Gravity

• 47 Replies
• 2005 Views
?

JackBlack

• 12684
Re: Gravity
« Reply #30 on: June 30, 2017, 01:23:32 AM »
That's where you get it wrong. In the case of the earth, the force is not point in just one direction, it is pointing in the directions all around the surface of the earth.
In the case of a round Earth, gravity points towards the centre.
In the case of a flat Earth with UA it points down, the same direction.

You can prove it in theory
Prove what in theory?

Can you point out anything wrong with my analysis that shows UA to be indistinguishable from gravity?

Crutchwater

• 2151
• Stop Indoctrinating me!
Re: Gravity
« Reply #31 on: June 30, 2017, 03:52:48 AM »
A question regarding UA.

What would we estimate to be the current velocity of the "flat earth"?

In relation to what?

I'm certainly no mathematician, but we must be approaching warp 9 by now!
I will always be Here To Laugh At You.

Son of Orospu

• Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
• Planar Moderator
• 37820
• I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravity
« Reply #32 on: June 30, 2017, 04:03:27 AM »
A question regarding UA.

What would we estimate to be the current velocity of the "flat earth"?

In relation to what?

I'm certainly no mathematician, but we must be approaching warp 9 by now!

You can't ask for a velocity without first giving a frame of reference.  Relative to you, it is around 0.

Slemon

• Flat Earth Researcher
• 11690
Re: Gravity
« Reply #33 on: June 30, 2017, 04:06:18 AM »
That's where you get it wrong. In the case of the earth, the force is not point in just one direction, it is pointing in the directions all around the surface of the earth.
Under RET. Under FET there is only one direction.

?

JackBlack

• 12684
Re: Gravity
« Reply #34 on: June 30, 2017, 04:06:48 AM »
What would we estimate to be the current velocity of the "flat earth"?

In relation to what?
That's the issue. There is no absolute velocity, just relative velocity, so the velocity of Earth will vary depending upon what you use as a reference.

I'm certainly no mathematician, but we must be approaching warp 9 by now!
Which scale?
By my calculation, Voyager should take no more than 5 or so years to cross the entire milky way galaxy, yet they are meant to take 70 years for 70 000 light years, so only 1000 times the speed of light, and then the different warp factors go all over the place for their "proper" calculation.

?

Kami

• 993
Re: Gravity
« Reply #35 on: June 30, 2017, 06:06:57 AM »
Two things:
The flat earth means that each part of the disk would be accelerating at different rates. it would mean moving every single atom of the world at a different velocity. But then that would also mean cutting the earth into tiny pieces.
As jane and a few others have already pointed out, regarding to einsteins equivalence principle you can not distinguish between uniform acceleration and a uniform gravitational field. Everything would be exactly the same.
Quote
The Great Pyramid of Geeza (or however you spell it), since it takes the mass (not actually mass) of 3,600,000 tons, has been proven to SLOW DOWN TIME by a tiny bit. Due to gravitational time dilation, there can (almost) only be one explanation for this phenomena, which is that the incredible mass allows for a decent gravitational field to be created (technically 'created' wouldn't be the best choice of wording'). This is proof that gravity exists and is not a hoax.
This is just a thought experiment, in practice this can not be measured, the effect would be way to small. What has been measured, however, is the gravitational redshift (and thus time-dilation) of photons moving upwards.

?

yash.paz123

• 18
Re: Gravity
« Reply #36 on: June 30, 2017, 07:46:01 AM »
That's where you get it wrong. In the case of the earth, the force is not point in just one direction, it is pointing in the directions all around the surface of the earth.
In the case of a round Earth, gravity points towards the centre.
In the case of a flat Earth with UA it points down, the same direction.

You can prove it in theory
Prove what in theory?

Can you point out anything wrong with my analysis that shows UA to be indistinguishable from gravity?

Are you pretending as if you don't understand?

Flat Earth: Flat earth accelerating up towards the objects. Appears as if objects are accelerating towards the earth. But since the whole flat earth is accelerating together, the second ball travels towards the earth at the same rate as the first ball. Don't deny this, because it is what will happen due to the whole flat earth accelerating together.

Round Earth: Objects accelerating towards the center of the earth. The second ball will travel towards the earth at a different rate than the first ball. This is because the gravitational force is acting on ALL DIRECTIONS around the earth individually. So instead of accelerating together (UA), it accelerates INDIVIDUALLY (Gravity Exists). Maybe go outside one day, and drop two balls - one from five meters and one from ten meters - and then observe and record data on how they behaved.

?

Twerp

• Gutter Sniper
• Flat Earth Almost Believer
• 6539
Re: Gravity
« Reply #37 on: June 30, 2017, 07:51:15 AM »
I think you might be confusing velocity with acceleration.

You started out well but now you're starting to flounder. It's because you are mistaken about a couple of things and you're refusing to see it.
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

Slemon

• Flat Earth Researcher
• 11690
Re: Gravity
« Reply #38 on: June 30, 2017, 07:58:18 AM »
Maybe go outside one day, and drop two balls - one from five meters and one from ten meters - and then observe and record data on how they behaved.
Ok, let's break this down. What is the specific difference in observations you expect?
If you drop those balls under UA, what would we see?
If you drop those balls under gravity, what would we see?

What, specifically, is the difference? You're talking a lot about UA in one direction, gravity in all directions... Great, but what would we see?

?

yash.paz123

• 18
Re: Gravity
« Reply #39 on: June 30, 2017, 08:04:48 AM »
Imagine this:

On a flat earth, the ground is accelerating upwards, but since all objects in space stand still, it looks as if the objects are falling towards the ground.

Now, if you have two balls, ball10 and ball20, which you drop from ten and twenty meters above the ground, assuming that the earth is flat, the balls will appear to both accelerate towards the earth at the same rate that the earth is accelerating towards them. That means that the balls are accelerating at the same rate in time. This is not the case though. In reality, the balls would accelerate at different rates.

I rest my case...

Son of Orospu

• Jura's b*tch and proud of it!
• Planar Moderator
• 37820
• I have artificial intelligence
Re: Gravity
« Reply #40 on: June 30, 2017, 08:18:05 AM »
What the f***?  No, the balls accelerate at the Same rate given not other influences.  One ball would hit the Earth later than the other because it has a greater distance to travel and it would be traveling faster because it had accelerated for a greater amount of time, but while they are falling, they are at the same speed relative to each other.  Even the round Earthers are trying to explain to you how wrong you are about everything.

?

Piesigma

• 59
Re: Gravity
« Reply #41 on: June 30, 2017, 08:32:51 AM »
In reality, the balls would accelerate at different rates.

In trying to declare a distinction between UA and gravity in this case are you referring to the variation of g with altitude?  If so, what you're saying might be consistent with the theory you are inferring, but have you considered the reality of any measurable difference in g at a height of 10 meters versus 20 meters above earth's surface?
« Last Edit: June 30, 2017, 08:38:22 AM by Piesigma »

?

Kami

• 993
Re: Gravity
« Reply #42 on: June 30, 2017, 08:33:59 AM »
Imagine this:

On a flat earth, the ground is accelerating upwards, but since all objects in space stand still, it looks as if the objects are falling towards the ground.

Now, if you have two balls, ball10 and ball20, which you drop from ten and twenty meters above the ground, assuming that the earth is flat, the balls will appear to both accelerate towards the earth at the same rate that the earth is accelerating towards them. That means that the balls are accelerating at the same rate in time. This is not the case though. In reality, the balls would accelerate at different rates.

I rest my case...
You and I have different understandings of gravity then. I think that both balls would accelerate 9.8m/s^2. Don't you?

• 899
• Crime Machine
Re: Gravity
« Reply #43 on: June 30, 2017, 09:01:03 AM »
Let's literally flip the idea around--here's something you could technically do in the real world to demonstrate.

Instead of balls I'm going to use toy drones--hover a drone at a certain height above the ground.  Hover another one twice as high as that.  Take a large heavy disc (parallel to the ground) and drop it straight down towards the two hovering drones.  Video tape the drop from off to the side.

Then just put the big disc flat on the ground.  Drop the two (powered off) drones simultaneously from heights corresponding to their distance from the disc in the first go-through.  Videotape this process as well.

Play both videos side by side, but flip the first one upside down.  Compare.
Suffering from a martyr complex...so you don't have to

Sam Hill

• 642
Re: Gravity
« Reply #44 on: June 30, 2017, 09:05:50 AM »
Are you expecting different results to the drone-drop and disk-drop experiment under the gravity model than you would under the UA model?  If so, different how?

Slemon

• Flat Earth Researcher
• 11690
Re: Gravity
« Reply #45 on: June 30, 2017, 09:48:38 AM »
Imagine this:

On a flat earth, the ground is accelerating upwards, but since all objects in space stand still, it looks as if the objects are falling towards the ground.

Now, if you have two balls, ball10 and ball20, which you drop from ten and twenty meters above the ground, assuming that the earth is flat, the balls will appear to both accelerate towards the earth at the same rate that the earth is accelerating towards them. That means that the balls are accelerating at the same rate in time. This is not the case though. In reality, the balls would accelerate at different rates.
Why?
With gravity, yes there'd be a slight variation, but it's a) hardly measurable and b) UA has multiple explanations for the rate at which gravity drops off with altitude. If this is the argument you're making, say so, but it's a far simpler one to state than going through all of this. 10 to 20 metres is barely going to be noticeable.
Otherwise you seem to be saying that the rate of acceleration of a ball depends on the distance it's going to travel, which just isn't true.

If you want to crunch the numbers it's easy. We know the formula for gravitational acceleration:

G=6.67408 × 10-11m3kg-1s-2, the gravitational constant
m1= 5.972 × 1024 kg, the mass of the Earth
m2=0.0585kg, if we use a tennis ball, say.
r=6371000m, the radius of the Earth, plus ten or twenty metres.

Sure, there's some approximation going on, but this suffices to roughly estimate the variation predicted by gravity.
Just for fun, note that at ground level, approximately F=9.8m2 which is, well, familiar. But if you want to calculate the variation in height, let's do that.

Dropping a tennis ball from 10m gives:
F = 0.5744477063 m/s/s
And dropping a tennis ball from 20m gives:
F = 0.574445903 m/s/s

You have a difference of 0.0000018m/s/s.
To put that in perspective, the balls would need for fall for about ten minutes before you'd notice one moving a millimetre per second faster than the other. That's going to be dwarfed by air resistance.
What part of the formula for gravity do you disagree with?

• 899
• Crime Machine
Re: Gravity
« Reply #46 on: June 30, 2017, 10:11:12 AM »
Are you expecting different results to the drone-drop and disk-drop experiment under the gravity model than you would under the UA model?  If so, different how?

Just trying to illustrate to yashpaz that a disc (plane) accelerating towards some objects is the same as the objects accelerating towards the disc.  This could have also been done by hanging the balls above a track, slapping the disc on the front of a car, and accelerating into the balls at g.

I imagine this experiment would look much the same under UA, but I stipulated the experiment should be done on a globe earth under gravity since he seems to agree that those are the only experimental conditions actually available to us.
Suffering from a martyr complex...so you don't have to

?

JackBlack

• 12684
Re: Gravity
« Reply #47 on: June 30, 2017, 02:58:47 PM »
Are you pretending as if you don't understand?
No. I am stating that I do understand quite well and trying to find out what part you don't understand.

Flat Earth: Flat earth accelerating up towards the objects. Appears as if objects are accelerating towards the earth. But since the whole flat earth is accelerating together, the second ball travels towards the earth at the same rate as the first ball. Don't deny this, because it is what will happen due to the whole flat earth accelerating together.
I wont deny this, as this is what is observed in reality. 2 balls dropped together (baring atmospheric effects like drag) will fall together to the level of accuracy we can detect.

Round Earth: Objects accelerating towards the center of the earth. The second ball will travel towards the earth at a different rate than the first ball.
No, it wont, at least not any perceptible difference.
What rate do you think each ball will fall at?

Maybe go outside one day, and drop two balls - one from five meters and one from ten meters - and then observe and record data on how they behaved.
Already done that. Guess what? They both appeared to fall at the same rate, both at roughly 9.8 m/s^2.

Maybe go inside some day, to a nice large elevator which can accelerate upwards at 1 g continually and drop some balls inside it.

Or better still, to avoid the effects of gravity, make it go sideways (but then you might get some issues with friction and moment of inertia).

On a flat earth, the ground is accelerating upwards, but since all objects in space stand still, it looks as if the objects are falling towards the ground.
No. They don't stand still.
Objects near Earth which aren't attached to Earth will not accelerate, instead they continue to travel at the same velocity.

Now, if you have two balls, ball10 and ball20, which you drop from ten and twenty meters above the ground, assuming that the earth is flat, the balls will appear to both accelerate towards the earth at the same rate that the earth is accelerating towards them. That means that the balls are accelerating at the same rate in time. This is not the case though. In reality, the balls would accelerate at different rates.
No. This is the case. In reality, both balls appear to accelerate at ~9.8 m/s^2.

Yes, technically, IF gravity is true (which you cannot just assume to disprove UA) you will get a difference of roughly 0.0003% if I recall correctly. That is not going to be detectable due to error in the experiment.