ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist

  • 2258 Replies
  • 55269 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1980 on: May 13, 2021, 10:39:42 PM »
There are forces acting on an object.
Always.

Quote from: Bored

To identify those forces you need a reference point. The chosen reference point is an object with no forces acting on it.
That can never happen so it can never be any reference point.


Quote from: Bored

Motion works the same way.
You need a point of reference to measure position or velocity. You are then going to treat that reference point as being stationary.
In normal everyday person made readings of speed and direction to gain a basic acceptance of velocity...it's fine.

What is not fne is constant velocity.


Quote from: Bored

You are claiming it is impossible to have any point of reference?
No I'm not.
You're trying to claim I'm claiming that.


Quote from: Bored

This is why you refuse to answer :
*What forces are always acting on an object?
Atmosphere and whatever other physical forces are applied along with it.


Quote from: Bored

*Can the forces always acting on an object be measured?
Not likely. I don't think we have the equipment to fully measure right down to the initial molecular set up.


Quote from: Bored

*How do you determine an objects velocity, if you don't have a reference point if nothing can be stationary?
You determine is how we always do, by taking an average for speed and direction, meaning a specific reading over time and an average velocity from that.


I'm happy to go along with that but constant velocity is not a reality.

If you want to argue constant as in consistent, as in keeping up a velocity, then I'll accept that but that kills off the notion of any argument of something moving at a set velocity forever if nothing alters that, as in, with your no external force...because it simply cannot happen and cannot be used to gauge anything other than a fantasy.



Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1981 on: May 13, 2021, 10:58:21 PM »
I don't think you could.
You could have just left it as you don't think.

Again, the fact you need a seatbelt and brakes to quickly stop a car and occupants shows that you do not need a force to continue motion. You might need a force to overcome another force, but that is an entirely separate issue.
Again, inertia is resistance to a CHANGE in motion, not simply resistance to motion.
Nothing has a magical property of resistance to motion. The closest you get is resistance to change in motion and resistance to relative motion.

But if your delusional garbage was correct, and somehow the air magically pushes in direct defiance of a pressure gradient, that air resistance should result in the object massively speeding up, not slowing down relative to the air.

Again, by what magic does your magical air magically maintain a magical pressure gradient?
By what magic does this magical air of yours magically make the pressure gradient proportional to weight of the fluid?
By what magic does this magical air magically stop the magical high pressure region from decompressing and pushing up the low pressure region above?
By what magic does the magical low pressure air above magically push down an object into a much greater force/resistance of the magical high pressure below?
By what magic does this magical air then magically decide to magically push up some objects instead of magically pushing them down?
By what magic does the air push things down and then resist that downwards motion so differently?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1982 on: May 13, 2021, 11:10:33 PM »
I don't think you could.
You could have just left it as you don't think.

Again, the fact you need a seatbelt and brakes to quickly stop a car and occupants shows that you do not need a force to continue motion.
The fact you need a seat belt and brakes to stop a car is of no consequence to what I've just said.

We can argue this bit at any time but first try and verify constant velocity and the words of "an object in motion will stay in motion unless acted upon by an external force."

You must have spent a little bit of time trying to think of how to twist this before you come back in.
A poor attempt.

Quote from: JackBlack
You might need a force to overcome another force, but that is an entirely separate issue.
It is a separate issue if you are hanging onto the fantasy of no force and no resistance.


Quote from: JackBlack
Again, inertia is resistance to a CHANGE in motion, not simply resistance to motion.
Nothing has a magical property of resistance to motion. The closest you get is resistance to change in motion and resistance to relative motion.
A resistance to motion is a change in motion by that resistance.

Your twisting techniques are inadequate.

*

sokarul

  • 18689
  • Extra Racist
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1983 on: May 13, 2021, 11:42:23 PM »
Unless you can give me a scenario where there is no resistance to motion and show me how constant velocity can be achieved....you have nothing.
We could, but you would dismiss it as fake.

I don't think you could.

You wouldn’t know but air tables and air rails are used in physics labs to lower force from friction. It helps in experiments.
I'm not arguing about lower force.
I'm arguing against the notion of no force/friction.
The lack of an object with zero force on it does not nullify the saying.

There are plenty of objects close to zero force.

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1984 on: May 14, 2021, 12:04:39 AM »
Unless you can give me a scenario where there is no resistance to motion and show me how constant velocity can be achieved....you have nothing.
We could, but you would dismiss it as fake.

I don't think you could.

You wouldn’t know but air tables and air rails are used in physics labs to lower force from friction. It helps in experiments.
I'm not arguing about lower force.
I'm arguing against the notion of no force/friction.
The lack of an object with zero force on it does not nullify the saying.

There are plenty of objects close to zero force.
Not the answer, is it?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1985 on: May 14, 2021, 12:08:30 AM »
The fact you need a seat belt and brakes to stop a car is of no consequence to what I've just said.
It shows that your claim that a force is needed to keep an object in motion is pure garbage.
If that was the case, as soon you stop applying a force, it would stop.

Quote from: JackBlack
Again, inertia is resistance to a CHANGE in motion, not simply resistance to motion.
Nothing has a magical property of resistance to motion. The closest you get is resistance to change in motion and resistance to relative motion.
A resistance to motion is a change in motion by that resistance.
Which in no way addresses what I said.
Inertia is NOT resistance to motion. It is resistance to CHANGE in motion. This is shown by needing a force to slow down a car, and a seatbelt to stop the occupant flying through the window.
Air resistance is NOT resistance to motion. It is resistance to RELATIVE motion. This is shown by the wind moving objects.

Your twisting techniques are inadequate.
There you go projecting your own inadequacies again.

Have you thought of answers to the simple questions which show your model is BS yet?
Again, by what magic does your magical air magically maintain a magical pressure gradient?
By what magic does this magical air of yours magically make the pressure gradient proportional to weight of the fluid?
By what magic does this magical air magically stop the magical high pressure region from decompressing and pushing up the low pressure region above?
By what magic does the magical low pressure air above magically push down an object into a much greater force/resistance of the magical high pressure below?
By what magic does this magical air then magically decide to magically push up some objects instead of magically pushing them down?
By what magic does the air push things down and then resist that downwards motion so differently?

*

sokarul

  • 18689
  • Extra Racist
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1986 on: May 14, 2021, 01:07:51 AM »
Unless you can give me a scenario where there is no resistance to motion and show me how constant velocity can be achieved....you have nothing.
We could, but you would dismiss it as fake.

I don't think you could.

You wouldn’t know but air tables and air rails are used in physics labs to lower force from friction. It helps in experiments.
I'm not arguing about lower force.
I'm arguing against the notion of no force/friction.
The lack of an object with zero force on it does not nullify the saying.

There are plenty of objects close to zero force.
Not the answer, is it?
Do you even know what forces act on objects in space?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41646
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1987 on: May 14, 2021, 06:33:37 AM »
Here's the key so absorb it and remember it.

unless acted upon by an external force

There is never a time when any object is not acted upon by an external force. Never.

This means the actual saying and supposed law, is nonsense. It does not exist as anything because the attempted meaning is nothing other than fantasy.
*sigh* Never underestimate how useful fantasy can be as a tool for helping one to better understand the nuances of the real world.
There's nothing wrong with fantasy as long as it's not pushed out as factual.
No one is claiming that an environment with no external forces is factual.  We're just saying that this is how an object would act if such an environment could exist.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1988 on: May 14, 2021, 02:55:22 PM »

Are you really saying there's no law applying to a constant velocity?
Yes, there's no natural law, that's what I'm saying.


Quote from: MicroBeta
To quote Newton directly:
  • The vis insita, or innate force of matter, is a power of resisting, by which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavours to persevere in its present state, whether it be of rest, or of moving uniformly forward in a right line."
IOW, he said, in part, an object in motion will remain in motion at a constant velocity, in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force.

Mike
And I'll say it again.
An object in motion will never remain in motion at any constant velocity if no force is acted upon it.
Without force you have no motion.
With force you cannot have constant velocity. It cannot happen in any scenario.
Wow.  You really don't know what that means do you?  Of course, a force would have to be applied to the object to start it moving. 

It literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving.  However, once an object is moving, another force is required to change it's direction or stop it.

Nowhere does it say or imply that an object can move on its own...to reiterate, it literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving. 

You demonstrated you do not understand what the laws of motion mean.

Mike
« Last Edit: May 14, 2021, 03:59:14 PM by MicroBeta »
Since it costs 1.82˘ to produce a penny, putting in your 2˘ if really worth 3.64˘.

*

Mikey T.

  • 2658
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1989 on: May 14, 2021, 08:59:24 PM »

Are you really saying there's no law applying to a constant velocity?
Yes, there's no natural law, that's what I'm saying.


Quote from: MicroBeta
To quote Newton directly:
  • The vis insita, or innate force of matter, is a power of resisting, by which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavours to persevere in its present state, whether it be of rest, or of moving uniformly forward in a right line."
IOW, he said, in part, an object in motion will remain in motion at a constant velocity, in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force.

Mike
And I'll say it again.
An object in motion will never remain in motion at any constant velocity if no force is acted upon it.
Without force you have no motion.
With force you cannot have constant velocity. It cannot happen in any scenario.
Wow.  You really don't know what that means do you?  Of course, a force would have to be applied to the object to start it moving. 

It literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving.  However, once an object is moving, another force is required to change it's direction or stop it.

Nowhere does it say or imply that an object can move on its own...to reiterate, it literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving. 

You demonstrated you do not understand what the laws of motion mean.

Mike
Dude. are you surprised?  His entire life is denial.  If I cared more, I might feel sorry for him, but I do "suffer" from intense bouts of Schadenfreude when the victims are con artists, liars, and the self deluded asshats.  Schadenfreude (/ˈʃɑːdənfrɔɪdə/; German: [ˈʃaːdn̩ˌfʁɔʏ̯də]; lit. 'harm-joy') is the experience of pleasure, joy, or self-satisfaction that comes from learning of or witnessing the troubles, failures, or humiliation of another.

*

lonely toast

  • Tide Pod Challenger
  • 980
  • Гопник
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1990 on: May 14, 2021, 09:03:14 PM »
I'm pretty sure hot gas rises.
The one true slav to rule them all!
Единственный истинный славянин, который будет править ими всеми!

*

Mikey T.

  • 2658
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1991 on: May 14, 2021, 09:24:01 PM »
I'm pretty sure hot gas rises.
Some hot gases rise.  Hot/more energetic molecules move around more, thus spread out, thus occupying more volume without changing mass, becoming less dense and can get to a point to where it's density is low enough to achieve enough buoyancy to float in the atmospheric density.  The lower it's density the higher it will float, it will not however float on a density layer that is lower than it is.  The atmosphere is arranged in a pressure gradient from near vacuum down to sea level pressure.  If a balloon is filled with hot air and that hot air has enough energy imparted on it from the heating to make it about as dense as the atmosphere is at say 1000 ft above sea level then the hot air balloon will float near that level depending on how much payload it may be carrying, i.e. the material of the balloon itself. 
So yes, for the simple minded "hot air float"

*

lonely toast

  • Tide Pod Challenger
  • 980
  • Гопник
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1992 on: May 14, 2021, 09:28:28 PM »
I'm pretty sure hot gas rises.
Some hot gases rise.  Hot/more energetic molecules move around more, thus spread out, thus occupying more volume without changing mass, becoming less dense and can get to a point to where it's density is low enough to achieve enough buoyancy to float in the atmospheric density.  The lower it's density the higher it will float, it will not however float on a density layer that is lower than it is.  The atmosphere is arranged in a pressure gradient from near vacuum down to sea level pressure.  If a balloon is filled with hot air and that hot air has enough energy imparted on it from the heating to make it about as dense as the atmosphere is at say 1000 ft above sea level then the hot air balloon will float near that level depending on how much payload it may be carrying, i.e. the material of the balloon itself. 
So yes, for the simple minded "hot air float"
Can you explain it simply becasue im a bitt tired and don't want too read .ucmh
The one true slav to rule them all!
Единственный истинный славянин, который будет править ими всеми!

*

Mikey T.

  • 2658
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1993 on: May 14, 2021, 10:12:01 PM »
I'm pretty sure hot gas rises.
Some hot gases rise.  Hot/more energetic molecules move around more, thus spread out, thus occupying more volume without changing mass, becoming less dense and can get to a point to where it's density is low enough to achieve enough buoyancy to float in the atmospheric density.  The lower it's density the higher it will float, it will not however float on a density layer that is lower than it is.  The atmosphere is arranged in a pressure gradient from near vacuum down to sea level pressure.  If a balloon is filled with hot air and that hot air has enough energy imparted on it from the heating to make it about as dense as the atmosphere is at say 1000 ft above sea level then the hot air balloon will float near that level depending on how much payload it may be carrying, i.e. the material of the balloon itself. 
So yes, for the simple minded "hot air float"
Can you explain it simply becasue im a bitt tired and don't want too read .ucmh
Go to bed then.  The words will be there in the morning.  This is the about the lamest shit yet.

*

lonely toast

  • Tide Pod Challenger
  • 980
  • Гопник
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1994 on: May 14, 2021, 10:17:41 PM »
I'm pretty sure hot gas rises.
Some hot gases rise.  Hot/more energetic molecules move around more, thus spread out, thus occupying more volume without changing mass, becoming less dense and can get to a point to where it's density is low enough to achieve enough buoyancy to float in the atmospheric density.  The lower it's density the higher it will float, it will not however float on a density layer that is lower than it is.  The atmosphere is arranged in a pressure gradient from near vacuum down to sea level pressure.  If a balloon is filled with hot air and that hot air has enough energy imparted on it from the heating to make it about as dense as the atmosphere is at say 1000 ft above sea level then the hot air balloon will float near that level depending on how much payload it may be carrying, i.e. the material of the balloon itself. 
So yes, for the simple minded "hot air float"
Can you explain it simply becasue im a bitt tired and don't want too read .ucmh
Go to bed then.  The words will be there in the morning.  This is the about the lamest shit yet.
Me: "I'm tired and need to sleep"
That soda I drank earlier: "I'm about to end this man's whole career".
P.s I had to use the autocorrect to write this.
P.p.s it wasn't working earlier.
The one true slav to rule them all!
Единственный истинный славянин, который будет править ими всеми!

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1995 on: May 15, 2021, 01:36:43 AM »
The fact you need a seat belt and brakes to stop a car is of no consequence to what I've just said.
It shows that your claim that a force is needed to keep an object in motion is pure garbage.

The only possible reason you could ever say that is due to your belief that things can move forever in space.
So I'm not surprised you would argue it.

You believe in magic unicorns and I don't. That's basically it when it comes to this stuff.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1996 on: May 15, 2021, 01:37:46 AM »

Do you even know what forces act on objects in space?
Why don't you enlighten me.

*

sokarul

  • 18689
  • Extra Racist
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1997 on: May 15, 2021, 01:43:34 AM »

Do you even know what forces act on objects in space?
Why don't you enlighten me.
If you don’t know it defeats your claim that there are zero objects with no force on them.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1998 on: May 15, 2021, 01:45:24 AM »

No one is claiming that an environment with no external forces is factual.  We're just saying that this is how an object would act if such an environment could exist.
But it wouldn't act like that, so how can you say that?

You can have a theory that it may act like you say but then you have to explain why.

Let me make myself clearer.

To move and object you need a force to cause the object to resist that force to then move that object.
One the object is in motion it can only stay in motion with an applied force which has to overcome the resistance of the objects mass and also against the pressure it is within.

You can't use force on an object then leave that object to now ove in a constant motion once that force is removed. It will always slow down.
It will never keep the same velocity.

If you want to argue for zero force upon the object after initial push then you lose the initial push because you cannot push something in nothing. You have zero leverage to resist or push, so no movement at all and to be fair there would also be no object but we won't argue that as of yet as it just complicates things further.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #1999 on: May 15, 2021, 01:48:48 AM »

Are you really saying there's no law applying to a constant velocity?
Yes, there's no natural law, that's what I'm saying.


Quote from: MicroBeta
To quote Newton directly:
  • The vis insita, or innate force of matter, is a power of resisting, by which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavours to persevere in its present state, whether it be of rest, or of moving uniformly forward in a right line."
IOW, he said, in part, an object in motion will remain in motion at a constant velocity, in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force.

Mike
And I'll say it again.
An object in motion will never remain in motion at any constant velocity if no force is acted upon it.
Without force you have no motion.
With force you cannot have constant velocity. It cannot happen in any scenario.
Wow.  You really don't know what that means do you?  Of course, a force would have to be applied to the object to start it moving. 

It literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving.  However, once an object is moving, another force is required to change it's direction or stop it.

Nowhere does it say or imply that an object can move on its own...to reiterate, it literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving. 

You demonstrated you do not understand what the laws of motion mean.

Mike
If  a force is needed to move the object then there will always be a force against that object. It will never move with force...ever.

The laws of motion do not count on this argument of yours, no matter how much you try to dress it up.
This is a fairy story.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2000 on: May 15, 2021, 01:51:51 AM »

Do you even know what forces act on objects in space?
Why don't you enlighten me.
If you don’t know it defeats your claim that there are zero objects with no force on them.
Defeat my claim by showing me how the law works of force pushing an object into motion and that force then leaving the force off that object for that to stay in constant motion/velocity.

Explain how that works.
If you can't then your nah nah attitude is worthless.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2001 on: May 15, 2021, 03:27:54 AM »

No one is claiming that an environment with no external forces is factual.  We're just saying that this is how an object would act if such an environment could exist.
But it wouldn't act like that, so how can you say that?

You can have a theory that it may act like you say but then you have to explain why.

Let me make myself clearer.

To move and object you need a force to cause the object to resist that force to then move that object.
One the object is in motion it can only stay in motion with an applied force which has to overcome the resistance of the objects mass and also against the pressure it is within.

You can't use force on an object then leave that object to now ove in a constant motion once that force is removed. It will always slow down.
It will never keep the same velocity.

If you want to argue for zero force upon the object after initial push then you lose the initial push because you cannot push something in nothing. You have zero leverage to resist or push, so no movement at all and to be fair there would also be no object but we won't argue that as of yet as it just complicates things further.


Why would the object slow down?
Because it chose to on its own?

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2002 on: May 15, 2021, 03:29:40 AM »

Are you really saying there's no law applying to a constant velocity?
Yes, there's no natural law, that's what I'm saying.


Quote from: MicroBeta
To quote Newton directly:
  • The vis insita, or innate force of matter, is a power of resisting, by which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavours to persevere in its present state, whether it be of rest, or of moving uniformly forward in a right line."
IOW, he said, in part, an object in motion will remain in motion at a constant velocity, in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force.

Mike
And I'll say it again.
An object in motion will never remain in motion at any constant velocity if no force is acted upon it.
Without force you have no motion.
With force you cannot have constant velocity. It cannot happen in any scenario.
Wow.  You really don't know what that means do you?  Of course, a force would have to be applied to the object to start it moving. 

It literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving.  However, once an object is moving, another force is required to change it's direction or stop it.

Nowhere does it say or imply that an object can move on its own...to reiterate, it literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving. 

You demonstrated you do not understand what the laws of motion mean.

Mike
If  a force is needed to move the object then there will always be a force against that object. It will never move with force...ever.

The laws of motion do not count on this argument of yours, no matter how much you try to dress it up.
This is a fairy story.
You just proved me right.  You don't have the first clue what the 1st law of motion means.  Clearly any claims you make based on that incorrect understanding are themselves incorrect.
Since it costs 1.82˘ to produce a penny, putting in your 2˘ if really worth 3.64˘.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2003 on: May 15, 2021, 03:29:44 AM »

Do you even know what forces act on objects in space?
Why don't you enlighten me.
If you don’t know it defeats your claim that there are zero objects with no force on them.
Defeat my claim by showing me how the law works of force pushing an object into motion and that force then leaving the force off that object for that to stay in constant motion/velocity.

Explain how that works.
If you can't then your nah nah attitude is worthless.


Aaah the hypocracy returns.

Still yet to draw the circle and show us the massive tilt.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2004 on: May 15, 2021, 03:55:05 AM »

No one is claiming that an environment with no external forces is factual.  We're just saying that this is how an object would act if such an environment could exist.
But it wouldn't act like that, so how can you say that?

You can have a theory that it may act like you say but then you have to explain why.

Let me make myself clearer.

To move and object you need a force to cause the object to resist that force to then move that object.
One the object is in motion it can only stay in motion with an applied force which has to overcome the resistance of the objects mass and also against the pressure it is within.

You can't use force on an object then leave that object to now ove in a constant motion once that force is removed. It will always slow down.
It will never keep the same velocity.

If you want to argue for zero force upon the object after initial push then you lose the initial push because you cannot push something in nothing. You have zero leverage to resist or push, so no movement at all and to be fair there would also be no object but we won't argue that as of yet as it just complicates things further.


Why would the object slow down?
Because it chose to on its own?
Resistance.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2005 on: May 15, 2021, 04:03:35 AM »

Are you really saying there's no law applying to a constant velocity?
Yes, there's no natural law, that's what I'm saying.


Quote from: MicroBeta
To quote Newton directly:
  • The vis insita, or innate force of matter, is a power of resisting, by which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavours to persevere in its present state, whether it be of rest, or of moving uniformly forward in a right line."
IOW, he said, in part, an object in motion will remain in motion at a constant velocity, in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force.

Mike
And I'll say it again.
An object in motion will never remain in motion at any constant velocity if no force is acted upon it.
Without force you have no motion.
With force you cannot have constant velocity. It cannot happen in any scenario.
Wow.  You really don't know what that means do you?  Of course, a force would have to be applied to the object to start it moving. 

It literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving.  However, once an object is moving, another force is required to change it's direction or stop it.

Nowhere does it say or imply that an object can move on its own...to reiterate, it literally says an object at rest need a force to start moving. 

You demonstrated you do not understand what the laws of motion mean.

Mike
If  a force is needed to move the object then there will always be a force against that object. It will never move with force...ever.

The laws of motion do not count on this argument of yours, no matter how much you try to dress it up.
This is a fairy story.
You just proved me right.  You don't have the first clue what the 1st law of motion means.  Clearly any claims you make based on that incorrect understanding are themselves incorrect.
Let's go through it then and let's see how you answer it.

Your adhered to law of motion. Your first so called law.

Law of inertia. ... Law of inertia, also called Newton's first law, postulate in physics that, if a body is at rest or moving at a constant speed in a straight line, it will remain at rest or keep moving in a straight line at constant speed unless it is acted upon by a force.



So basically the law is all about the word "if" it wasn't acted upon by a force.
There is never a time with any object when it is free from force......ever.


So don't tell me that I don't understand the law when there is no law, unless you argue for it being a law of fiction/fantasy.


There's no reasoning your way out of this.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2006 on: May 15, 2021, 05:16:37 AM »

No one is claiming that an environment with no external forces is factual.  We're just saying that this is how an object would act if such an environment could exist.
But it wouldn't act like that, so how can you say that?

You can have a theory that it may act like you say but then you have to explain why.

Let me make myself clearer.

To move and object you need a force to cause the object to resist that force to then move that object.
One the object is in motion it can only stay in motion with an applied force which has to overcome the resistance of the objects mass and also against the pressure it is within.

You can't use force on an object then leave that object to now ove in a constant motion once that force is removed. It will always slow down.
It will never keep the same velocity.

If you want to argue for zero force upon the object after initial push then you lose the initial push because you cannot push something in nothing. You have zero leverage to resist or push, so no movement at all and to be fair there would also be no object but we won't argue that as of yet as it just complicates things further.


Why would the object slow down?
Because it chose to on its own?
Resistance.



There you go.
You now undersrand the 1st law.

My goodness.

Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2007 on: May 15, 2021, 02:27:31 PM »
The fact you need a seat belt and brakes to stop a car is of no consequence to what I've just said.
It shows that your claim that a force is needed to keep an object in motion is pure garbage.
The only possible reason you could ever say that is due to your belief that things can move forever in space.
No, the only possible reason I say that is because that is the logical conclusion from the available evidence.

Not everyone has the same willingness as you to just outright reject reality.
If I was going to just reject reality and believe in delusional BS, I would be a FEer.

Again, if your blatant lie was true, as soon as you stop having a force provided to keep up the motion, the object would stop.
It would be instant.
You take your foot of the gas and the car immediately comes to a stop with all occupants in the car coming to an immediate stop.

The fact you don't, shows that objects will continue to move when a force is not applied.
It shows that a force is needed to stop the object moving.

It will always slow down.
The reason it will slow down is due to air resistance (and other similar forces).
That is a force which resists relative motion.
If you take away that force, it doesn't slow down.

Again, this is shown by plenty of evidence.
We can look at how this force slows a light object down much faster than it slows down a heavy object.
If the object itself was just going to stop, there should be no difference.
But because the same force is applying to different masses, masses which resist change in motion, the lighter object, with less mass, is affected more.

We can also look at changing the resistance, where putting it in water causes it to slow more, and if you reduce the air pressure it slows less.
This can be projected to a point where there is no air resistance, at which point it doesn't slow.

Again, you fail basic mechanics. With that it isn't surprising you fail to have an answer for the simple questions which show your model is garbage:
Again, by what magic does your magical air magically maintain a magical pressure gradient?
By what magic does this magical air of yours magically make the pressure gradient proportional to weight of the fluid?
By what magic does this magical air magically stop the magical high pressure region from decompressing and pushing up the low pressure region above?
By what magic does the magical low pressure air above magically push down an object into a much greater force/resistance of the magical high pressure below?
By what magic does this magical air then magically decide to magically push up some objects instead of magically pushing them down?
By what magic does the air push things down and then resist that downwards motion so differently?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 41646
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2008 on: May 15, 2021, 06:53:56 PM »
There is never a time with any object when it is free from force......ever.
What about when the forces are very small?  So small that they have no effect on the object.  So small that they can be safely ignored.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27784
Re: ANOTHER EXPERIMENT: Gravity Doesn't Exist
« Reply #2009 on: May 16, 2021, 12:27:14 AM »

No one is claiming that an environment with no external forces is factual.  We're just saying that this is how an object would act if such an environment could exist.
But it wouldn't act like that, so how can you say that?

You can have a theory that it may act like you say but then you have to explain why.

Let me make myself clearer.

To move and object you need a force to cause the object to resist that force to then move that object.
One the object is in motion it can only stay in motion with an applied force which has to overcome the resistance of the objects mass and also against the pressure it is within.

You can't use force on an object then leave that object to now ove in a constant motion once that force is removed. It will always slow down.
It will never keep the same velocity.

If you want to argue for zero force upon the object after initial push then you lose the initial push because you cannot push something in nothing. You have zero leverage to resist or push, so no movement at all and to be fair there would also be no object but we won't argue that as of yet as it just complicates things further.


Why would the object slow down?
Because it chose to on its own?
Resistance.



There you go.
You now undersrand the 1st law.

My goodness.
If resistance is the first law then I'm happy with it.

Anything outside of it is not, as in what the supposed law states.

Unless.