Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)

  • 8 Replies
  • 641 Views
*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22984
  • The Most Forum Legend
There is a power trying to shred to a rounder on air.  :)



This is a comic experiment. But you can think same test with a matter which not trying to stay together.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2016, 04:47:01 AM by İntikam »


this workplace is on strike

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 18921
  • Or should I?
Re: Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)
« Reply #1 on: November 21, 2016, 01:08:06 AM »
https://books.google.com.au/books?id=9S-hzg6-moYC&printsec=frontcover&dq=general+relativity&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-u8n2vrnQAhUJoZQKHQtXCfsQ6AEIGTAA#v=onepage&q=general%20relativity&f=false

Its a little expensive but that's what you get, it's a really good book the author knows what he is talking about and gives problems to solve at the end of chapters.

You should learn orthodox physics before you try to debunk it with something silly.

I really like your new sig.

Edit.

This is a comic experiment. But you can think same test with a matter which not trying to stay together.

Yes, it falls down, hence why we build things plumb and level.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2016, 01:21:36 AM by disputeone »
BOTD member

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)
« Reply #2 on: November 21, 2016, 01:25:27 AM »
There is a power triying to shred to a rounder on air.  :)



This is a comic experiment. But you can think same test with a matter which not trying to stay together.
Yes, this is one effect of gravity, and it explains why air pressure doesn't decrease linearly with altitude but exponentially. Luckily for us, the ground is pushing our lower body back up which keeps us from snapping. And our flesh is also pulling our body together, so that we don't tear in mid-air or if, for example, two people try to pull us apart.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!

Re: Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)
« Reply #3 on: November 21, 2016, 03:36:33 AM »
No. This isn't debunking anything.
This is because just like so many, you fail to do the math.

How large should this force be?
Is it enough to feel?
What about rotation?

Well, for now, lets just focus on gravity. There are 2 ways to go about this.
One is to determine the force at each location and find the difference, the other way is to differentiate to find the step (which is effectively the former).

As F=GmM/r^2
dF/dr (the change in force for a change in r)=-GmM/r^3 (note: this is only true for small changes).

Thus, dF=-GmM dr/r^3=-2(GmM/r^2)*dr/r=-2F*dr/r
And now, taking F to be the force on a 1kg mass (9.8N), and r to be an underestimate of the radius of earth (so it is in your favour) of 6300 km, and dr to be an overestimate of the height of a person (2m), you get a difference of:
-2*9.8N*2/6300000=-0.000006222. So basically nothing.
To give you an idea, this would correspond to a weight of 0.0000006349 kg, or 0.0006349 g. To give you a comparison, the average ant weighs roughly 0.003g.

So what you are basically asking is can you feel that 1kg is 1 fifth of an ant heavier at your feet than at your head?

Doing it the other way:
F1=GmM/r^2
F2=GmM/(r+dr)^2
dF=F2-F1=GmM*((1/(r+dr)^2-(1/r^2))
Using the above numbers, and taking the mass of Earth to be 5.97237*10^24 kg and G to be  6.674 * 10^-11 N m^2 /kg^2 you get dF=-0.000006376N (note: this is different by a small amount, primarily due to taking GmM/r^2 to =9.8N.

So sure, there should be a force, but it would be tiny.

Re: Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)
« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2016, 04:08:19 AM »
Intikam is 'triying' hard to disprove things, but I just find him very trying!

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 22984
  • The Most Forum Legend
Re: Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)
« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2016, 05:47:25 AM »
Intikam is 'triying' hard to disprove things, but I just find him very trying!

I corrected it by post but image is still same because someone quoted it.


this workplace is on strike

*

Son of Orospu

  • Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
  • Planar Moderator
  • 37834
  • I have artificial intelligence
Re: Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)
« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2016, 05:51:59 AM »
Has anyone else ever heard of the term, "Bat shit crazy?"

Re: Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)
« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2016, 01:46:41 PM »
One other thing I noticed. What makes you say it would be trying to tear you?

It is simply a different force at 2 points. It isn't trying to rip you apart.

If you were standing on Earth, you would just feel it trying to crush you.
If you were hanging on a rope, you would feel it trying to pull you down/tear you apart.
But the same is true regardless of if Earth is flat or not.

The actual force you want to look at is the sideways force acting on an object.

The centre of your body is pulled straight down, but your sides are not pulled in the exact same direction. Instead there is a slight angular difference. This results in what can be described as 2 separate forces, a force pulling your side down (parallel to the centre of your body), and a force pushing your side in.

But again, this is insignificant.

Yes, this is one effect of gravity, and it explains why air pressure doesn't decrease linearly with altitude but exponentially. Luckily for us, the ground is pushing our lower body back up which keeps us from snapping. And our flesh is also pulling our body together, so that we don't tear in mid-air or if, for example, two people try to pull us apart.

No. It doesn't.
If that was the case, it would do the same as you go underwater, but it doesn't.
Underwater it increases in a roughly linear way.

The difference in the force of gravity between the surface and the 100 km up is a mere 3% or so. Not enough to make a serious drop off in the atmospheric pressure.

The reason it is exponential is because at sea level, if you take a 1 m^2 square slice (and go up with lines which extend from the centre of Earth, so not quite parallel, such that at 100km your 1 m expands to roughly 1.02 m, so a change of roughly 2%, which I'll also ignore due to how small it is), then the weight of the atmosphere it is supporting is roughly 10 204 kg.
If you move up some distance, you now have less atmosphere to support above you, and thus the weight (and thus pressure) is less. As the pressure is less, the mass per unit volume is less and thus moving up the same distance will result in a smaller decrease. As such, the rate of decrease is proportional to the mass of the air per unit volume which is proportional to the pressure. As the rate of change is proportional to the quantity that is changing, it is an exponential.

This is also why it increases in a linear way underwater, and for each roughly 10m down you gain an atmosphere of pressure.
For a column which is 1m^2, 10m long would be 10m^3, or 10 000 L, and thus weighs roughly 10 kg. This means the force would be roughly 98 000 N, or roughly 100 000 N/m^2, which is roughly an atmosphere.

As water is incompressible, the extra weight of the water does not significantly compress it and thus the weight of the column of water remains the same. This means the change in pressure is not proportional to the pressure and thus is linear.

?

Master_Evar

  • 3381
  • Well rounded character
Re: Debunking gravitation with a comic draw :) (a rounder on air test)
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2016, 02:00:13 PM »
Yes, this is one effect of gravity, and it explains why air pressure doesn't decrease linearly with altitude but exponentially. Luckily for us, the ground is pushing our lower body back up which keeps us from snapping. And our flesh is also pulling our body together, so that we don't tear in mid-air or if, for example, two people try to pull us apart.

No. It doesn't.
If that was the case, it would do the same as you go underwater, but it doesn't.
Underwater it increases in a roughly linear way.

The difference in the force of gravity between the surface and the 100 km up is a mere 3% or so. Not enough to make a serious drop off in the atmospheric pressure.

The reason it is exponential is because at sea level, if you take a 1 m^2 square slice (and go up with lines which extend from the centre of Earth, so not quite parallel, such that at 100km your 1 m expands to roughly 1.02 m, so a change of roughly 2%, which I'll also ignore due to how small it is), then the weight of the atmosphere it is supporting is roughly 10 204 kg.
If you move up some distance, you now have less atmosphere to support above you, and thus the weight (and thus pressure) is less. As the pressure is less, the mass per unit volume is less and thus moving up the same distance will result in a smaller decrease. As such, the rate of decrease is proportional to the mass of the air per unit volume which is proportional to the pressure. As the rate of change is proportional to the quantity that is changing, it is an exponential.

This is also why it increases in a linear way underwater, and for each roughly 10m down you gain an atmosphere of pressure.
For a column which is 1m^2, 10m long would be 10m^3, or 10 000 L, and thus weighs roughly 10 kg. This means the force would be roughly 98 000 N, or roughly 100 000 N/m^2, which is roughly an atmosphere.

As water is incompressible, the extra weight of the water does not significantly compress it and thus the weight of the column of water remains the same. This means the change in pressure is not proportional to the pressure and thus is linear.
*one of the reasons. I know the main reason is compression and that another small part is the decrease in surfade are as altitude decreases. I was simply going with intikams apparent thought that it would be noticeable.
Math is the language of the universe.

The inability to explain something is not proof of something else.

We don't speak for reality - we only observe it. An observation can have any cause, but it is still no more than just an observation.

When in doubt; sources!