Disproving the gravity in 30 seconds

All objects in the earth are under force of gravity, right?

Think an object, like human, has density about 1t/m^3
Water has 1t/m^3 too.

Imagine a person in water. the water at the top of it and the water under it are equal forces him and create a balance.

So; The total force applied to the person by water is zero.

if the force of gravity was present, the person would move downward in the water. but it is not. Anything that is equal to the weight of the self-weight of the water remains in a fixed position within it, not falling down.

If you have read this writing in 30 seconds so you've saw a disprooof which disproves the gravity in 30 seconds. it's your problem that you haven't gone to a fast reading course.

What happens if you drop a spanner in a submarine?

Quote from: wise on February 28, 2019, 11:49:41 PM

All objects in the earth are under force of gravity, right?

Think an object, like human, has density about 1t/m^3
Water has 1t/m^3 too.

Imagine a person in water. the water at the top of it and the water under it are equal forces him and create a balance.

So; The total force applied to the person by water is zero.

if the force of gravity was present, the person would move downward in the water. but it is not. Anything that is equal to the weight of the self-weight of the water remains in a fixed position within it, not falling down.

If you have read this writing in 30 seconds so you've saw a disprooof which disproves the gravity in 30 seconds. it's your problem that you haven't gone to a fast reading course.

What happens if you drop a spanner in a submarine?

Get say.

Quote from: wise on February 28, 2019, 11:49:41 PM

All objects in the earth are under force of gravity, right?

Think an object, like human, has density about 1t/m^3
Water has 1t/m^3 too.

Imagine a person in water. the water at the top of it and the water under it are equal forces him and create a balance.

So; The total force applied to the person by water is zero.

if the force of gravity was present, the person would move downward in the water. but it is not. Anything that is equal to the weight of the self-weight of the water remains in a fixed position within it, not falling down.

If you have read this writing in 30 seconds so you've saw a disprooof which disproves the gravity in 30 seconds. it's your problem that you haven't gone to a fast reading course.

What happens if you drop a spanner in a submarine?

Haha
Wise disproven in 31sec

Quote from: turtles on June 09, 2019, 10:08:54 AM

Quote from: wise on February 28, 2019, 11:49:41 PM

All objects in the earth are under force of gravity, right?

Think an object, like human, has density about 1t/m^3
Water has 1t/m^3 too.

Imagine a person in water. the water at the top of it and the water under it are equal forces him and create a balance.

So; The total force applied to the person by water is zero.

if the force of gravity was present, the person would move downward in the water. but it is not. Anything that is equal to the weight of the self-weight of the water remains in a fixed position within it, not falling down.

If you have read this writing in 30 seconds so you've saw a disprooof which disproves the gravity in 30 seconds. it's your problem that you haven't gone to a fast reading course.

What happens if you drop a spanner in a submarine?

Haha
Wise disproven in 31sec

Your baselessly claiming me "haha disproven" does not magically disproven me. Where is your proof?

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 10, 2019, 05:13:46 AM

Quote from: turtles on June 09, 2019, 10:08:54 AM

Quote from: wise on February 28, 2019, 11:49:41 PM

All objects in the earth are under force of gravity, right?

Think an object, like human, has density about 1t/m^3
Water has 1t/m^3 too.

Imagine a person in water. the water at the top of it and the water under it are equal forces him and create a balance.

So; The total force applied to the person by water is zero.

if the force of gravity was present, the person would move downward in the water. but it is not. Anything that is equal to the weight of the self-weight of the water remains in a fixed position within it, not falling down.

If you have read this writing in 30 seconds so you've saw a disprooof which disproves the gravity in 30 seconds. it's your problem that you haven't gone to a fast reading course.

What happens if you drop a spanner in a submarine?

Haha
Wise disproven in 31sec

Your baselessly claiming me "haha disproven" does not magically disproven me. Where is your proof?

You yourself confirmed the existence of those very forces when you started your "explanation".

You said that: "weight of the man is balanced with weight of the displaced water".

Where these weights came from without gravity?
How they can balance themselves if they don't exist?

hehe

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 05:22:07 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 10, 2019, 05:13:46 AM

Quote from: turtles on June 09, 2019, 10:08:54 AM

Quote from: wise on February 28, 2019, 11:49:41 PM

All objects in the earth are under force of gravity, right?

Think an object, like human, has density about 1t/m^3
Water has 1t/m^3 too.

Imagine a person in water. the water at the top of it and the water under it are equal forces him and create a balance.

So; The total force applied to the person by water is zero.

if the force of gravity was present, the person would move downward in the water. but it is not. Anything that is equal to the weight of the self-weight of the water remains in a fixed position within it, not falling down.

If you have read this writing in 30 seconds so you've saw a disprooof which disproves the gravity in 30 seconds. it's your problem that you haven't gone to a fast reading course.

What happens if you drop a spanner in a submarine?

Haha
Wise disproven in 31sec

Your baselessly claiming me "haha disproven" does not magically disproven me. Where is your proof?

You yourself confirmed the existence of those very forces when you started your "explanation".

You said that: "weight of the man is balanced with weight of the displaced water".

Where these weights came from without gravity?
How they can balance themselves if they don't exist?

hehe

atmospheric stringency causes a downward force. hehe isn't a magic argument makes your magical gravity dreams to a real power.

Without atmosphere things are a bit heavier.

Styrofoam of 1 m³ has weight of 50 kilograms.
At sea level 1 m³ of air has weight of 1.225 kilograms.

So, 1 m³ of styrofoam submerged in ar will lose 1.225 kg and weigh 48.775 kg.

Read about Archimedes Principle.

Without atmosphere things are a bit heavier.

Styrofoam of 1 m³ has weight of 50 kilograms.
At sea level 1 m³ of air has weight of 1.225 kilograms.

So, 1 m³ of styrofoam submerged in ar will lose 1.225 kg and weigh 48.775 kg.

Read about Archimedes Principle.

At sea level it is heavier because it has more air upside of it. Where is problem here with atmospheric stringency?

Quote from: Macarios on June 10, 2019, 06:03:47 AM

Without atmosphere things are a bit heavier.

Styrofoam of 1 m³ has weight of 50 kilograms.
At sea level 1 m³ of air has weight of 1.225 kilograms.

So, 1 m³ of styrofoam submerged in ar will lose 1.225 kg and weigh 48.775 kg.

Read about Archimedes Principle.

At sea level it is heavier because it has more air upside of it. Where is problem here with atmospheric stringency?

At sea level 1 cubic meter of styrofoam loses 1.225 kg due to air buoyancy.

Did you have time to learn about Archimedes Principle?

Please define "stringceny"

Please define "stringceny"

What?

Quote from: Macarios on June 10, 2019, 06:03:47 AM

Without atmosphere things are a bit heavier.

Styrofoam of 1 m³ has weight of 50 kilograms.
At sea level 1 m³ of air has weight of 1.225 kilograms.

So, 1 m³ of styrofoam submerged in ar will lose 1.225 kg and weigh 48.775 kg.

Read about Archimedes Principle.

At sea level it is heavier because it has more air upside of it. Where is problem here with atmospheric stringency?

Stringency?

Quote from: Macarios on June 10, 2019, 06:03:47 AM

Without atmosphere things are a bit heavier.

Styrofoam of 1 m³ has weight of 50 kilograms.
At sea level 1 m³ of air has weight of 1.225 kilograms.

So, 1 m³ of styrofoam submerged in ar will lose 1.225 kg and weigh 48.775 kg.

Read about Archimedes Principle.

At sea level it is heavier because it has more air upside of it. Where is problem here with atmospheric stringency?

Er, no, at sea level it's being bouyed up by dense air, so it will weigh less. It will weigh it's full 50kg in a vacuum.

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 06:27:18 AM

Quote from: Macarios on June 10, 2019, 06:03:47 AM

Without atmosphere things are a bit heavier.

Styrofoam of 1 m³ has weight of 50 kilograms.
At sea level 1 m³ of air has weight of 1.225 kilograms.

So, 1 m³ of styrofoam submerged in ar will lose 1.225 kg and weigh 48.775 kg.

Read about Archimedes Principle.

At sea level it is heavier because it has more air upside of it. Where is problem here with atmospheric stringency?

Stringency?

Scringency?

Wise. Define what you mean by stringency please and stop spamming posts everywhere.

atmospheric stringency causes a downward force. hehe isn't a magic argument makes your magical gravity dreams to a real power.

Easily disproven by so many things it isn't funny.
Objects still fall in a vacuum chamber. Things weigh more in a vacuum chamber.
A helium balloon will rise in the atmosphere.
And so on.

This shows it clearly isn't the atmospheric "stringency" (Are you sure that is what you mean? I find three definitions, one is tightness, one is rigorous standards and one is dealing with money) that causes a downwards force.
Instead (the helium balloon especially) shows that there is a downwards force separate from the atmosphere and that the atmosphere actually provides an upwards force (likely due to the pressure differential you claim cannot exist).

Wise. Define what you mean by stringency please and stop spamming posts everywhere.

Where is the spam? He has said something else and I'm trying to make sure which word he mean. Because he has used two different words similar. If you want to get involved, if you dare, get involved the issue. But you have only dare to use your moderatorship rights those given you without you deserved them, you have not that capability. If you intervene the issue really, get do it, Then you will be snubbed, like your bossinoz. If it is easy to discuss here, come and do it yourself.

Quote from: wise on June 10, 2019, 05:42:10 AM

atmospheric stringency causes a downward force. hehe isn't a magic argument makes your magical gravity dreams to a real power.

Easily disproven by so many things it isn't funny.
Objects still fall in a vacuum chamber. Things weigh more in a vacuum chamber.
A helium balloon will rise in the atmosphere.
And so on.

This shows it clearly isn't the atmospheric "stringency" (Are you sure that is what you mean? I find three definitions, one is tightness, one is rigorous standards and one is dealing with money) that causes a downwards force.
Instead (the helium balloon especially) shows that there is a downwards force separate from the atmosphere and that the atmosphere actually provides an upwards force (likely due to the pressure differential you claim cannot exist).

Helium baloon is the proof of your so called gravitons are absent. helium particles rise. but when they rise higher, although gravitation becomes lower, they do not rise and scatter into space; because there is a wall around them that prevents them from coming out. you couldn't prove otherwise. saying "can be proven otherwise" does not magically prove anything.

Helium baloon is the proof of your so called gravitons are absent.

No. Helium and bouyancy in general is a disproof of the air causing things to fall.
If air caused things to fall, the helium filled balloon should fall as well.
The only explanation for the buoyant force is the air (or whatever medium the object is in) pushing objects up.
The buoyant force is measurable and acts on all objects.
All you need to do is measure the weight of the object in a vacuum and then measure it in air.
You can also easily observe it with water.
Fill a balloon with air and watch it fall, but put it under water and you can watch it rise.

You can even fill a balloon with helium and watch it rise in air, but sink in hydrogen or low enough pressure air.

So it is clear that the helium doesn't push itself up, instead the air around it does.

The only sane explanation is that there is a general downwards force acting on all objects and a medium applies an upwards, buoyant, force on objects immersed in it.
This ties into the pressure gradient of the fluid caused by this general downwards force as this pressure gradient is what causes the upwards force.
This also shows that the air is pushing objects upwards, not down.

<BS deleted>

Helium baloon goes upward not because of air pushes it to up; simple because it is lighter than the air. It contradicts with your childish claim:

The only explanation for the buoyant force is the air (or whatever medium the object is in) pushing objects up.

Nope. Air pushes everything around like everything does. Which one heavier than stays downside. Simple to get but you are denying the fact because your so called scientists did not teach it you in kindergarden.

Helium baloon goes upward not because of air pushes it to up; simple because it is lighter than the air.

It being lighter than air provides no reason for it to go upwards.
However pressure gradients in mediums (which would push objects upwards) are easily observed and measured.
So no, it goes up because the air pushes it up.
This is further demonstrated by it falling in a vacuum chamber.

What is stringency?

What is stringency?

  Are you asking this with motivation under boydster or with your free will? 

Simple answer here. If you have any doubt about answer so I can help you get it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+stringency

Quote from: wise on June 11, 2019, 03:36:07 AM

Helium baloon goes upward not because of air pushes it to up; simple because it is lighter than the air.

It being lighter than air provides no reason for it to go upwards.
However pressure gradients in mediums (which would push objects upwards) are easily observed and measured.
So no, it goes up because the air pushes it up.
This is further demonstrated by it falling in a vacuum chamber.

So you have agreed air pushes helium to upward. It means objects pushes each other.

Okay, please repeat after me.

All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other.

Thank you for your supporting the flat earth theory, fellow flat earther.

So you have agreed air pushes helium to upward. It means objects pushes each other.

Okay, please repeat after me.

Quote from: wise on April 08, 2019, 06:42:48 AM

All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other.

Just because one "object" pushes one other "object" does not mean that "All objects push each other".
That would be a Hasty Generalization logical fallacy!

And your so-called "Disproving the gravity in 30 seconds" disproves nothing!

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 11, 2019, 04:17:20 AM

What is stringency?

  Are you asking this with motivation under boydster or with your free will? 

Simple answer here. If you have any doubt about answer so I can help you get it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+stringency

Yes
Tried that.
No relevant answers.

Quote from: wise on June 11, 2019, 04:26:57 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 11, 2019, 04:17:20 AM

What is stringency?

  Are you asking this with motivation under boydster or with your free will? 

Simple answer here. If you have any doubt about answer so I can help you get it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+stringency

Yes
Tried that.
No relevant answers.

You have asked the stringency, right? You have tried to learn it and your angry globularist moderator fanatic has forced me to answer you, right? There is an answer there. If you don't know what being stringency, so how you can get whether it is relevant or not? I have told you that ask me which part you don't get I can teach you and you are saying just their not being relevant. You have not that knowledge deciding their being relevant or nor relevant. Just ask which definition you think isn't relevant, and give me the remain part how I see you their being relevant.

Quote from: wise on June 11, 2019, 04:24:55 AM

So you have agreed air pushes helium to upward. It means objects pushes each other.

Okay, please repeat after me.

Quote from: wise on April 08, 2019, 06:42:48 AM

All objects push each other. Lets repeat it: All objects push each other.

Just because one "object" pushes one other "object" does not mean that "All objects push each other".
That would be a Hasty Generalization logical fallacy!

And your so-called "Disproving the gravity in 30 seconds" disproves nothing!

Stop to do make word salad again. Object pushes each other. The fact that generalizations are wrong does not mean that generalizations cannot be made. Spesific examples are specity can not change the general laws. All objects push each other, prove me wrong. Your claiming me does not disprove the gravity does not make me magically do not disproved it. Prove I did not do it.

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 11, 2019, 05:34:38 AM

Quote from: wise on June 11, 2019, 04:26:57 AM

Quote from: Themightykabool on June 11, 2019, 04:17:20 AM

What is stringency?

  Are you asking this with motivation under boydster or with your free will? 

Simple answer here. If you have any doubt about answer so I can help you get it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+stringency

Yes
Tried that.
No relevant answers.

You have asked the stringency, right? You have tried to learn it and your angry globularist moderator fanatic has forced me to answer you, right? There is an answer there. If you don't know what being stringency, so how you can get whether it is relevant or not? I have told you that ask me which part you don't get I can teach you and you are saying just their not being relevant. You have not that knowledge deciding their being relevant or nor relevant. Just ask which definition you think isn't relevant, and give me the remain part how I see you their being relevant.

No one is interested in playing a game to figure out exactly how you are butchering the English language today. Please explain what you intend that word to mean in the manner you have used it.

Stop to do make word salad again. Object pushes each other. The fact that generalizations are wrong does not mean that generalizations cannot be made. Spesific examples are specity can not change the general laws. All objects push each other, prove me wrong. Your claiming me does not disprove the gravity does not make me magically do not disproved it. Prove I did not do it.

Your explanation of gravity cannot be correct because objects still fall in a Vacuum chamber where the cannot be any "air push".
Look here showing that objects still fall in a vacuum chamber:
Bowling ball and feathers falling in vacuum - yjr times are not real times but in the slow-motion video:

At 0 secs

At 5 secs

At 10 secs

At 15 secs

At 20 secs

At 25 secs

Objects still fall in a vacuum chamber when there is no air proving that air has nothing to do with objects falling and in fact impeds the falling and can even provide buoyancy.