# Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II

• 57 Replies
• 2889 Views
?

#### MouseWalker

• 777 ##### Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« on: January 07, 2020, 06:54:48 PM »
Quote
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II

From a classic text on mechanics:

When science teachers are asked how does gravity work, they answer in this manner:

Gravity is a force.

Gravity is directed towards the center of the orbit i.e. the sun.

That makes gravity the centripetal force.
no the out word circular motion is the centripetal force, gravity is the string holding the ball in.
Quote
Imagine a ball attached to a string and you are holding the other end of the string and moving your hand in such a way that the ball is in circular motion.

Then tension in the string is centripetal force.

not quite, is the results of inertia of the earth and gravity

Quote
Now, ball = earth

you = sun

tension in the string = gravity

Gravity is the reason one object orbits another. An analogy is swinging a ball on a string over your head. The string is like gravity, and it keeps the ball in orbit. If you let go of the string, the ball flies away from you. (Dr. Eric Christian, April 2011)
yes
Quote

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4569 (UCSB Science Line)

Centrifugal force acts on a rotating object in a direction opposite the axis of rotation. Imagine that you have a tennis ball tied to a string. If you swing the tennis ball on the string around in a circle, you would feel the ball tugging on the string. That is the centrifugal force on the ball. It is counteracted by tension in the string that you are holding. In this example, the tension force in the string is like the gravitational force between the earth and the sun. The ball doesn't get closer or farther from your hand. If you suddenly cut the string, the ball would go flying away, but that wont happen to the earth because of the sun's gravity.
yes
Quote
http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4583

Forces can make something move or stop something from moving. For a planet in orbit around the sun, the string is invisible. That invisible string is the gravitational force between the Earth and the sun.

yes
Quote
Then, the Mass Attraction and General Relativity Attraction concepts are not viable models for the cause of gravity and inertia.
why?
Quote
Applying any "attractive" force model to the Earth Moon dynamic forces, we obtain this system:

The Earths attractive gravitation balances the orbital centrifugal force of the Moon.
The Moons attractive gravitation balances the orbital centrifugal force of the Earth.

the same force not two, from a from different point of view.
Quote

At first this may seem like an orderly and balanced attractive force system; however,... the following paradox exists. If the seat, source and cause of the "apparent" attraction forces are "internal" to each of the bodies...the attraction concept produces twice the force that is necessary to balance the centrifugal orbital forces of a planet moon system. The concept of "attraction" between bodies requires that the force from each separate body acts on the remote body,-- and equally on the originating body. Another example of a balanced system is a rope under tension; each end has an equal amount of opposing force. As noted by Newton's third law of motion, " To every action there is always an opposed  equal reaction".

This double force paradox is directly applicable to the "mass attraction",... the General Relativity attraction and all other attraction type concepts of gravity.

This example may help visualize the double force issue.

Let there be two rafts ( x and y )  freely floating on a clear calm lake with a rope between them.
Both rafts are still and are a rope length apart.
The man on (raft x) pulls on the rope which is attached to raft y.
Raft x will move toward raft y, and raft y will move toward raft x.
Both rafts will receive equal and opposite force and motion.
It is not possible for (raft x) to remain still and be the source of the force.

I see no doubling divorces of forces
Quote
The Mass Attraction Models of Gravitation

The attraction concepts accept Newton's inverse square equation of gravity's force between two bodies as:
F = G x (M1 x M2) / r squared .
The surface gravity (g) for each of the bodies can be derived from the gravitational constant (G) and the mass and radius of the bodies. Using Newton's equation the g forces, allegedly "seated" in each of the "two" bodies acting on the other at a distance, can be calculated.

Within the "attraction" concepts:

From Earth, the concept requires that Earth's gravity is attracting the Moon; and an equal Earth anchored attraction force is pulling the Earth toward the Moon.

From the Moon, the Moon's gravity is attracting the Earth; and this Moon seated force is equally pulling the Moon toward the Earth.

there is no doubling forces, only the point of reference is changing
Quote

Using: 1 ) Newtons equation as given above, 2 ) basic arithmetic, 3 ) common logic and 4 ) the mechanics of force, it is shown that the assumed Earth and Moon seated forces are equal; and as a result;"all attraction models" produce twice the force that is required to balance the centrifugal forces of orbit!
why? : no Dublin of forces occur
Quote

The General Relativity Model of Gravitation

The exact same paradox arises with the General Relativity (GR) concept of gravity. It postulates that Mass warps a hypothetical "fabric of spacetime" and the warped fabric of spacetime causes attraction of other masses. Since in the GR theory the seat of the attractive force is anchored within the center of the planets and moons positions, we would again have twice the force required to balance the orbital forces of the Earth Moon system.
why? :  you are seeing twice, where there is no twice;  no Dublin of forces occur
It is the same force, just viewed from a different pointe of view.
Quote

Stanley V. Byers
« Last Edit: May 12, 2018, 06:51:23 AM by sandokhan »

It's hard, you almost have it, but then you jump to the wrong conclusion,
And won't let go.

The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

?

#### MouseWalker

• 777 ##### Re: Not DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #1 on: January 07, 2020, 09:50:52 PM »
Quote
DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II

From a classic text on mechanics:

When science teachers are asked how does gravity work, they answer in this manner:

Gravity is a force.

Gravity is directed towards the center of the orbit i.e. the sun.

That makes gravity the centripetal force.
no the out word circular motion is the centripetal force, gravity is the string holding the ball in.
Quote
Imagine a ball attached to a string and you are holding the other end of the string and moving your hand in such a way that the ball is in circular motion.

Then tension in the string is centripetal force.

not quite, is the results of inertia of the earth and gravity

Quote
Now, ball = earth

you = sun

tension in the string = gravity

Gravity is the reason one object orbits another. An analogy is swinging a ball on a string over your head. The string is like gravity, and it keeps the ball in orbit. If you let go of the string, the ball flies away from you. (Dr. Eric Christian, April 2011)
yes
Quote

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4569 (UCSB Science Line)

Centrifugal force acts on a rotating object in a direction opposite the axis of rotation. Imagine that you have a tennis ball tied to a string. If you swing the tennis ball on the string around in a circle, you would feel the ball tugging on the string. That is the centrifugal force on the ball. It is counteracted by tension in the string that you are holding. In this example, the tension force in the string is like the gravitational force between the earth and the sun. The ball doesn't get closer or farther from your hand. If you suddenly cut the string, the ball would go flying away, but that wont happen to the earth because of the sun's gravity.
yes
Quote
http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4583

Forces can make something move or stop something from moving. For a planet in orbit around the sun, the string is invisible. That invisible string is the gravitational force between the Earth and the sun.

yes
Quote
Then, the Mass Attraction and General Relativity Attraction concepts are not viable models for the cause of gravity and inertia.
why?
Quote
Applying any "attractive" force model to the Earth Moon dynamic forces, we obtain this system:

The Earths attractive gravitation balances the orbital centrifugal force of the Moon.
The Moons attractive gravitation balances the orbital centrifugal force of the Earth.

the same force not two, from a from different point of view.
Quote

At first this may seem like an orderly and balanced attractive force system; however,... the following paradox exists. If the seat, source and cause of the "apparent" attraction forces are "internal" to each of the bodies...the attraction concept produces twice the force that is necessary to balance the centrifugal orbital forces of a planet moon system. The concept of "attraction" between bodies requires that the force from each separate body acts on the remote body,-- and equally on the originating body. Another example of a balanced system is a rope under tension; each end has an equal amount of opposing force. As noted by Newton's third law of motion, " To every action there is always an opposed  equal reaction".

This double force paradox is directly applicable to the "mass attraction",... the General Relativity attraction and all other attraction type concepts of gravity.

This example may help visualize the double force issue.

Let there be two rafts ( x and y )  freely floating on a clear calm lake with a rope between them.
Both rafts are still and are a rope length apart.
The man on (raft x) pulls on the rope which is attached to raft y.
Raft x will move toward raft y, and raft y will move toward raft x.
Both rafts will receive equal and opposite force and motion.
It is not possible for (raft x) to remain still and be the source of the force.

I see no doubling divorces of forces
Quote
The Mass Attraction Models of Gravitation

The attraction concepts accept Newton's inverse square equation of gravity's force between two bodies as:
F = G x (M1 x M2) / r squared .
The surface gravity (g) for each of the bodies can be derived from the gravitational constant (G) and the mass and radius of the bodies. Using Newton's equation the g forces, allegedly "seated" in each of the "two" bodies acting on the other at a distance, can be calculated.

Within the "attraction" concepts:

From Earth, the concept requires that Earth's gravity is attracting the Moon; and an equal Earth anchored attraction force is pulling the Earth toward the Moon.

From the Moon, the Moon's gravity is attracting the Earth; and this Moon seated force is equally pulling the Moon toward the Earth.

there is no doubling forces, only the point of reference is changing
Quote

Using: 1 ) Newtons equation as given above, 2 ) basic arithmetic, 3 ) common logic and 4 ) the mechanics of force, it is shown that the assumed Earth and Moon seated forces are equal; and as a result;"all attraction models" produce twice the force that is required to balance the centrifugal forces of orbit!
why? : no Dublin of forces occur
Quote

The General Relativity Model of Gravitation

The exact same paradox arises with the General Relativity (GR) concept of gravity. It postulates that Mass warps a hypothetical "fabric of spacetime" and the warped fabric of spacetime causes attraction of other masses. Since in the GR theory the seat of the attractive force is anchored within the center of the planets and moons positions, we would again have twice the force required to balance the orbital forces of the Earth Moon system.
why? :  you are seeing twice, where there is no twice;  no Dublin of forces occur
It is the same force, just viewed from a different pointe of view.
Quote

Stanley V. Byers
« Last Edit: May 12, 2018, 06:51:23 AM by sandokhan »

It's hard, you almost have it, but then you jump to the wrong conclusion,
And won't let go.
There was no angry in my intent.
The the universe has no obligation to makes sense to you.
The earth is a globe.

?

#### Unconvinced

• 1485 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #2 on: January 09, 2020, 05:50:52 AM »
Centripetal means acting towards the centre.  Centripetal forces can be due to gravity or a physical structure.

Centrifugal forces act outwards, although they are really just momentum trying to go straight, so often arent considered real forces.

Im not aware of any double force paradox.  It all adds up.

Some people here would do well to learn how to draw free body diagrams.  They make things like this so much easier to understand. #### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6318 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #3 on: January 09, 2020, 06:32:02 AM »
The doubles forces of attractive gravitation is one of the most devastating arguments against RE.

Complete demonstration, using FE and RE equations:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1905467#msg1905467

?

#### Unconvinced

• 1485 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2020, 07:16:19 AM »
The doubles forces of attractive gravitation is one of the most devastating arguments against RE.

Complete demonstration, using FE and RE equations:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1905467#msg1905467

Your example is just plain wrong.

The men pulling on the rope must be pulling the same amount if nothing is moving. A=B #### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6318 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #5 on: January 09, 2020, 07:40:58 AM »
My example is perfect.

You haven't studied the situation being described at all.

RE equation leads to this: A = -B.

You wrote A=B.

The RE analysis leads to a total disaster, where the basic requirement is this |A|=|B|.

Which can NEVER be the case.

Force A can never equal force B.

Even if we had, as an example, force A = 100.000,000,000,021 N and force B = 100.000,000,000,034 N, it would still NOT satisfy the RE requirement which is this: |A|=|B|.

The RE analysis leads directly to the ONLY case which can never be experienced in reality.

Here is the correct FE analysis.

Two boats pulled toward each other on a lake.

Man from boat X is pulling with force A, directed to the left.

Man from boat Y is pulling with force B, directed to the right.

Forces A and B are, of course, of different magnitude.

What are the forces acting on boat X?

To the left we will have a negative direction.

Boat X will be acted upon by TWO FORCES: A (the reaction force on the action force -A) and B.

What are the forces acting on the left end side of the rope?

-A and -B.

What are the forces acting boat Y?

To the right we will have the positive direction.

Boat Y will be acted upon by two forces: -B (the reaction force on the action force B) and
-A.

What are the forces acting on the right end side of the rope?

A and B.

Net force on boat X: A + B

Net force on boat Y: -A - B

Net force on the string: [-A - B] + [A + B]

The string/rope will not move: [-A - B] + [A + B] = 0

All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

The man in boat X is pulling on the rope, while at the same time boat Y is pulling on that same rope with force B. The correct analysis must take these facts into account. ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #6 on: January 09, 2020, 07:54:18 AM »
You appear to be mixing up your conventions.  Does a positive force represent a force to the left and a negative force represent a force to the right, or does a positive force represent attraction and a negative force represent repulsion?  It seems to change depending on if you're in space or on the ocean.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.
I've seen you make this claim before.  You have this bizarre idea that the equation of Newtonian gravity is wrong because you have to apply it twice which gets you double the force.  Don't do that.  Don't apply it twice.  Calculate f = (G m1 m2) / r2 once.  Also keep in mind that that equation is a description of non-relativistic gravitational mechanics, not an explanation of it.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature. #### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6318 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #7 on: January 09, 2020, 08:05:49 AM »
My conventions are very clear.

You better not bring repulsive gravity into our discussion.

Because then you are going to have to explain this:

Two bodies are pulled to each other by an external pressure.

Let's see how Newton describes this force in the Principia:

In attractions, I briefly demonstrate the thing after this manner. Suppose an obstacle is interposed to hinder the meeting of any two bodies A, B, attracting one the other: then if either body, as A, is more attracted towards the other body B, than that other body B is towards the first body A, the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A than by the pressure of the body B, and therefore will not remain in equilibrium: but the stronger pressure will prevail, and will make the system of the two bodies, together with the obstacle, to move directly towards the parts on which B lies; and in free spaces, to go forwards in infinitum with a motion continually accelerated; which is absurd and contrary to the first law.

the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A

PRESSURE = PUSHING FORCE

ATTRACTION = PULLING FORCE

Newton's clear description again:

the obstacle will be more strongly urged by the pressure of the body A than by the pressure of the body B, and therefore will not remain in equilibrium: but the stronger pressure will prevail

Here is a chance to redeem yourself.

From the pages of the same Principia:

"If a horse draws a stone tied to a rope, the horse (if I may so say) will be equally drawn back towards the stone: for the distended rope, by the same endeavour to relax or unbend itself, will draw the horse as much towards the stone, as it does the stone towards the horse, and will obstruct the progress of the one as much as it advances that of the other."

Please describe the forces acting on the rope. ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #8 on: January 09, 2020, 09:14:15 AM »
Please describe the forces acting on the rope.
Lucky for me, you asked for the easy part.  Let's make it a little easier still and assume the rope has no plastic or elastic characteristics.  The exact scenario isn't clear, so I'll describe two.  First, let's say the stone is fixed.  Here, the rope is under tension and not moving, so the forces acting on the rope net to zero.  Relevant components include a pull from the horse, a pull from the stone, and a pull from gravity.  All of these must necessarily be balanced, since the rope is not moving.  Second scenario, the horse is dragging the stone forward.  This case is similar to the first, except that there is a net force in the direction of the horse.  However, I only took a statics course in college, not a dynamics course, so I'm not certain of the terminology to describe that the force isn't constant and does not result in a constant acceleration. I'll let you fill me in on that.

Meanwhile, here's the fun part: this has nothing to do with gravity.  There is no gravitational tension between bodies.  Our sun isn't swinging planets around on a tether like an out-of-control yo-yo trick.  Read what Newton has to say about that on that page you cited.  Consider his analogy with a magnet.  "So the gravitation between the earth and its parts is mutual."

Also, in case you're hung up on Netwon's language of a pressure, I'd recommend updating your understanding of gravity to something in line with the last hundred years.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature. #### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6318 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #9 on: January 09, 2020, 09:20:54 AM »
You did not describe the forces acting on the rope.

Even here there will be two forces acting on each end of the rope.

X end of the rope: horse is pulling with force -A, force A reacting on the horse, the stone is exerting through the rope a force B on the horse.

Forces acting on the rope at the X end: -A and -B (reaction forces)

Y end of the rope: -B, while the horse is pulling with force -A

Forces acting on the rope at the Y end: A and B

Double the forces needed in the Newtonian description of mechanics.

Meanwhile, here's the fun part: this has nothing to do with gravity.  There is no gravitational tension between bodies.  Our sun isn't swinging planets around on a tether like an out-of-control yo-yo trick.

When science teachers are asked how does gravity work, they answer in this manner:

Gravity is a force.

Gravity is directed towards the center of the orbit i.e. the sun.

That makes gravity the centripetal force.

Imagine a ball attached to a string and you are holding the other end of the string and moving your hand in such a way that the ball is in circular motion. Then tension in the string is centripetal force.

Now, ball = earth

you = sun

tension in the string = gravity

Gravity is the reason one object orbits another. An analogy is swinging a ball on a string over your head. The string is like gravity, and it keeps the ball in orbit. If you let go of the string, the ball flies away from you. (Dr. Eric Christian, April 2011)

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4569 (UCSB Science Line)

Centrifugal force acts on a rotating object in a direction opposite the axis of rotation. Imagine that you have a tennis ball tied to a string. If you swing the tennis ball on the string around in a circle, you would feel the ball tugging on the string. That is the centrifugal force on the ball. It is counteracted by tension in the string that you are holding. In this example, the tension force in the string is like the gravitational force between the earth and the sun. The ball doesn't get closer or farther from your hand. If you suddenly cut the string, the ball would go flying away, but that wont happen to the earth because of the sun's gravity.

http://scienceline.ucsb.edu/getkey.php?key=4583

Forces can make something move or stop something from moving. For a planet in orbit around the sun, the string is invisible. That invisible string is the gravitational force between the Earth and the sun. ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #10 on: January 09, 2020, 10:00:39 AM »
You did not describe the forces acting on the rope.

Double the forces needed in the Newtonian description of mechanics.
Don't you find it a little suspicious that you're the only person to claim this in hundreds of years?  Wouldn't it be far more likely that you are misunderstanding something?  Just because you're a smart guy doesn't mean you don't make mistakes.  Humility is the first step to learning.

tension in the string = gravity
Tension in a rope that is fixed on one end applies a force of the swinging body in the direction of the center.  In this picture, the free body diagram of a swinging body is indeed analogous to the free body diagram of an orbiting body.  But don't take this analogy too far.  For example, if the orbit of a satellite changes to increase its distance from earth, the force of gravity does not increase correspondingly.  There is no string attaching the satellite to the earth, after all.  There are equal forces acting on the string, but there are not forces acting on the gravity that holds a body in orbit.  So no force doubling is required.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature. #### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6318 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #11 on: January 09, 2020, 10:06:04 AM »
There are equal forces acting on the string, but there are not forces acting on the gravity that holds a body in orbit.  So no force doubling is required.

But there is:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1909690#msg1909690

We have been left certain clues along the way, from the group of people who wrote the works attributed to Newton and Huygens, which point out the sheer fallacy of the law of universal gravitational attraction:

That gravity should be innate, inherent, and essential to matter, so that one body can act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man, who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking, can ever fall into it.

Huygens dismissed the attraction concept:

Concerning the cause of the flux given by M. Newton, I am by no means satisfied [by it], nor by all the other theories that he builds upon his principle of attraction, which to me seems absurd, as I have already mentioned in the addition to the Discourse on Gravity. And I have often wondered how he could have given himself all the trouble of making such a number of investigations and difficult calculations that have no other foundation than this very principle."

?

#### Unconvinced

• 1485 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #12 on: January 09, 2020, 11:09:05 AM »
My example is perfect.

You haven't studied the situation being described at all.

RE equation leads to this: A = -B.

You wrote A=B.

The RE analysis leads to a total disaster, where the basic requirement is this |A|=|B|.

Which can NEVER be the case.

Force A can never equal force B.

Even if we had, as an example, force A = 100.000,000,000,021 N and force B = 100.000,000,000,034 N, it would still NOT satisfy the RE requirement which is this: |A|=|B|.

The RE analysis leads directly to the ONLY case which can never be experienced in reality.

Here is the correct FE analysis.

Two boats pulled toward each other on a lake.

Man from boat X is pulling with force A, directed to the left.

Man from boat Y is pulling with force B, directed to the right.

Forces A and B are, of course, of different magnitude.

What are the forces acting on boat X?

To the left we will have a negative direction.

Boat X will be acted upon by TWO FORCES: A (the reaction force on the action force -A) and B.

What are the forces acting on the left end side of the rope?

-A and -B.

What are the forces acting boat Y?

To the right we will have the positive direction.

Boat Y will be acted upon by two forces: -B (the reaction force on the action force B) and
-A.

What are the forces acting on the right end side of the rope?

A and B.

Net force on boat X: A + B

Net force on boat Y: -A - B

Net force on the string: [-A - B] + [A + B]

The string/rope will not move: [-A - B] + [A + B] = 0

All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

The man in boat X is pulling on the rope, while at the same time boat Y is pulling on that same rope with force B. The correct analysis must take these facts into account.

What youve done here is introduce a spurious additional term.

Lets go back a step.  Two men are holding each end of a rope.  First man pulls with force A.  To stay put, the second man has to resist this force, which you are calling a reaction force.

But what does resisting this force feel like?  It feels like pulling, doesnt it?  So each man is pulling with force A.

Maybe the second man then gives it some extra welly, with an additional force B so both men are now pulling with A+B.  That just means both men are now pulling harder.

Whatever.  Both men pull the same amount.

Or, lets cut the rope in half and stick a force gauge in the middle.  The gauge reads 50N.  Thats the force between the two men, thats what they are both pulling.

This is analogous to the force of gravity.  The force between the two objects.  No doubling required.

In my first post I mentioned free body diagrams.  Honestly, they help. ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #13 on: January 09, 2020, 11:17:02 AM »
Huygens dismissed the attraction concept
Huygens lived in the 1600s, bro.

In my first post I mentioned free body diagrams.  Honestly, they help.
I second the motion.

Sandokhan, if you're unfamiliar with free body diagrams, or if you're not confident on how to create or use them, there are many good and reputable sites online and videos on YT that will help you.  I have no doubt you'll pick up the technique easily.  I highly encourage you to take advantage of these tools.
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature. #### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6318 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #14 on: January 09, 2020, 11:17:38 AM »
So each man is pulling with force A.

No.

On one end of the rope we place Queen Elizabeth I, on the other end we have Henry VIII.

Not the same force.

It can NEVER be the same. No two persons can pull with the same force.

Both men pull the same amount.

No.

We have two forces: A and B.

Always different.

Or, lets cut the rope in half and stick a force gauge in the middle.  The gauge reads 50N.

Doesn't matter.

You still have TWO FORCES acting on each end of the rope.

DOUBLE the forces required by Newtonian mechanics.

Both boats will start to move toward each other.

Then, both the Moon and the Earth should also start to move toward each other.

That is why the double forces of attractive gravitation paradox is so devastating. ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #15 on: January 09, 2020, 12:09:21 PM »
Signatures are displayed at the bottom of each post or personal message. BBCode and smileys may be used in your signature.

?

#### Unconvinced

• 1485 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #16 on: January 09, 2020, 12:39:07 PM »
So each man is pulling with force A.

No.

On one end of the rope we place Queen Elizabeth I, on the other end we have Henry VIII.

Not the same force.

It can NEVER be the same. No two persons can pull with the same force.

Both men pull the same amount.

No.

We have two forces: A and B.

Always different.

Or, lets cut the rope in half and stick a force gauge in the middle.  The gauge reads 50N.

Doesn't matter.

You still have TWO FORCES acting on each end of the rope.

DOUBLE the forces required by Newtonian mechanics.

Both boats will start to move toward each other.

Then, both the Moon and the Earth should also start to move toward each other.

That is why the double forces of attractive gravitation paradox is so devastating.

If Henry VIII and Elizabeth I are having a tug of war and neither is moving, they are in equilibrium and are pulling the same amount by definition.

If Liz is too strong for Henry, she pulls him over onto his fat arse.

Simple.

PS. I like the way you are not only trying to debunk gravity, but probably the most fundamental principle in engineering.  Interesting that all the worlds engineers have had their calculations wrong all this time, but things still work and not one of them has noticed such a basic problem.

?

#### JackBlack

• 13304 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #17 on: January 09, 2020, 01:25:50 PM »
The doubles forces of attractive gravitation is one of the most devastating arguments against RE.
Except it is all in your head, and has been repeatedly refuted.
You weren't even able to address basics of how forces on a rope act, so how do you hope to deal with gravity?

And of course, rather than link to the debate, where you were repeatedly refuted before you fled, you link to your compilation of dishonesty.

Complete demonstration, using FE and RE equations:
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg1905467#msg1905467
Yes, a complete demonstration that your hypothesis is wrong. YOU CANNOT HAVE DIFFERENT FORCES ON THE ROPE!

Person at one end pulls on the rope with a force of A, person a the other end pulls with B.
Thus A=-B.
This is the ONLY option.

You even reach effectively the same result in your analysis, you just label the forces differently.
Instead of A, you have A+B.
This is the force that the the person holding the rope at boat x is applying to the rope.
Instead of B, you have -A-B.

It isn't including twice the forces, it is just relabelling the forces.

It is the exact same setup, just with different labels, which again shows that the 2 forces are equal and opposite, and that you cannot have a situation like this where one person pulls on the rope with some force, and the person at the other end pulls with a different force (i.e. different in magnitude).

What you are doing is equivalent to starting with the hypothesis that 1=2 (or that 3/3 != 1), and then complaining that people show that that hypothesis is wrong.

Your paradox is based upon a blatant rejection of reality, where you complain that people show your rejection of reality is wrong.

Your false hypothesis can never happen if the net force on the rope is 0.
The only way to have it happen is if you go to a rope with mass which is accelerated. Then there is a net force on the rope and the rope moves.
Otherwise, there cannot be any net force on the rope and thus you must have A+B=0. There is no alternative.

If you wish to claim there is tell us how this extra force is magically applied to the rope?

Is it the person pulling on the rope applying a force of A+B?
Or do they only pull with a force of A, with the rope just magically getting the force of B from nothing at all? #### rabinoz

• 26525
• Real Earth Believer ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #18 on: January 09, 2020, 02:53:25 PM »
So each man is pulling with force A.
No.
On one end of the rope we place Queen Elizabeth I, on the other end we have Henry VIII.
Not the same force.
If they are pulling on each end of an ideal massless "rope" the forces cannot be different - end of story!

Quote from: sandokhan
It can NEVER be the same. No two persons can pull with the same force.
But if Henry VIII is stronger than Queen Elizabeth I she simply gets pulled along. What's so hard about that?

Throw the rope away and have Henry VIII grab Queen Elizabeth I by the hands. What happens then? She gets pulled over.

Have you ever been involved in a tug-of-war? If one team is stronger than the other they simply pull the weaker team along.

But in all these cases the force on the rope is equal to the lesser of the capabilities of those doing the pulling.

Quote from: MIT
Tension interaction
Ropes, wires, strings, etc. are commonly used to provide force in everyday situations. A force provided by a rope or string is generally called a tension force.
Tension as a Force

Properties of Ideal Ropes
When discussing ropes, strings, etc. in this course, it will generally be that they have zero mass. In this case, their behavior is fairly simple. The important aspects can be summarized with two simple rules:

A segment of a massless rope can only exert a tension force if it is stretched between two points of contact with other objects.
If a massless rope is stretched between two points of contact with other objects, the tension force exerted by a given segment of the rope on the objects on either side will be equal in size and will point directly along the rope segment.

Tension as Constraint
Tension does not have an associated force law like gravitational or elastic restoring forces do. Instead, tension acts as a constraint. It will take on whatever value is necessary to keep the objects joined by the rope at the same separation.

Tension and Energy
Tension is a non-conservative force, and therefore has no associated potential energy. When tension is internal, however, it is a non-dissipative force, performing zero net work on the chosen system. The reason is that an ideal rope cannot stretch, which guarantees that the two interacting objects will undergo the same displacement. Thus, the work done on the two objects will cancel by Newton's Third Law. #### MaNaeSWolf

• 1983
• Show me the evidence ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2020, 02:36:41 AM »
discussions with sandokhan is like arguing with someone who traveled 1000 years to the future, and still refuses to believe that scientific progress and understanding have improved. He just ignores everything from the last few hundred years.

I wonder how he manages to use the internet.

?

#### Platonius21

• 450 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #20 on: January 17, 2020, 07:21:39 PM »
I think when folks like Sandokhan and Wise were babies they were accidentally given an anti-science vaccine instead of a measles vaccine. You can't convince them of anything, they are immune. ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #21 on: January 17, 2020, 10:19:03 PM »
There is no basis for discussion here.

Without an acceptance of a global earth and gravity, of course there will be a paradox with observable reality and the theoretical sciences.
A theory is not a fact. An insult is not an argument. #### rabinoz

• 26525
• Real Earth Believer ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #22 on: January 17, 2020, 11:34:28 PM »
There is no basis for discussion here.

Without an acceptance of a global earth and gravity, of course there will be a paradox with observable reality and the theoretical sciences.
But gravitation, as mass appearing to attract mass, has been measured hundreds of times to far higher precision than any flat-Earther has ever managed.
Not only that but it has been qualitatively demonstrated hundreds of time.

But you cannot deny that "something" holds you down on the Earth with a force equal to your weight - what is that "something"?

But all that is irrelevant to the topic. Did you read this part of the OP?
Quote
This example may help visualize the double force issue.

Let there be two rafts ( x and y )  freely floating on a clear calm lake with a rope between them.
Both rafts are still and are a rope length apart.
The man on (raft x) pulls on the rope which is attached to raft y.
Raft x will move toward raft y, and raft y will move toward raft x.
Both rafts will receive equal and opposite force and motion.
It is not possible for (raft x) to remain still and be the source of the force.
More detail can be found in Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Is the tension on an "ideal rope" (massless) the same at each end? « Message by sandokhan on May 16, 2018, 07:04:50 AM »

?

#### JackBlack

• 13304 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #23 on: January 18, 2020, 01:25:44 AM »
There is no basis for discussion here.

Without an acceptance of a global earth and gravity, of course there will be a paradox with observable reality and the theoretical sciences.
Nope, his fake paradox has absolutely nothing to do with gravity and instead is just simple Newtonian physics.
Look at the examples he is using, with a rope, with nothing at all to do with gravity.

It is just his misunderstanding of physics or intentionally lying about it. #### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6318 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #24 on: January 18, 2020, 01:56:13 AM »
The double forces of gravitation paradox is very real.

It is devastating for the RET.

Very simple to understand.

Now, the complete demonstration that indeed there will be two forces acting on boat X, and two forces acting on boat Y.

Two boats on lake, boat X and boat Y, are being pulled toward each other using a single rope by the two men on each boat.

The force applied by the first man is force A.

The force applied by the second man is force B.

They are of different magnitude to start with, A does not equal B.

Here is how the RE analysis goes, reaching a most profound contradiction:

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is -B.
The net force on the string is A+B.
As the string isn't moving, the net force on the string is 0, so A+B=0 so B=-A.

The net force on boat x is -A.
The net force on boat y is A.
The net force on the string is A-A=0.

By the very hypothesis, A DOES NOT EQUAL B.

A cannot equal B.

Yet, by using the twisted RE logic, using only a single force acting on boat X (respectively on boat Y), the analysis reaches a point where the absolute value of A equals the absolute value of B. A most direct contradiction of the hypothesis.

The RE analysis leads to a total disaster, where the basic requirement is this |A|=|B|.

Which can NEVER be the case.

Force A can never equal force B.

Even if we had, as an example, force A = 100.000,000,000,021 N and force B = 100.000,000,000,034 N, it would still NOT satisfy the RE requirement which is this: |A|=|B|.

The RE analysis leads directly to the ONLY case which can never be experienced in reality.

Here is the correct FE analysis.

Two boats pulled toward each other on a lake.

Man from boat X is pulling with force A, directed to the left.

Man from boat Y is pulling with force B, directed to the right.

Forces A and B are, of course, of different magnitude.

What are the forces acting on boat X?

To the left we will have a negative direction.

Boat X will be acted upon by TWO FORCES: A (the reaction force on the action force -A) and B.

What are the forces acting on the left end side of the rope?

-A and -B.

What are the forces acting boat Y?

To the right we will have the positive direction.

Boat Y will be acted upon by two forces: -B (the reaction force on the action force B) and
-A.

What are the forces acting on the right end side of the rope?

A and B.

Net force on boat X: A + B

Net force on boat Y: -A - B

Net force on the string: [-A - B] + [A + B]

The string/rope will not move: [-A - B] + [A + B] = 0

All forces balance out perfectly.

But they include TWICE THE FORCES NEEDED in the Newtonian system.

The man in boat X is pulling on the rope, while at the same time boat Y is pulling on that same rope with force B. The correct analysis must take these facts into account.

A perfect demonstration that there are indeed two forces acting on boat X, respectively on boat Y: the equations work out in total balance, no wild substitutions are to be made, no contradiction is to be reached at all.

?

#### JackBlack

• 13304 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #25 on: January 18, 2020, 02:40:21 AM »
The double forces of gravitation paradox is very real.

Again, what is the net force on the rope at Side A?
What is it at side B?
Notice how these are equal and opposite?
That means the very basis of your claim IS FANTASY!

There are no twice the forces involved, just you inventing a hypothetical situation which cannot describe reality at all and results in a direct contradiction of your hypothesis, directly refuting yourself.

?

#### Unconvinced

• 1485 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #26 on: January 18, 2020, 03:00:53 AM »
Wow.  A cut and paste from a few posts up.  Is that a new record?

Whats the point in saying the exact same thing again?  Several people have pointed out where you went wrong.

Can I make this any easier for you to get?  Ill try.

You said at the beginning that the forces on either side cant be equal, then set about balancing the forces so they are equal on both sides.

So which is it?  Do the forces need to be balanced or not? #### rabinoz

• 26525
• Real Earth Believer ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #27 on: January 18, 2020, 03:01:44 AM »
The double forces of gravitation paradox is very real.

It is devastating for the RET.

Very simple to understand.

Now, the complete demonstration that indeed there will be two forces acting on boat X, and two forces acting on boat Y.

Two boats on lake, boat X and boat Y, are being pulled toward each other using a single rope by the two men on each boat.

The force applied by the first man is force A.

The force applied by the second man is force B.

They are of different magnitude to start with, A does not equal B.
If the two men are connected by a massless rope the forces applied to each end must be equal in magnitude because a massless rope is simply a connector.

End of story!

Quote from: sandokhan
Here is how the RE analysis goes, reaching a most profound contradiction:
No it doesn't!

The twin men might be capable of applying very different forces but that is immaterial.

But in all these cases the force on the rope cannot be more than the lesser of the capabilities of those doing the pulling.

Quote from: MIT
Tension interaction
Ropes, wires, strings, etc. are commonly used to provide force in everyday situations. A force provided by a rope or string is generally called a tension force.
Tension as a Force

Properties of Ideal Ropes
When discussing ropes, strings, etc. in this course, it will generally be that they have zero mass. In this case, their behavior is fairly simple. The important aspects can be summarized with two simple rules:

A segment of a massless rope can only exert a tension force if it is stretched between two points of contact with other objects.
If a massless rope is stretched between two points of contact with other objects, the tension force exerted by a given segment of the rope on the objects on either side will be equal in size and will point directly along the rope segment.

Tension as Constraint
Tension does not have an associated force law like gravitational or elastic restoring forces do. Instead, tension acts as a constraint. It will take on whatever value is necessary to keep the objects joined by the rope at the same separation.

Tension and Energy
Tension is a non-conservative force, and therefore has no associated potential energy. When tension is internal, however, it is a non-dissipative force, performing zero net work on the chosen system. The reason is that an ideal rope cannot stretch, which guarantees that the two interacting objects will undergo the same displacement. Thus, the work done on the two objects will cancel by Newton's Third Law.

MIT makes sense but your "DOUBLE FORCES . . . . . PARADOX" is quite illogical. #### sandokhan

• Flat Earth Sultan
• Flat Earth Scientist
• 6318 ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #28 on: January 18, 2020, 03:08:49 AM »
The equations are very clear and direct: you need to deal with real life situations where two different persons will apply two different forces on each end of the rope.

What are the forces acting on the left end side of the rope?

-A and -B.

What are the forces acting on the right end side of the rope?

A and B.

DOUBLE THE FORCES needed in Newtonian mechanics!

This means that both boats will start to travel towards each other.

Now, the Earth and the Moon should also start to travel towards each other: the very same mechanism applies, the supposed attractive force of gravity.

What? Massless rope?

Cut the crap.

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=75798.0

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=71192.msg1931730#msg1931730 #### rabinoz

• 26525
• Real Earth Believer ##### Re: Debating: DOUBLE FORCES OF ATTRACTIVE GRAVITATION PARADOX II
« Reply #29 on: January 18, 2020, 04:38:52 AM »
The equations are very clear and direct:
The questions might be but your logic is pure crap. Equations are useless if they do not represent a real system

Quote from: sandokhan
you need to deal with real life situations where two different persons will apply two different forces on each end of the rope.
No, it's you who refuse to "to deal with real life situations".

Two different persons simply cannot apply two different forces on each end of the rope - it is quite impossible!

This has been explained to you numerous time but you won't believe us and you won't believe MIT.

Look my 4WD, in low range, has a draw-bar capability of about 2000 kg but a small kid on his trolley can only pull about 10 kg.

What strength rope do I need to connect the boy, pulling as hard as he possibly can, to the 4WD? Is it:
• 10 kg + a bit for safety,
• 2000 kg + a bit for safety or
• 2010 kg + a bit for safety?