behavior of gravity

  • 60 Replies
  • 3361 Views
*

rabinoz

  • 24910
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #30 on: September 17, 2019, 08:59:30 PM »
Too bad that "Universal acceleration" or "Downwards Universal DeAcceleration ::)", if you prefer, "does not explain the orbit of the ISS, the orbit of the Moon, or the orbit of the earth around the sun, gravity does."

ISS? What do you mean?

The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Care to offers some evidence for your "tracks above the dome"?

*

Macarios

  • 1896
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #31 on: September 17, 2019, 09:23:52 PM »
"Finally, to return to the titular problem, how else would you define gravity or your density-attraction mess?"

>> Too bad you didn't know that there is Universal Acceleration approach as an alternative of gravity.

Phew has renamed it with Downwards Universal DeAcceleration.
Universal acceleration, does not explain the orbit of the Moon, or the orbit of the earth around the sun, gravity does.

There is no indication of gravity at all in reality.
Incorrect! Gravitation has been directly measured hundreds if times.

Too bad RErs confuse between Free Fall Object and Gravity as if there were no other theory describing such phenomenon with better sense.
Too bad that "Universal acceleration" or "Downwards Universal DeAcceleration ::)", if you prefer, "does not explain the orbit of the ISS, the orbit of the Moon, or the orbit of the earth around the sun, gravity does."

What happens when the number of bodies in a simulation is more than two?

Depends on the formulas used by the simulation software. :)
I don't have to fight about anything.
These things are not about me.
When one points facts out, they speak for themselves.
The main goal in all that is simplicity.

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #32 on: September 18, 2019, 02:25:15 AM »
The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Ignoring reality wont help you.
There is nothing perfect about it.

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #33 on: September 18, 2019, 03:23:25 AM »
"Finally, to return to the titular problem, how else would you define gravity or your density-attraction mess?"

>> Too bad you didn't know that there is Universal Acceleration approach as an alternative of gravity.

Phew has renamed it with Downwards Universal DeAcceleration.
Universal acceleration, does not explain the orbit of the Moon, or the orbit of the earth around the sun, gravity does.

There is no indication of gravity at all in reality.
Incorrect! Gravitation has been directly measured hundreds if times.

Too bad RErs confuse between Free Fall Object and Gravity as if there were no other theory describing such phenomenon with better sense.
Too bad that "Universal acceleration" or "Downwards Universal DeAcceleration ::)", if you prefer, "does not explain the orbit of the ISS, the orbit of the Moon, or the orbit of the earth around the sun, gravity does."

ISS? What do you mean?

The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
That's why time never fails along the day and night.
I cannot imagine such case could apply on celestial bodies with independent positions and orbits and frictions under 'gravity' which never been kissed, I meant, ;D never been proven ✌

stuff crashes into stuff all the time.
and stuff avoids other stuff all the time.
there's a lot of nonstuff out there.

*

Yes

  • 603
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #34 on: September 18, 2019, 05:57:44 AM »
The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Some flat earthers (like Sandokhan) believe that the other plants are tiny, only a few dozen or hundred kilometers across.  I guess they'd have to be tiny to fit inside the dome.  This also makes them very close.  Do you also believe that the the celestial bodies are close to us, only slightly further than the clouds?

If so, why aren't your asserted tracks visible?  Surely someone with a telescope should be able to see them, either during the day or night or twilight, right?
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

*

rabinoz

  • 24910
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #35 on: September 18, 2019, 04:05:52 PM »
The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Some flat earthers (like Sandokhan) believe that the other plants are tiny, only a few dozen or hundred kilometers across.  I guess they'd have to be tiny to fit inside the dome.  This also makes them very close.  Do you also believe that the the celestial bodies are close to us, only slightly further than the clouds?

If so, why aren't your asserted tracks visible?  Surely someone with a telescope should be able to see them, either during the day or night or twilight, right?
Make that Sandokhan believes that the sun is only 600 metres across and the planets are tinier than that.

Quote from: sandokhan

The photographs taken by T. Legault prove very clearly the fallacy of the 148,000,000 km figure, especially if we compare them with the Mercury transit photographs:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1786946#msg1786946

It is the Sun that orbits above the flat surface of the Earth.
And bits from the above link:
Quote from: sandokhan
NO 148,000,000 KM BETWEEN THE SUN THE ISS/Atlantis (slow motion video):


The diameter of the ISS looks exactly the same as the diameter of Mercury (during solar transit, see photographs above), and YET we are told that the diameters of Mercury and the Moon are very similar, while the diameter of the ISS is some 100 meters.

These images and photographs show the exact size of our geocentric planetary system: much smaller than we have been led to believe.
Quote from: sandokhan

The diameter of the ISS looks exactly the same as the diameter of Mercury (during solar transit, see photographs above), and YET we are told that the diameters of Mercury and the Moon are very similar, while the diameter of the ISS is some 100 meters.

*

Danang

  • 3715
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #36 on: September 19, 2019, 03:54:03 AM »
The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Some flat earthers (like Sandokhan) believe that the other plants are tiny, only a few dozen or hundred kilometers across.  I guess they'd have to be tiny to fit inside the dome.  This also makes them very close.  Do you also believe that the the celestial bodies are close to us, only slightly further than the clouds?

If so, why aren't your asserted tracks visible?  Surely someone with a telescope should be able to see them, either during the day or night or twilight, right?

To me the real north star and the surrounding stars are extremely far away otherwise they could not form specific reflections as seen on the northern hemiplane.

My hypothesis is, the track is not visible because it is made of some thing transparent as much as the dome is.

If we cannot see certain architectural celestial bodies, we can indicate their existences by the impacts in astronomical occurrences.

High leveled refractrion of sunlight needs a solid transparent body, more than mere air and gas.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2019, 04:11:57 AM by Danang »
TRY: (Curved Grided) South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map and Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/

*

Danang

  • 3715
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #37 on: September 19, 2019, 03:56:46 AM »
The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Ignoring reality wont help you.
There is nothing perfect about it.

That's why you need maths to make everything well organized.
TRY: (Curved Grided) South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map and Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/

*

rabinoz

  • 24910
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #38 on: September 19, 2019, 04:02:32 AM »
The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Ignoring reality wont help you.
There is nothing perfect about it.

That's why you need maths to make everything well organized.
Which is why you screw every up! You don't understand the simplest maths can't even sort π out!

*

Danang

  • 3715
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #39 on: September 19, 2019, 04:06:04 AM »
Too bad that "Universal acceleration" or "Downwards Universal DeAcceleration ::)", if you prefer, "does not explain the orbit of the ISS, the orbit of the Moon, or the orbit of the earth around the sun, gravity does."

ISS? What do you mean?

The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Care to offers some evidence for your "tracks above the dome"?

It takes a (honest) president to conduct a space exploration. A non CGI one ;D

For the time being, we can see the impact of such track, i.e. celestial bodies move with a well organized mechanism so that time and date as well as celestial occurrences can be predicted. Such thing can be possible only for a system with machinery mechanism.
The universe works with machinery mechanism.
TRY: (Curved Grided) South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map and Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/

*

Danang

  • 3715
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #40 on: September 19, 2019, 04:08:50 AM »
The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Ignoring reality wont help you.
There is nothing perfect about it.

That's why you need maths to make everything well organized.
Which is why you screw every up! You don't understand the simplest maths can't even sort π out!

I'd say: "Eat your pi constant for 2D and 3D. But for 1D, phew constant rules firmly".  8)

TRY: (Curved Grided) South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map and Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #41 on: September 19, 2019, 05:10:08 AM »
That's why you need maths to make everything well organized.
No, the math doesn't make it organised. The math allows us to calculate and predict.
If it was perfect, you would even be able to use the math to show it and it would be quite simple math.

Again, there is nothing perfect about it.
The vast majority of orbits are elliptical, and precess.
The length of a solar day varies throughout the year.
The polar star isn't the same as before.

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #42 on: September 20, 2019, 01:19:37 AM »
The orbits of celestial bodies follow the tracks above the dome like a perfect clock mechanism.
Some flat earthers (like Sandokhan) believe that the other plants are tiny, only a few dozen or hundred kilometers across.  I guess they'd have to be tiny to fit inside the dome.  This also makes them very close.  Do you also believe that the the celestial bodies are close to us, only slightly further than the clouds?

If so, why aren't your asserted tracks visible?  Surely someone with a telescope should be able to see them, either during the day or night or twilight, right?

To me the real north star and the surrounding stars are extremely far away otherwise they could not form specific reflections as seen on the northern hemiplane.

My hypothesis is, the track is not visible because it is made of some thing transparent as much as the dome is.

If we cannot see certain architectural celestial bodies, we can indicate their existences by the impacts in astronomical occurrences.

High leveled refractrion of sunlight needs a solid transparent body, more than mere air and gas.

I don't  think the tracks on the dome theory is even remotely feasible.

In the heliocentric model planets orbit the sun in elliptical orbits.
In the geocentric model planets orbit the earth in some kind of flower-shaped orbits.
In the flat earth model planets cross the sky every day in circles.

If planets are using tracks on the dome, then they must be using a different track every day, as the planet's path on the sky as seen from any given location on earth will vary slightly from day to day.

There is also the problem of planet transits and occulations. Inferior planets do transit the sun, superior planets never do. Planets never transit the moon. Moon and Sun can both occultate planets.

That would indicate:
- The moon is always lower than planets
- The sun is sometimes higher  and sometimes lower than inferior planets. This can be also confirmed by planetary phases of Venus and Mercury, which are also a difficult topic for FE.
- Superior planets are higher than the sun

That would mean the sun and the moon must be able to travel below planet tracks. How does that happen if the tracks are on the dome? It doesn't make any sense unless sun and moon are inside the dome. But the sun is also sometimes higher than Mercury and Venus, which would mean the sun is higher than the dome. It doesn't make any sense.

Other planets have their own moons as well, which from our perspective can be seen transiting the planet, adding further complexity to your model.
« Last Edit: September 20, 2019, 01:21:10 AM by kopfverderber »
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Danang

  • 3715
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #43 on: September 21, 2019, 06:02:27 AM »
Machinary with periodic revolution gives a steady, predictable calculation about celestial bodies occurrences.

Independent celestial bodies under gravity AKA solar system is an absurd conception. It contradicts the mechanism of gravity (if it existed).
How do you resolve the gravity's mutual attraction that in fact it doesn't occur?
How do you resolve the inertia?
How do you resolve the "coffee tides" ;D #JustJoking
TRY: (Curved Grided) South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map and Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/

*

Danang

  • 3715
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #44 on: September 21, 2019, 06:05:47 AM »
That's why you need maths to make everything well organized.
No, the math doesn't make it organised. The math allows us to calculate and predict.
If it was perfect, you would even be able to use the math to show it and it would be quite simple math.

Again, there is nothing perfect about it.
The vast majority of orbits are elliptical, and precess.
The length of a solar day varies throughout the year.
The polar star isn't the same as before.

That means your maths is incorrect. ✌
TRY: (Curved Grided) South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map and Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/

*

Danang

  • 3715
  • Everything will be "Phew" in its time :')
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #45 on: September 21, 2019, 06:09:42 AM »
No response for 👉 "for 1D, phew constant rules firmly" 👈 ?

Welcome to phew land... or at least, be a secret admirer of phew 8)
TRY: (Curved Grided) South Pole Centered FE Map AKA Phew FE Map and Downwards Universal Deceleration.

Phew's Silicon Valley: https://gwebanget.home.blog/

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #46 on: September 21, 2019, 02:50:44 PM »
Machinary with periodic revolution gives a steady, predictable calculation about celestial bodies occurrences.
Which isn't what happens in reality.

Independent celestial bodies under gravity AKA solar system is an absurd conception. It contradicts the mechanism of gravity (if it existed).
How do you resolve the gravity's mutual attraction that in fact it doesn't occur?
How do you resolve the inertia?
You are aware those 2 questions answer each other?
Consider the Earth and the moon. Gravity results in mutual attraction between them. Note that this means they accelerate in the direction towards each other. This does not mean they must get closer. They are already moving sideways, and their inertia will keep them moving. This means that gravity results in them following a curved path known as an orbit.
So there is no contradiction and no problem.

No response for 👉 "for 1D, phew constant rules firmly" 👈 ?
There was.
Danang, stop spamming your phew stuff everywhere. If you want to debate phew start a new thread, or go back to one of the other endless arguments about it.

*

rabinoz

  • 24910
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #47 on: September 21, 2019, 04:11:29 PM »
Machinary with periodic revolution gives a steady, predictable calculation about celestial bodies occurrences.
Except that there is no evidence of such Machinery.

Quote from: Danang
Independent celestial bodies under gravity AKA solar system is an absurd conception. It contradicts the mechanism of gravity (if it existed).
No, it doesn't "contradict the mechanism of gravity".
The "mechanism of gravity" combined with the centripetal acceleration needed to keep an object in circular motion explains circular and elliptical orbits in a two-bodied system perfectly.

Suppose an object is moving in circle with tangential velocity, v, at a distance, d, from the centre.
This requires an acceleration (called the centripetal acceleration) towards the centre of acent = v2/r.

If you swing a stone tied to a string around your head that centripetal acceleration is provided by the string.
But it can also be provided by gravitation, which causes an apparent attractive force Fgrav = (some constant)/d2.

For some object orbiting the earth, say the moon, that "some constant" can be found at least approximately from g = 9.81 m/s2 at 6731 km from the earth's centre.

The only acceleration involved in a circular orbit is towards the centre (and that is the meaning of centripetal) so the tangential speed remains unchanged

The maths for an elliptic orbit are far more complicated because there is tangential acceleration as well as radial acceleration.

Isaac Newton developed (his version of) calculus to analyse elliptical orbits such as the moon's orbit around the earth.
Newton used the "dot style notation" for differentiation while Leibniz, at about the same time, developed the common notation for differentiation.

Both notations are still used.

Quote from: Danang
How do you resolve the gravity's mutual attraction that in fact it doesn't occur?
Easy, it does occur and the moon appears to attract the earth with exactly the same force as the earth appears to attract the moon.

Quote from: Danang
How do you resolve the inertia?
There is nothing to resolve. Inertia is simply what keeps the moon along its path - there is no contradiction.

Quote from: Danang
How do you resolve the "coffee tides" ;D #JustJoking
But the "tide" in my coffee always seems to be ebbing (going down) but maybe that's caused by my drinking it ::).

*

Omega

  • 929
  • Debating honestly even if no-one else will
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #48 on: September 22, 2019, 02:36:35 AM »
Just to clarify: inertia does not mean something will slow down over time. It means the exact opposite. An object in motion stays in motion unless a force acts on it.

In an atmosphere objects slow down because of friction. Without an atmosphere (or any other force acting on it) an object will stay in motion forever.

Only thing round in FE is its circular logic.

*

KindMan01

  • 16
  • Whatever you are thinking, it is wrong. No doubt.
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #49 on: September 24, 2019, 12:45:47 PM »
Inertia is a property that matter has by which it continues in its current state (moving or at rest) unless it is changed by an external, unbalanced force.
Just to clarify.
You are WRONG! No matter your opinion!

*

wise

  • Professor
  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 20608
  • To Us Everywhere Flat Earth
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #50 on: September 26, 2019, 12:30:04 AM »
I just want to put this here.

Ignore list: boydster, Bullwinkle, Crouton, DuckDodgers, Hamzah, JackBlack, jdaniel0319, Junker, Jura-Glenlivet II, magellanclavichord, Mundin, NotSoSkeptical, rabinoz, sokarul


*

Stash

  • 3832
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #51 on: September 26, 2019, 01:02:20 AM »
I just want to put this here.



I'm picking up what you're putting down. That's just the old "pour a drink during a barrel roll" trick. G forces and all. Simple physics as defined in the modern world.

No. That sudden lurch forwards is the atmospheric slosh effect.

*

rabinoz

  • 24910
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #52 on: September 26, 2019, 01:11:06 AM »
I just want to put this here.

Why?

That photograph is noting more than a demonstration that the pilot is performing a well executed loop.

Try pouring tea during a barrel-roll!
Quote
Not only can you keep a glass of water full, you can pour one (or tea) while rolling the aircraft yourself if you're Bob Hoover!

  andy-m Aug 8 '17 at 15:45
And

Fighter jet pilot drinks water cup while flying upside down by Rumble Viral

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #53 on: September 26, 2019, 01:53:45 AM »
I just want to put this here.
Yes, it is a wonderful example of how Earth spinning won't result in massive winds, and that the vast majority of arguments against Earth's motion amount to pure garbage (the others are still garbage, they just aren't refuted by this).
This is still entirely consistent with gravity.

The existence of other forces doesn't mean gravity isn't real.

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #54 on: September 26, 2019, 07:03:25 AM »
the behavior of gravity, is well-known from Newton.
The cause of gravity is still not quite understood, Einstein's relativity is as close as we've gotten so far.


The cause of gravity is curved space-time ...

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #55 on: September 26, 2019, 01:08:15 PM »
the behavior of gravity, is well-known from Newton.
The cause of gravity is still not quite understood, Einstein's relativity is as close as we've gotten so far.


The cause of gravity is curved space-time ...

Is a result.
Cause still unknown.
Is it a particle wave energy?
Whst is it?

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #56 on: September 26, 2019, 02:59:44 PM »
the behavior of gravity, is well-known from Newton.
The cause of gravity is still not quite understood, Einstein's relativity is as close as we've gotten so far.


The cause of gravity is curved space-time ...

Is a result.
Cause still unknown.
Is it a particle wave energy?
Whst is it?
What we do know is that it is a the Property of mass, the point that we can direct our satellites, and space probes to other planets. In the exploration of our Solar system.
The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

*

rabinoz

  • 24910
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #57 on: September 26, 2019, 03:27:52 PM »
the behavior of gravity, is well-known from Newton.
The cause of gravity is still not quite understood, Einstein's relativity is as close as we've gotten so far.


The cause of gravity is curved space-time ...

Is a result.
Cause still unknown.
Is it a particle wave energy?
Whst is it?

The cause of the force we call "gravity" is the preventing of a moving object from following its geodesic - the equivalent of a straight line in curved spacetime and so is an inertial force somewhat like centripetal force.

A book sitting on a table might be stationary in space but is moving forward in the "timelike component of spacetime time" (commonly abbreviated to simply time) at a rate of one second per second.

But mass bends this timelike component of spacetime time towards itself.
If unrestrained the object would follow this path (geodesic) towards the mass. Restraining it from doing this causes the force we call gravity.

The is somewhat akin to the centripetal force needed to cause circular motion in ordinary flat space.

There is a similar curvature the "spaceike components of spacetime time" but near objects the size of the earth it is minute - only enough to increase the apparent diameter of the earth a centimetre or so and quite negligible.

Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #58 on: September 26, 2019, 03:44:14 PM »
Yes
The properties of mass and physics is measurable and preductable.
Im saying the actual quirks and quarks of it all are unknown.
What is the mechanism of matter that causes spacetime sinkwells.

But because we dont fully understand doesnt negate the fact that it exists as a property (contrary to johnd and tomB).

*

rabinoz

  • 24910
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: behavior of gravity
« Reply #59 on: September 26, 2019, 04:52:16 PM »
Yes
The properties of mass and physics are measurable and predictable.
Im saying the actual quirks and quarks of it all are unknown.
What is the mechanism of matter that causes spacetime sinkwells.
That's getting deep into "The theory of everything" and the deeper one goes the weirder it gets.

Even just pondering on "where did it, the universe, all come from" makes my head spin - was it always in existence?

Quote from: Themightykabool
But because we dont fully understand doesnt negate the fact that it exists as a property (contrary to johnd and tomB).