WHY would the government trick us?

Does it really though?

Yes, it does.

Or are you making the facts conform to assumptions?

No, that would be you.

There is a significant difference.

Of course there is, that's why we keep pointing it out.

If the density of an object is less than water, it floats atop the surface. Your idea is that gravity pushes it down to prevent it from rising further.  But this is an explanation that assumes that an object only has to answer to one surface or fluid. Nope. It floats atop the water, and sinks under the air.

Gravity is necessary, if for no other reason, to provide a reference to down.  Density is a scalar quantity.  It has magnitude but no direction,  Density doesn't know or care which way is up or down.  Gravity is a vector quantity.  It has both magnitude and direction.  Gravity tells dense objects which way is down and how deep it should sink into a less dense medium.  Not sure why that's so hard to understand.

Does it really though?

Yes, it does.
And unlike your BS, it provides a justification, it works with the pressure gradient, and it tells us the magnitude of the force.

Or are you making the facts conform to assumptions?

You mean what you do all the time?

I'll have my beliefs match the facts, i.e. reality.
I'll leave trying to manipulate reality to match delusional beliefs to the likes of you.

If the density of an object is less than water, it floats atop the surface.

WHY?
Don't just assert it does. Explain why being less dense should make it rise.
Do you have any justification at all?
Can you explain the pressure gradient observed in the fluid, and its effect on this rising or falling?
Can you explain the magnitude of the force, including how if we take a steel ball suspended on a spring balance and lower it into water we observe the weight recorded on the balance to reduce by the weight of the water displaced?

Your idea is that gravity pushes it down to prevent it from rising further.

No, we understand that gravity is applying a downwards force which is balanced by an upwards force from the pressure differential across the object. That includes the pressure from the air pushing down from above and the pressure from the water pushing up from below. You know, the thing you need to keep ignoring because it destroys your delusional BS?
This can also be simplified to a balance of a downwards force due to gravity and an upwards force from the weight of fluid (NOTE: FLUID, that includes both air and water) displaced.

The scale is to buoyancy, not gravity. Negative buoyancy is what causes things to fall. Density is not a force.

Newton wrongly saw this as two different forces, when in fact these are two correlaries of the same force. In fact, an article on buoyancy even says objects sink in water due to negative buoyancy. Then people usually don't make the connection for air.

wtf is negative bouyancy?

that's sceppy talk.

how does the air push something down when all it knows is surface area/

how does air push down through a ceiling?

The scale is to buoyancy, not gravity. Negative buoyancy is what causes things to fall. Density is not a force.

We know that density is not a force, which is why we know simply being denser CANNOT be the reason it falls.
In order for it to fall, it needs a force, and you simply don't have that.

Newton wrongly saw this as two different forces, when in fact these are two correlaries of the same force.

I don't really give a damn about Newton, but importantly, we know they are NOT the same force.

Again, we know through plenty of evidence and experiments, that fluids have a pressure gradient.
e.g. if you go diving the pressure increases as you get deeper.

Anyone with a tiny bit of intelligence who wants to honestly considering what happens as a result (so that excludes you), would realise this pressure gradient creates an upwards force.

That means there MUST be 2 forces.
And that means if an object is floating it must have that upwards force balanced by a downwards force.

If you measure these pressure gradients, and do the math on objects immersed in fluids, you find this is a downwards force proportional to the mass of the object, i.e. its weight, i.e. GRAVITY; and an upwards force proportional to the weight of fluid displaced.

So there is no magical buoyancy like you want to pretend.

And this simple fact is why you continually ignore every question about the observed, measurable, testable pressure gradient; because it kills your delusional BS.

In fact, an article on buoyancy even says objects sink in water due to negative buoyancy. Then people usually don't make the connection for air.

You mean the article you cherry picked from and entirely ignored that it said it was due to gravity?

wtf is negative bouyancy?

that's sceppy talk.

how does the air push something down when all it knows is surface area/

how does air push down through a ceiling?

Try fucking reading sometime.
https://sciencing.com/three-types-buoyancy-10036718.html

Buoyancy measures two competing forces. One force is the downward pressure of the object on the fluid. The other force is the upward pressure of the fluid on the object.

Did you see that? Downward pressure of the object on the fluid. Not downward pressure of gravity on the object.

The three types of buoyancy are positive, negative and neutral.
Positive Buoyancy
Positive buoyancy occurs when an object is lighter than the fluid it displaces. The object will float because the buoyant force is greater than the object’s weight. A swimmer experiences a great amount of buoyant force. Israel’s Dead Sea is famous for attracting floating tourists. Saltwater is less dense than fresh water and provides more buoyant force. Buoyant and net forces are not the same. An object’s volume and density determine its buoyancy.
Negative Buoyancy
Negative buoyancy occurs when an object is denser than the fluid it displaces. The object will sink because its weight is greater than the buoyant force. A submarine is designed to operate underwater by storing and releasing water through ballast tanks. If the command is given to descend, the tanks take in water and increase the vessel's density. Archimedes discovered the king's crown was made of a substance less buoyant than the sunken gold coins.
Neutral Buoyancy
Neutral buoyancy occurs when an object’s weight is equal to the fluid it displaces. A scuba diver is trained in techniques to regulate buoyancy underwater. Swimming horizontally and taking deep, long breaths allow the diver to propel forward, not upward. Fish control buoyancy through an internal swim bladder. Similar to a submarine, the bladder is filled with gas as a means of altering buoyancy.

Try fucking reading sometime.

Try thinking sometime, and reading, and not just the BS you want to see.
From your own source:

When an object is dropped into a fluid, the force of gravity pulls the object down towards the Earth.

Even look at what you quoted:

Quote

The three types of buoyancy are positive, negative and neutral.
Positive Buoyancy
Positive buoyancy occurs when an object is lighter than the fluid it displaces. The object will float because the buoyant force is greater than the object’s weight. A swimmer experiences a great amount of buoyant force. Israel’s Dead Sea is famous for attracting floating tourists. Saltwater is less dense than fresh water and provides more buoyant force. Buoyant and net forces are not the same. An object’s volume and density determine its buoyancy.
Negative Buoyancy
Negative buoyancy occurs when an object is denser than the fluid it displaces. The object will sink because its weight is greater than the buoyant force. A submarine is designed to operate underwater by storing and releasing water through ballast tanks. If the command is given to descend, the tanks take in water and increase the vessel's density. Archimedes discovered the king's crown was made of a substance less buoyant than the sunken gold coins.
Neutral Buoyancy
Neutral buoyancy occurs when an object’s weight is equal to the fluid it displaces. A scuba diver is trained in techniques to regulate buoyancy underwater. Swimming horizontally and taking deep, long breaths allow the diver to propel forward, not upward. Fish control buoyancy through an internal swim bladder. Similar to a submarine, the bladder is filled with gas as a means of altering buoyancy.

i.e. you have a downwards force known as weight, due to gravity, and an upwards force known as buoyancy.

Unlike your nonsense, this works with the pressure gradient and doesn't need to continually hide from it like you do.

As long as you think of weight in Newtonian terms (weight as having to do with gravity) you will never understand what I am saying.

If weight, however, is expressed in pre-Newtonian terms (as in, what regular people mean when they say weight, that is either mass or density), then you have something quite different.

The three types of buoyancy are positive, negative and neutral.
Positive Buoyancy
Positive buoyancy occurs when an object is lighter than the fluid it displaces. The object will float because the buoyant force is greater than the object’s density. A swimmer experiences a great amount of buoyant force. Israel’s Dead Sea is famous for attracting floating tourists. Saltwater is less dense than fresh water and provides more buoyant force. Buoyant and net forces are not the same. An object’s volume and density determine its buoyancy.
Negative Buoyancy
Negative buoyancy occurs when an object is denser than the fluid it displaces. The object will sink because its density is greater than the buoyant force. A submarine is designed to operate underwater by storing and releasing water through ballast tanks. If the command is given to descend, the tanks take in water and increase the vessel's density. Archimedes discovered the king's crown was made of a substance less buoyant than the sunken gold coins.
Neuteal Buoyancy
Neutral buoyancy occurs when an object’s density is equal to the fluid it displaces. A scuba diver is trained in techniques to regulate buoyancy underwater. Swimming horizontally and taking deep, long breaths allow the diver to propel forward, not upward. Fish control buoyancy through an internal swim bladder. Similar to a submarine, the bladder is filled with gas as a means of altering buoyancy.

And yes, they do mean density. They are describing fish using a bladder to puff themselves up, not super-powerful beings bending the foece of gravity in their favor.

Hahha i forgot you tried to use that link before

So dumb

Forgeting things is the first sign of dementia.
Voting democrat is the second.

Should I start calling you grandpa?

In the mean time, yes, I showed a website. I think it was actually a different one, though.

But this is not a fringe idea.

Wikipedia uses the words negative and neutral buoyancy in its discussion about submarines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buoyancy#Submarines

Submarines rise and dive by filling large ballast tanks with seawater. To dive, the tanks are opened to allow air to exhaust out the top of the tanks, while the water flows in from the bottom. Once the weight has been balanced so the overall density of the submarine is equal to the water around it, it has neutral buoyancy and will remain at that depth. Most military submarines operate with a slightly negative buoyancy and maintain depth by using the "lift" of the stabilizers with forward motion.

And when discussing about divers.

Underwater divers are a common example of the problem of unstable buoyancy due to compressibility. The diver typically wears an exposure suit which relies on gas-filled spaces for insulation, and may also wear a buoyancy compensator, which is a variable volume buoyancy bag which is inflated to increase buoyancy and deflated to decrease buoyancy. The desired condition is usually neutral buoyancy when the diver is swimming in mid-water, and this condition is unstable, so the diver is constantly making fine adjustments by control of lung volume, and has to adjust the contents of the buoyancy compensator if the depth varies.

If negative, positive, and neutral buoyancy were not things, such words would make no sense. But they do.

Moreover, you can look up types of buoyancy:
https://www.toppr.com/guides/physics/fundamentals/types-of-buoyancy/
https://physics-network.org/what-are-the-3-types-of-buoyancy/
https://seaperch.org/page-resources/how-things-work-how-things-float/

Over and over again, they mention there are three types of buoyancy.

No

Your attempt to claim air pushes things down negatives the reference frame at what negatvie neutral and postive bouyancy ref to.

"So dumb" still stands.

As long as you think of weight in Newtonian terms (weight as having to do with gravity) you will never understand what I am saying.

I understand what you are saying, I just realise it is wrong.
I also understand how the very source you cited does not agree with you.

Your own source clearly accepts gravity, and clearly shows there is a downwards force and an upwards force.
It is not your magical BS.

And yes, they do mean density. They are describing fish using a bladder to puff themselves up, not super-powerful beings bending the foece of gravity in their favor.

No, they mean weight, based upon gravity, as shown by them directly saying so:

When an object is dropped into a fluid, the [size=24]force of gravity pulls the object down[/size] towards the Earth.

You blatantly lying about it wont change that.

The fish control buoyancy by increasing volume increasing the force from the pressure gradient of the fluid.

No where in that page do they describe your magical BS.
Your BS which needs to continually flee from the very things they do talk about, specifically gravity and the force acting on the object from the pressure of the fluid, i.e. the pressure gradient, something you still can't explain.

But this is not a fringe idea.

The way you are using it certainly is.

Wikipedia uses the words negative and neutral buoyancy in its discussion about submarines.

With a nice big "Citation needed", on the only sentence where "negative buoyancy" is used.

But again, they fully recognise it is a balance of a downwards force due to gravity and an upwards buoyant force.
They fully recognise that buoyancy is UPWARDS, it doesn't make things sink.

Buoyancy (/ˈbɔɪənsi, ˈbuːjənsi/),[1][2] or upthrust is a net upward force exerted by a fluid that opposes the weight of a partially or fully immersed object.

Moreover, you can look up types of buoyancy:
https://www.toppr.com/guides/physics/fundamentals/types-of-buoyancy/
https://physics-network.org/what-are-the-3-types-of-buoyancy/
https://seaperch.org/page-resources/how-things-work-how-things-float/

And over and over again, they mention buoyancy is an upwards force, which opposes weight/gravity.

Buoyancy refers to an upward force which is exerted by a fluid. Furthermore, this fluid opposes the weight of an object which is immersed.
...It measures two forces which are competing.

Buoyancy or a buoyant force can be defined as the tendency of the fluid to exert an upward force on an object, which is wholly or partially immersed in a fluid.
...We estimate the buoyancy needed for an object using the formula B = ρ × V × g, where ρ and V are the object’s density and volume, respectively, and g is the acceleration due to gravity.
...A body at rest in a fluid is acted upon by a force pushing upward called the buoyant force, which is equal to the weight of the fluid that the body displaces
...Does gravity affect buoyancy? Yes, because buoyancy depends on weight of fluid displaced and we all know weight is a function of gravitational acceleration. Hence in the absence of gravity buoyancy force would be zero.

When an object is immersed fully or partially in a fluid, it experiences an upward force that is equal to the weight of the fluid displaced by it.
...Buoyancy is a force that moves an object upward.
...The object will sink because its weight is greater than the buoyant force.
...resulting in the buoyant force balancing the force of gravity
...The object will float because the buoyant force is greater than the object’s weight.

Again, these do not support your delusional fantasy.
These fully recognise the buoyant force is only UPWARDS, never down, and that a separate force, gravity (or just stated as weight) makes it go down.

Again, these can work with the pressure gradient, the pressure gradient caused by gravity, which results in an upwards force on objects.
Your delusional fantasy cannot.
So you continue to flee from this pressure gradient that destroys your delusional fantasy.

The scale is to buoyancy, not gravity. Negative buoyancy is what causes things to fall. Density is not a force.

That's right, density is not a force, but buoyancy is.  Being a force means that buoyancy must have both magnitude and direction (positive, neutral or negative).  Again, since density is not a force, buoyancy needs a force like gravity or acceleration in order to gain a vector and become a force.  Density alone just isn't enough to do it.

Why does a force need another force to function?

Does magnetism need something to create magnetism?
Does weak attraction need another force?

No, it doesn't! A force is sufficient to affect matter on its own.

Why does a force need another force to function?

Does magnetism need something to create magnetism?
Does weak attraction need another force?

No, it doesn't! A force is sufficient to affect matter on its own.

A physics course forum is where your questions belong. Not here.

I'm asking you because you are supposed to know such things.

But passing the buck is an expected tactic.

Why does a force need another force to function?

Density is not a force.  How does buoyancy become a force without gravity or some other form of acceleration?

the sum of forces is the sum of forces

be it gravity, electromagnetic, surface friction, air friction, tension, vanderwaals...


the sum of them give end the direction of accelleration.


all these monkeys pushing gives a net direction.


"A sufficeient "force is usually the biggest one if all others are 000000.1% negligible in comparison (ref jackblack earlier precision vs accuracy comment).

Why does a force need another force to function?

It isn't a matter of needing it.
It is a matter of their being an observed, measurable pressure gradient which will exert a force on the object.
That is the buoyant force.

But a quite obvious reason for why 2 forces are needed is how you can take an object, measure the downwards force acting on it with a spring scale, them immerse it in a fluid and the force reduces.
What magic should cause it to reduce?
Wouldn't it make more sense to be 2 forces, one up and one down?

But passing the buck is an expected tactic.

You continually ignoring simple questions which bring up issues which destroy your BS (like the pressure gradient, how you have absolutely no basis for directionality, and the fact that your own sources disagree with you) is an expected tactic from you.

Again, can you address the pressure gradient?
Why doesn't this push neutrally buoyant objects up in your delusional fantasy?

the sum of forces is the sum of forces

be it gravity, electromagnetic, surface friction, air friction, tension, vanderwaals...

the sum of them give end the direction of accelleration.

all these monkeys pushing gives a net direction.


"A sufficeient "force is usually the biggest one if all others are 000000.1% negligible in comparison (ref jackblack earlier precision vs accuracy comment).

These monkeys?



Barbaric societies impress upon their followers a sort of blanket ignorance about what is seen, heard, or spoken.

But a "scientific" society does all of this while telling their people they are advanced.

Motion is indeed a set of forces. But I use momentum and velocity, not acceleration. And buoyancy not "gravity". An object's momentum while falling is based on the difference between the air and the anvil, feather, or balloon. One of these objects falls quickly, one falls slowly (occasionally rising if a strong wind knocks it upward), and one rises by floating.

You can scream all you want while covering your eyes and ears, but the "evil" that is the truth is here in front of you.

Yet nobody believes it but you, and as you have constantly proven, your knowledge is suspect.

All the things we use are based on science that you reject, but they constantly work.

As I may have told you, observing a phenomenon working doesn't make it the correct one. If there are two explanations and both explanations work, you pick one.

Buoyancy works too. More importantly, it works when gravity fails. If you have a helium balloon only half filled, it won't float, but totally filled, it will. In a gravity model, this has no good explanation, but in a buoyancy model, the explanation is that as the balloon increases in total volume, the fact that its contents (helium) is less dense than the oxygen surrounding the balloon means that even though the uninflated balloon drops when you let go of it, the inflated balloon rises.

If gravity were the explanation here, the balloon should be forced down regardless of inflation.

Gravity doesn't work without buoyancy. But buoyancy can be rewritten to work without gravity, as mentioned above.

Since he mechanism for bouyancy os tp push up, how does water push a rock down?

So wind-air-drag is just another word for negative-thrust.

Is this plane negative-thrusting?

Yeah, No.

A balloon with some helium in will rise if its overall density, which includes the balloon itself, is less than the surrounding air, if it is part filled and the air+helium+balloon is denser than the surrounding air it will sink, its not difficult to understand.

the questions she wants to leave you with is:

irrationally defend your biased beliefs regardless of evidence?
or see the world as clearly as you can and be humble, and learn?

These monkeys?

No, they are the monkeys you cling to.

Barbaric societies impress upon their followers a sort of blanket ignorance about what is seen, heard, or spoken.

Just like you try.

But a "scientific" society does all of this while telling their people they are advanced.

No, it doesn't. You just don't like what science shows so you choose to remain wilfully ignorant.

And buoyancy not "gravity".

Except as repeatedly shown, that fails, with you needing to continually free some simple issues.

You can scream all you want while covering your eyes and ears, but the "evil" that is the truth is here in front of you.

You mean you can, as you do.

Again, why down?
Why that rate/that force?
How does this cause a pressure gradient?
Why doesn't that pressure gradient push things up?

Can you address any of these?
No.
You can just continually cover your eyes and ears and scream.

Motion is indeed a set of forces.

No, motion, in and of itself, is not "a set of forces".  Forces are what change the motion of an object.

But I use momentum and velocity, not acceleration.

Although momentum and velocity are are vectors, neither are forces.  Acceleration, on the other hand, is a force.  Why would you use not forces to discuss forces but ignore an actual force?  That's just plain stupid.

And buoyancy not "gravity". An object's momentum while falling is based on the difference between the air and the anvil, feather, or balloon.

But what is a falling object's acceleration based on?  In order to accelerate an object (change its motion), you need to apply a force.  Again, density is not a force, so it can't change an object's motion.

You can scream all you want while covering your eyes and ears, but the "evil" that is the truth is here in front of you.

Yet you're the one who inventing your own physics while shouting down and ignoring everyone else.

But what is a falling object's acceleration based on?  In order to accelerate an object (change its motion), you need to apply a force.  Again, density is not a force, so it can't change an object's motion.

Seriously. I have videos on my signature. You can watch them.

Within the first three minutes of the buoyanct one, they mention that helium (lighter than air) floats rather than sinks) and that hydrogen rises faster.

The rate of rise or fall is based on the difference between surface/fluid and the object.

Seriously. I have videos on my signature. You can watch them.

Which have already been shown to be crap.
You keeping them there just further demonstrates your dishonesty.

The rate of rise or fall is based on the difference between surface/fluid and the object.

Except it quite clearly is not a simple case of the difference dictating it.
Take a steel ball and an aluminium ball. Both fall at basically the same rate, even though steel is roughly 3 times as dense.
If it was just the difference, steel should fall much faster.

And if you go to different locations on earth, the rate changes.

And you still have no explanation for why it should fall in the first place.
Meanwhile gravity (including the pressure gradient caused by it) explains it just fine.

And you still need to flee from the pressure gradient which destroys your fantasy.

Again, why down?
Why that rate/that force?
How does this cause a pressure gradient?
Why doesn't that pressure gradient push things up?

Within the first three minutes of the buoyanct one, they mention that helium (lighter than air) floats rather than sinks) and that hydrogen rises faster.

Lighter and heavier mean weight and weight is a force that includes gravity/acceleration.  Density does not mean weight, no matter how much you want it to.