned that observations are matched perfectly if the orbits are slightly elliptic and that's when he came up with his laws of planetary motion.  After that Newton figured out that a force that is proportional to mass and falls off over distance the same way that light does then he could derive Keppler's laws of planetary motion and at the same time his equasion explained why things fall as fast as they do.  After that there were many experiments done to measure gravity in labs and they were successful.  Now space ships use our knowlage of gravity and orbital mechanics to navigate around the solar system.

The concept of gravity seems to be the magic bullet explanation for all that science can not explain. Yes, dropping an object will cause it to fall. Simple enough, but gravity then goes on to become the glue that holds all the pieces together in the current scientific round earth model. This force is strong enough to keep the oceans from sliding down to the south pole, but not so strong as to pull the moon down to earth.

What would make the oceans "slide down to the south pole"? What makes south "down", and with respect to what? Do you think this because we traditionally orient our maps that way? Which way was "down" to the oceans before the first map was drawn?

The Moon is being pulled toward earth. If the Moon weren't being pulled toward earth, it would have gone flying off, never to be seen again, long ago.

The Sun which is supposed to have such a massive gravitational pull and is powerful enough to cause Pluto to orbit around it, is somehow not powerful enough to pull Mercury close enough to get sucked in.

Mercury is in orbit around the Sun. The Sun's gravity keeps it in orbit. Why would it get "sucked in"?

And then we are supposed to believe how gravity works with concepts such as normal force where you are standing because gravity is pushing you down, but the earth is "pushing" you back up.

What's hard to believe? Do you think you should get slurped into the earth if you're standing on solid ground? If you step off a cliff or tall building, you do get "sucked toward" the center of the Earth until you encounter something solid (or a liquid dense enough, like water, where you have enough buoyancy so you stop).

I have never read any convincing evidence to support all the things that the theory of gravity is supposed to be responsible for.

I can't argue with this. As far as I know, based mostly on your earlier post and this one, you've have never read anything factual about gravity, which would make your statement true.

All the equations regarding gravity were easy to come up with, since modern scientists already knew the results they wanted and worked their way backwards.

They were? Which "modern scientists" are you referring to? Einstein? His model of gravity was hardly "easy to come up with". It's still difficult to understand by most people, even today. Or did you mean, say, Newton and Kepler? Newton's formulas for gravity are simple and elegant, but deducing them was not easy.

As I say, I can't argue with your first statement since you seem to have read (or comprehended, if you did happen to see the words and symbols) nothing.

It seems to me that this argument will soon become irrelevant in any case once the great scientific minds of our day achieve their new goal of "proving" our universe is just a hologram.

Until then, we'll stick with what works well explaining what we see and measure, and accurately predicts what will happen.