Density doesnt make things go up or down, gravity does.

Quote from: Aera23 on December 08, 2024, 06:52:25 PM

Steel ships float because the shape of the ship allows air to be stored in it, the air doesn't weigh much, allowing the ship to be larger, displacing as much water as it weighs.

*sigh*  I want the BS density makes things go up and down explanation, not the real scientific explanation.

Ohh, that explanation may involve "the denser the material is, the lower it falls" (partially true, fails without gravity, unless gravity is renamed to be the 2nd type of density)

An aluminum table is on the ground, and becomes part of the ground, it isn’t just a table of aluminum alone, it’s a table resting on solid ground.

The grounds mass is holding up the table. Which makes the table sturdier and gives it more density when on ground.

I’m specifically referring to objects within one medium, surrounded by one medium.

If the table was in water, the steel balls greater density would push the table down in water, right? Because water is less dense than the ground, and relative density comes into play once again.

You cannot ignore the ground as a medium below the table, it’s the most important thing here.

So why does the denser ball not push down the table on ground, but does in water, is their different densities. One greater than the ball, the other lesser than the ball.

The grounds mass is holding up the table. Which makes the table sturdier and gives it more density when on ground.

Would you please do us a favor and give us your definition of mass, density and weight, just so that we can see how they may differ from the mainstream physics definitions?

The whole youtube density nonsense solves no issues that other flat earth models haven't solved and introduces a whole mess of problems that they short sightedly ignore or fail to address. Until this changes, I don't understand why anybody seriously discusses it.

Mass and density exist, weight does not.

Weight is a made up term for a made up force, but mass is the one and only correct term for it.

They couldn’t explain how their made up force could pull down all objects of all masses at the same rate of acceleration and speed within air.

So they made up a term called weight, which is their mass acted on by their made up force gravity.

That still didn’t explain objects that rise up against the made up force, so they made up another force called buoyancy.

But it still doesn’t explain anything at all.

If there were such a force, it would act like all actual forces do. A pulling down force that will pull down and hold down almost all objects being of lesser mass and lesser of that same pulling down force, would act just like magnetic fiorce does within objects of magnetic properties to metallic objects. But every object, not specific objects. 

Magnetic force is proven to exist, and is consistent as a force, like all actual forces are.

An aluminum table is on the ground, and becomes part of the ground, it isn’t just a table of aluminum alone, it’s a table resting on solid ground.

So why doesn't water, with a steel ball then floating on that?

But also, the ground is not more dense than a steel ball.

The ground holds the object up, because it is solid and would need to be broken apart for the object to go through.

I’m specifically referring to objects within one medium, surrounded by one medium.

No, you weren't. That is obvious from your post:

Sand rests on denser soil, the soil rests on even denser rock.
The air rests on the surface of Earth, becoming a layer of denser air, and air above that layer is less dense than air below it, and so on upward with all the air.

Here you are specifically saying sand is resting on denser soil and that is resting on denser rock.
That is quite clearly NOT talking about an object surrounded by a medium.

If the table was in water, the steel balls greater density would push the table down in water, right?

No, the weight would.
If you got a material the same density as the table and placed that on top of the table, it would also push the table down, because you have increased the weight, so you need to increase the amount of fluid displaced.

So why does the denser ball not push down the table on ground, but does in water, is their different densities.

No, it isn't. As explained above.
A steel ball is denser than the ground. And we can go for even denser like lead or osmium. Far denser than Earth.
The difference is that the ground is solid while water is a liquid.
Water, being a liquid, can flow, and pushes things upwards by surface tension or a pressure differential (you know, that thing you still flee from because you can't explain?)

Nothing to do with density, and coherent with why a steel ball placed on an aluminium table doesn't magically phase through it.

Weight is a made up term for a made up force, but mass is the one and only correct term for it.

No it isn't.
Mass has no directionality, weight does.
Weight can be directly measured with various instruments.

They couldn’t explain how their made up force could pull down all objects of all masses at the same rate of acceleration and speed within air.

They could, quite trivially, with you just ignoring it and repeatedly lying about.

That still didn’t explain objects that rise up against the made up force

No, it directly explains the pressure gradient observed in fluids, and the resulting upwards force from this pressure gradient.
Again, you know that thing you need to continually flee from because you can't explain it at all?

If there were such a force, it would act like all actual forces do.

And it does. With you unable to show any fault and instead needing to repeatedly lie to everyone.

Magnetic force is proven to exist, and is consistent as a force, like all actual forces are.

Just like gravity.

If you want to claim magic density, explain what causes the pressure gradient and why this doesn't push things up.
Until you do, your claims remain refuted delusional BS.

Then you can address the other issues you have consistently fled from:
1 - Why down?
2 - Why that rate?
3 - Why doesn't the rate depend directly on density or even the difference in density?
4 - Why does the rate vary across Earth?

Simple questions you can't answer that show you are spouting pure BS.

Mass and density exist, weight does not.

I didn't ask you whether or not they exist, I asked you do define them.  So please answer the question that was asked,

Weight is a made up term for a made up force, but mass is the one and only correct term for it.

Oh?  What does your bathroom scale measure?  Why does your bag of potato chips say "sold by weight, not by volume)?

So they made up a term called weight, which is their mass acted on by their made up force gravity.

Actually weight is mass acted upon by any form of acceleration which includes, but is not limited to, gravity.  What do you think that fighter pilots mean when they talk about pulling g's?

That still didn’t explain objects that rise up against the made up force, so they made up another force called buoyancy.

But it still doesn’t explain anything at all.

What does it not explain?

If there were such a force, it would act like all actual forces do. A pulling down force that will pull down and hold down almost all objects being of lesser mass and lesser of that same pulling down force, would act just like magnetic fiorce does within objects of magnetic properties to metallic objects. But every object, not specific objects. 

Whether or not gravity is a force depends on who you ask.  According the Standard Model of particle physics, gravity is a fundamental force.  On the other hand, according to General Relativity, gravity is not a force, but curved space-time that influences the movement of matter.  In Newtonian classical mechanics (which is mostly what we're discussing here), gravity is generally treated as a form of acceleration as described by GR.

Magnetic force is proven to exist, and is consistent as a force, like all actual forces are.

Are you saying that there shouldn't be any difference between Newtonian forces (mass x acceleration) in classical mechanics and fundamental forces in particle physics?

The steel ball is only denser than one part of the entire ground, or one part of the whole sand in a desert.

Your made up force exists in the core of ball Earth, which you claim is its source, so everything should be pulled to the core, but nothing is pulled to that core. 

Actual forces don't use objects density and adjust equally by strength as if all were one object!

Wind emits one force of strength, and unlike your made up force, does not adjust its strength to objects of different mass or surface area.

You claim wind has more force used over larger surface areas, than smaller surface areas…

No, the whole area of a wind hits a larger surface area than a smaller area is hit with that same wind.

The variable is objects surface area which is hit by a wind.

Same as a current in a river, hits over an area along tge river as one force, spread over the river, will hit longer objects across it with more of its current force spanning across the rivet.

And they certainly never achieve the most amazing feat that your magical force can do, which doesn’t make any sense, just a stupid excuse they made up for it…

Forces don’t vary their strength, to any properties of the objects. It is the objects which are the variable in how much of that ONE SINGLE strength of a force which is variable in it. It’s one strength of force, always that one strength.

When they first spoke about a force unknown to exist at all, to theoretically be found to exist, but has yet to be discovered so far, they didn’t ever find a force at all, they always said it was a theoretical force, not proven to exist at all.

Because if they claimed this force was real, they’d have to show proof of it being a real force, and they had no proof it was real or existed at all.

What they did, was to gradually evolve it into a ‘real’ force over time. It’s never been real or proven to exist, it’s taken to be a real force, but it’s all bs.

They had and still have many problems. Forces don’t vary in strength outward, when it’s emitted from their sources…

They cannot, will not, do not vary in strength, except over more distance from their sources of origin.

Forces are sources of energy, emitted outward from their sources, and they lose strength over more distance outward from their sources of origin.

They cannot vary their strength of energy which they emit outward.

There cannot be an actual force which emits a single strength of energy outward, from its source of origin, acting on everything there, within the area nearest to it, then suddenly changes it’s one original strength it emitted outward, to whatever the level of strength needed to act out the same single rate on every and all objects it contacts!!

No force can do such a thing, and it proves no force is there at all.

The actual reason that all objects in air fall through it at the same speed and same acceleration, which cannot occur by any actual forces, are not due to a force. Not possible by any actual forces.

Actual forces have been proven to exist, can be demonstrated to exist.

Gravity is a made up bs concoction, sold as a theoretical force which has no proof of existing at all. Never was real, isn’t real, it’s all made up and utter bs that fails miserably.

The steel ball is only denser than one part of the entire ground, or one part of the whole sand in a desert.

No, the steel ball is denser than the ground in its entirety.

Your made up force exists in the core of ball Earth, which you claim is its source, so everything should be pulled to the core, but nothing is pulled to that core.

No, your STRAWMAN does.

But again, this pull is not magic. It cannot magically just pull objects so they occupy the same space. Not unless it is incredibly strong to overcome the forces that would hold the object together.

Actual forces don't use objects density and adjust equally by strength as if all were one object!

Again, actual forces are proportional to some property of the object.
We have been over this countless times, with you unable to defend your delusional BS.
For wind it is area.
For gravity it is mass.

Forces don’t vary their strength, to any properties of the objects. It is the objects which are the variable in how much of that ONE SINGLE strength of a force which is variable in it.

Which is just a game of semantics.
You have the one strength of gravity, the gravitational field, with it "hitting" a different mass. Just like your wind hits a different area.

Again, take 2 identical 1 kg blocks. What is the force on each from gravity?
Now join them together into a 2 kg block. What should the force be?
Should joining them magically cut down the force?
Or should the new force be the sum of the force on each part?

When they first spoke about a force unknown to exist at all

Again going to your fantasy.

Gravity was known to exist for quite some time.
And it has been proven to exist beyond any sane doubt. There are even experiments you can do which you refuse to because it will show you are wrong.

They had and still have many problems.

Yet you cannot demonstrate a single one.

Forces don’t vary in strength outward, when it’s emitted from their sources…

No, real forces typically do vary, often following an inverse square law or something else depending on the nature of the force.
And this is NOT the force on the object.
Instead it is the strength of the field. With some property of the object then effecting what the actual force is.

Just like wind has a certain strength, effectively the wind speed and density of the fluid.
But this will impact a different force onto objects based upon their area and shape.

They cannot, will not, do not vary in strength, except over more distance from their sources of origin.

Nor does gravity.

The actual reason that all objects in air fall through it at the same speed and same acceleration, which cannot occur by any actual forces, are not due to a force.

You keep asserting this BS, but you cannot justify it at all.

Actual forces have been proven to exist, can be demonstrated to exist.

Just like gravity.

And yet again, you flee from the pressure gradient because you know it kills your delusional BS

If you want to claim magic density, explain what causes the pressure gradient and why this doesn't push things up.
Until you do, your claims remain refuted delusional BS.

Then you can address the other issues you have consistently fled from:
1 - Why down?
2 - Why that rate?
3 - Why doesn't the rate depend directly on density or even the difference in density?
4 - Why does the rate vary across Earth?

Simple questions you can't answer that show you are spouting pure BS.

[quote{We have been over this countless times, with you unable to defend your delusional BS.
For wind it is area.
For gravity it is mass[/quote]

No, you haven’t a clue about it.

Wind is spread over an area, as a single force of strength.

That means each object hit by that span of wind, which is of one strength along its span, will be hit by various amounts of the one force of wind. The wind doesn’t add or reduce its strength of one level of force, the objects will be hit by a larger SPAN of the one wind force, or less of that span of force.

Wind is a force over an area, so it is an objects surface area which is the variable to how much of the one wind force that hits it.

If you claim your made up force emits one level of energy outward, it should act on all objects of different masses with that one level of strength.

Unlike wind which is a span over an area, where objects of various surface area are hit by various degrees of the spanning out force. The span of wind is the same the objects surface area is the variable here.

And once again, you ignore the worst most absurd feature of your goofy force.

This force would make all objects of different masses, after emitting out one level of force or strength from the ball Earth core, somehow, for no possible reason, after emitting out one level of force, detect or sense or indicate in some unknown way, each objects mass, instantly, and then, by another unknown way, instantly change its one level of strength, increasing or descreasing it, to the objects masses.

All of this is done by the made up force, because it wants to make sure they’re all pulled down by its force at the same rate! 

Nobody also knows why it chose this specific rate to pull all things down at either,

These things aren’t important to explain with a force that’s been made up, anyway.

Right, all of that just happens because you say it does.

What a stupid, convoluted story you need to make up, stretched.beyond even most fairy tales.   

The worst part is that your made up force must have an explanation for why it would pull different masses down at the same rate, when there is absolutely nothing that can ever explain that.

It’s nonsensical. Forces don’t know or detect things of objects it hits, let alone adjust its strength to the objects, and balance them out equally to respond the same way to that force.

Truly insane

No, you haven’t a clue about it.

I clearly do. Because you keep just repeating the same pathetic BS without even attempting to address what I said.

Look at how much you continually flee from simple questions that show you are spouting delusional BS.

Wind is spread over an area, as a single force of strength.

That means each object hit by that span of wind, which is of one strength along its span, will be hit by various amounts of the one force of wind. The wind doesn’t add or reduce its strength of one level of force, the objects will be hit by a larger SPAN of the one wind force, or less of that span of force.

Wind is a force over an area, so it is an objects surface area which is the variable to how much of the one wind force that hits it.

Again, you can do the same with gravity:
"Gravity is spread over a mass, as a single force of strength.

That means each object hit by that span of gravity, which is of one strength along its span, will be hit by various amounts of the one force of gravity. The gravity doesn’t add or reduce its strength of one level of force, the objects will be hit by a larger SPAN of the one gravity force, or less of that span of force.

Gravity is a force over a mass, so it is an objects mass which is the variable to how much of the one gravity force that hits it."

This force would make all objects of different masses, after emitting out one level of force or strength from the ball Earth core, somehow, for no possible reason, after emitting out one level of force, detect or sense or indicate in some unknown way, each objects mass

No more so than wind detects the area.

Again, gravity acts on each bit of mass.

You would expect the same force in a 2 kg mass as you would in the combined sum of two separate 1 kg masses

Nobody also knows why it chose this specific rate to pull all things down at either,

It didn't choose a specific rate no more so than magnets chose a specific force.

It is a constant of proportionality just like other real fundamental forces. It then depends upon this constant, as well as the mass and distance to the primary (and its distribution of mass).
And as pointed out, it isn't a constant rate. It varies over Earth.

These things aren’t important to explain with a force that’s been made up, anyway.

Which is why you refuse to make any attempt to do so and instead just keep repeating the same pathetic BS.

The worst part is that your made up force must have an explanation for why it would pull different masses down at the same rate

Again, not a made up force.
A real force you can verify exists yourself, which you choose not to because you want to live in a fantasy.
And this real force can explain it, with that explanation provided to you repeatedly.

Once more, take two identical separate 1 kg objects. Each of these will accelerate downwards at the same rate, based upon the force of gravity acting on each.
Now join them together. The same force is acting on each part of the object.
Why should it magically change because they are now 1 object?
That means the ratio of force to mass remains the same so the acceleration remains the same.

Not hard to understand.

It’s nonsensical. Forces don’t know or detect things of objects it hits, let alone adjust its strength to the objects, and balance them out equally to respond the same way to that force.

Nor does gravity.
So yes, your BS is truly insane nonsense.

Now again, care to address the simple issues you keep fleeing from?

If you want to claim magic density, explain what causes the pressure gradient and why this doesn't push things up.
Until you do, your claims remain refuted delusional BS.

Then you can address the other issues you have consistently fled from:
1 - Why down?
2 - Why that rate?
3 - Why doesn't the rate depend directly on density or even the difference in density?
4 - Why does the rate vary across Earth?

Simple questions you can't answer that show you are spouting pure BS.

No, you’re trying to say your made up force will emit one level of strength outward, yet will vary its strength equally to all objects of different masses, to pull them all down as if they’re the same mass.

Only your made up force makes objects act the same way to a force.

Magnets don’t pull all objects of different masses in the same way or same rate of speed pulling them in!

No force acts on different objects and masses or surface areas and adjusts them to act equally as if they’re one sane object!

You said a wind uses more or less force by surface area of objects.

Gravity would adjust for different surface areas and make them move the same distance! That’s what you forgot to mention! For good reason, it’s stupid as hell to say such crap!

Magnets don’t pull all objects of different masses in the same way or same rate of speed pulling them in!

Magnets don't pull all objects, period.  Magnets only pull (or push) certain materials with certain properties.

No, you’re trying to say your made up force will emit one level of strength outward, yet will vary its strength equally to all objects of different masses, to pull them all down as if they’re the same mass.

No, I am saying the real force of gravity behaves in a manner similar to wind. There is one "strength" for wind that is the speed and density, for gravity is the strength of the gravitational field (or curvature of spacetime). This then acts on the different objects resulting in a force proportional to the area for wind or mass for gravity.

I am showing how your BS attempt to get out of proportional forces for wind works equally well for gravity.
To show how you are lying to everyone.

No force acts on different objects and masses or surface areas and adjusts them to act equally as if they’re one sane object!

Except in cases where whatever the force is proportional to is also proportional to the mass.
For example in a magnetic field all objects travelling at the same velocity with the same mass to charge ratio will be deflected the same.
In an electric field, all objects with the same mass to charge ratio will be accelerated the same.
For wind, all objects with the same shape and the same surface area to mass ratio will be accelerated the same.

The only way in which gravity is special, is that the thing it is proportional to is mass.
Or alternatively, for all known substances, the gravitational mass and inertial mass have a single constant of proportionality, typically taken to be 1.

You said a wind uses more or less force by surface area of objects.

I said wind applies a force proportional to the surface area of an object.
Just like gravity does based upon mass.

Gravity would adjust for different surface areas

No, gravity is based upon mass, not surface area.

Now again, care to address the simple issues you keep fleeing from?

If you want to claim magic density, explain what causes the pressure gradient and why this doesn't push things up.
Until you do, your claims remain refuted delusional BS.

Then you can address the other issues you have consistently fled from:
1 - Why down?
2 - Why that rate?
3 - Why doesn't the rate depend directly on density or even the difference in density?
4 - Why does the rate vary across Earth?

Simple questions you can't answer that show you are spouting pure BS.

I’ve already answered your questions.

You still don’t understand that it was created and designed this way.

You cannot start with the idea that everything would float around without any direction within your endless ‘space’, unless there was some sort of ‘force’ that stopped everything from floating around in space!

Why would you believe all things on Earth were floating around in space until your made up force pulled them down to Earth?

That would assume that many other things are floating around in space and some of them have been pulled down to Earth all the time, but nothing is floating around in space nor anything being pulled down to Earth at all since day one we’ve been on Earth.

You’ve got no basis to believe this happened at all.

Your entire story is nothing but what they want you to believe is true.

About time to stop silly beliefs they tell you about

I’ve already answered your questions.

No, you haven't.
Instead you just appeal to magic.

You say everything will magically go down for no reason at all.
Magically accelerating at that rate for no reason at all.
With that rate varying for no reason at all.

All because it was magically designed to so do.

You may as well be saying you have absolutely no idea, it just magically happens this way and could magically change at any point in the future.

Why would you believe all things on Earth were floating around in space until your made up force pulled them down to Earth?

Because all the evidence shows that if you want to accelerate an object, you need to provide a force to do so.

but nothing is floating around in space nor anything being pulled down to Earth at all since day one we’ve been on Earth.

Except the countless objects which have which you just lie about.
Yet again you appeal to your wilful ignorance to pretend your fantasy is true.

If you want to appeal to your wilful ignorance, that means you don't know if things have fallen or not.

Your entire story is nothing but what they want you to believe is true.

No, the RE model is based upon mountains of evidence; evidence you typically just dismiss as fake because you can't refute it.

Meanwhile, your entire story is nothing but what YOU want to be true, with you having absolutely no basis for any of it.


Now again, instead of just appealing to magic or claiming it is magically designed this way, try actually explaining.

1 - Why down?
2 - Why that rate?
3 - Why doesn't the rate depend directly on density or even the difference in density?
4 - Why does the rate vary across Earth?

And if you want some more:
5 - Why does this produce a pressure gradient.
6 - Why doesn't that pressure gradient push things up.

That would assume that many other things are floating around in space

So?  What’s the earth resting on.  And what ever you answer with, what is it setting on?

If you dont agree, you do no research, btw 16 year old here

Think about two unbroken egg yolks of identical volume inside the same glass, which is not wide enough for both yolks to fully lie on the bottom. Assume that for some reason, yolk A is substantially heavier than yolk B. Gravity will pull A down to the bottom of the glass with a greater force than it does so to B. so the force of gravity on A will cancel out and then some the force of gravity on B. Therefore B will be lifted up by the force of gravity on A, and A will take up the space on the bottom of the glass with B fully or partially resting on top of A. That is how gravity and density work together to put denser things below less dense things.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 17, 2025, 04:37:44 AM

I’ve already answered your questions.

No, you haven't.
Instead you just appeal to magic.

You say everything will magically go down for no reason at all.
Magically accelerating at that rate for no reason at all.
With that rate varying for no reason at all.

All because it was magically designed to so do.

You may as well be saying you have absolutely no idea, it just magically happens this way and could magically change at any point in the future.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 17, 2025, 04:37:44 AM

Why would you believe all things on Earth were floating around in space until your made up force pulled them down to Earth?

Because all the evidence shows that if you want to accelerate an object, you need to provide a force to do so.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 17, 2025, 04:37:44 AM

but nothing is floating around in space nor anything being pulled down to Earth at all since day one we’ve been on Earth.

Except the countless objects which have which you just lie about.
Yet again you appeal to your wilful ignorance to pretend your fantasy is true.

If you want to appeal to your wilful ignorance, that means you don't know if things have fallen or not.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 17, 2025, 04:37:44 AM

Your entire story is nothing but what they want you to believe is true.

No, the RE model is based upon mountains of evidence; evidence you typically just dismiss as fake because you can't refute it.

Meanwhile, your entire story is nothing but what YOU want to be true, with you having absolutely no basis for any of it.


Now again, instead of just appealing to magic or claiming it is magically designed this way, try actually explaining.

1 - Why down?
2 - Why that rate?
3 - Why doesn't the rate depend directly on density or even the difference in density?
4 - Why does the rate vary across Earth?

And if you want some more:
5 - Why does this produce a pressure gradient.
6 - Why doesn't that pressure gradient push things up.

Why not down? That is the direction things must go in when above ground. That is how God designed things, to fall down when within air.

Why do you think things couldn’t go downward from air? Why all directions? Because you think they should go in all directions for some reason?

What reason should things go in all directions wherever they are?

They claim things fall at different rates at some places on Earth? Where are those places, exactly? Who has measured those different rates of fall? What are those rates, at those places?

Do all objects still fall at those different rates?

And why would these places have their own different rates?

But assuming there are different rates of fall at some places, then it’s even more of a problem you have.

If your made up force pulls things down at different rates over some areas on Earth, your made up force which was making all things of all masses be pulled down to Earth at the one same speed, doesn’t pull all things down at the same rate everywhere above Earth.


Anyway, you’re still trying to ignore the big problem I keep telling you to address.

You think wind applies more force to objects of more surface area, which is true, except it is due to the objects surface area being greater and being hit by a wider area of the span of wind. The same wind is over a span across Earth.

But the stupidest part of your goofy force is the greatest joke of them all.

Your goofy force somehow magically knows each objects mass before it hits them in air, or can instantly measure each objects mass when it first hits them in air. Unlike wind, which we know is a span of force, so objects of larger spans of surface area are hit by more of the force’s span of wind.

There’s nothing that can explain your made up force applying more or less strength of force by each objects mass, because your made up force emits out in waves of energy, out over the entire Earth from its ‘core’ at all times at once, mass of an object has nothing to do with a single wave of force emitted over the Earth.

There’s no mechanism which could account for mass of objects with a single wave of force hitting all objects at once.

Wind is explained easily as a span of one force across Earth along an area, objects having more span of surface area get hit by more span of the force.

But again, the part you won’t address cannot ever happen in the real world.

No force will vary in strength of each objects surface area, wind is one strength of force over a span of area, each object of different surface area or span of surface is the variable here, how much of the force will hit it, why would it not vary by the objects varied in surface area or span?

There’s no force that applies various levels of strength, period.

Forces are energy, they are emitted outward from their sources, at once, and that’s it.

That’s all they ever do. Emit force outward, at once, at one strength of force at one time.

When objects all fall down from air at the same rate, that is what proves there is no force acting on them from elsewhere.

Because forces emit one level of force, it is the various properties of each object making them act differently to the forces hitting them.

What further confirms objects fall at the same rate from air cannot be due to a force, is that there actually is a force acting on them in air, which is wind resistance, and ThAT is when objects will sometimes fall at different rates. Nothing about your made up force at all

Your goofy force somehow magically knows each objects mass

The attraction is based on mass.  The more mass you have, the more attraction between more massive objects.

There’s no force that applies various levels of strength, period.

Gravity oversimplified is like a mass magnet.

A little magnet may only pick up paper clips.

A bigger magnet and / or a magnet with a stronger field can pick up things a little magnet cannot pick up.

Magnet Strength Side By Side

If two magnets are used side by side, does that double the pull force?


https://www.kjmagnetics.com/blog/magnet-strength-side-by-side?gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAAD_kQrFjPpGFm8xgDf3ohQTq7a7VW&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIxrKpn9zZiwMV2HF_AB1rbx7REAAYASAAEgJRVPD_BwE

Or the way electrical noise incresss with power and frequency.

Or the way a hurricane on average produces more power fill winds than a simple rain shower. 

Or the way a small engine produces less torque and horse power compared to a larger engine.  Same for motors. 

Makes sense that gravity is the attraction of mass.  And the more mass you have greater the attraction.  And on earth, mass is in the shadow of earth.  And the mass of the earth is not uniform density, so its gravity isn’t uniform.

Like if a magnetic had different levels of impurities in its length. 

Earth's gravity measured by NASA GRACE mission, showing deviations from the theoretical gravity of an idealized, smooth Earth, the so-called Earth ellipsoid. Red shows the areas where gravity is stronger than the smooth, standard value, and blue reveals areas where gravity is weaker (Animated version).[

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_of_Earth#/media/File%3AGravity_anomalies_on_Earth.jpg

Why not down?

So.  You think gravity and the attraction of mass doesn’t exist.  So you just say things of mass are attracted to earth which is mass? 

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Added.  Where you can’t explain the influence of the Sun’s gravity over comets.  Nor explained how comets travel about the planets and sun, so why can’t man follow in the same paths of comets to travel about the solar system.

Turbs.  You are just stupid. 

If Earth was a ball in space, wouldn’t we see comets fly over us and across from us?

Why do all falling stars and comets travel across the sky left to right and right to left?

They never go over or across from us. Do you know the reason?

I do

If Earth was a ball in space, wouldn’t we see comets fly over us and across from us?

Why do all falling stars and comets travel across the sky left to right and right to left?

They never go over or across from us. Do you know the reason?

I do

What are you talking about?

If Earth was a ball in space, wouldn’t we see comets fly over us and across from us?

Why do all falling stars and comets travel across the sky left to right and right to left?

They never go over or across from us. Do you know the reason?

I do

You mean for comets, like the planets orbit the sun.  Near the same plane.

You are changing the subject.  Typical flat earther.  How about actually answering what was asked instead of this stupid flat earth game trying to change the question into a meaningless rant.   

Where you can’t explain the influence of the Sun’s gravity over comets.  Nor explained how comets travel about the planets and sun, so why can’t man follow in the same paths of comets to travel about the solar system.

Turbs.  You are just stupid.

They never go over or across from us. Do you know the reason?

You mean like this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/BeAmazed/comments/9jtqwc/long_exposure_of_a_meteor_shower/?rdt=40746

Why not down?

Why not up?
Why not to the right?
Why not to the left?
Why not stay where it is?

Acting like down should be the default is just saying you have no idea.

That is the direction things must go in when above ground. That is how God designed things, to fall down when within air.

Appealing to your imaginary fiend doesn't help.
It just shows you have no explanation and literally need to appeal to magic.

So what would a sane person accept:
A coherent model which has an explanation for the directionality, rate and so on, or
Pure magic with no explanation at all and instead saying things happen that way because that is how they were designed?

Why do you think things couldn’t go downward from air? Why all directions? Because you think they should go in all directions for some reason?

No, I think absent a force trying to accelerate them in a particular direction there is no reason for them to move in any direction.
It is not that they should go in all directions, it is that there is no reason for any direction, except gravity.

If we want to ignore gravity, then the force that we know exists is the force from the pressure gradient which should be pushing things up.

They claim things fall at different rates at some places on Earth?

They don't merely claim, they have proven with mountains of evidence lying POS like you will just dismiss.
So you go get an accelerometer or a gravimeter and test it yourself.
And it isn't any particular special place, it is all over Earth g is different.

Here is an example for Canadia:
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/rncan-nrcan/M183-2/M183-2-8081.pdf

And why would these places have their own different rates?

Because Earth is not a perfectly uniform sphere in space with nothing around it.

Firstly, gravity, being like most other laws by following an inverse square law, will have g depend on d, the distance from the centre of mass.
That means as you get higher, g will reduce in magnitude.
i.e. g will vary by altitude.

Earth, by virtue of rotating has an equatorial bulge which means the equator is further from the centre of mass than the poles.
And this is not a step, instead it is a gradient, from the pole to the equator.
So g will vary with latitude.

Earth, by virtue of not being homogenous, will have some regions where mass is more densely concentrated near the surface resulting in a greater attraction.

And if you want to throw in some more variation, this time with time:
Earth is orbited by the moon, a point on the surface of Earth is a different distance and/or direction from the moon than the centre of mass of Earth. This will leave a residual tidal force acting on something on the surface affecting the value of g.

But assuming there are different rates of fall at some places, then it’s even more of a problem you have.

Not assuming. It is a fact.
It is measurable and demonstrable.

But importantly, gravity explains it, so it isn't a problem for gravity at all.
But it is a big problem for your magic.
As you have no explanation for the rate or why it shuold vary.

If your made up force pulls things down at different rates over some areas on Earth, your made up force which was making all things of all masses be pulled down to Earth at the one same speed, doesn’t pull all things down at the same rate everywhere above Earth.

The one with the magic made up force here is YOU!
In reality, the real force of gravity pulls things in the same location and time down at the same rate.

Anyway, you’re still trying to ignore the big problem I keep telling you to address.

You mean I have addressed it and pointed out why you are a lying POS.

You think wind applies more force to objects of more surface area, which is true

And it doesn't require the wind to magically know the surface area.
Instead, the wind interacts with the surface affecting the object based upon its area.

Just like gravity doesn't need to know the mass. Instead it simply interacts with the mass, just the wind interacts with area.

There’s nothing that can explain your made up force applying more or less strength of force by each objects mass, because your made up force emits out in waves of energy, out over the entire Earth from its ‘core’ at all times at once, mass of an object has nothing to do with a single wave of force emitted over the Earth.

No, that is nothing like how gravity works.

Gravity is a force of attraction between masses.
All mass creates a gravitational field. This is comparable to the speed of the wind combined with its density.
This gravitational field then effects MASS. With the mass of the object interacting with this field creating a force to accelerate the object. As it is the mass which is interacting with it, the greater the greater the force.
Just like with wind, because it is the area interacting with it, the greater the area the greater the force.


Meanwhile, you can't explain what the force should be or why.

Again, a nice simple question you avoided repeatedly.
Say you have two objects, each weighing 1 kg.
What should the force on each of these weights be?

Now, join those 2 weights together into a single object.
What should the force be now?

You have no actual idea of an interaction between gravity and the mass.
Because of this you have no explanation for why joining the objects should suddenly drop the force.

There’s no force that applies various levels of strength, period.

EVERY force does.

Forces are energy

No, they aren't.
A force applied to object to move it over some distance is energy.

That’s all they ever do. Emit force outward, at once, at one strength of force at one time.

If that was all they ever did, then wind would apply the same force to every object, that one force.

Instead, all forces act by having something proportional to the force, which is also proportional to some property of the object.

And it isn't just wind.
It is ALL forces.
Another example you have been provided with is magnetism.

When objects all fall down from air at the same rate

It proves that there is a force proportional to mass acting on them.
No force, means no acceleration.
Literally, F=ma.
So if a is the same, that is then saying force is proportional to mass.

What further confirms objects fall at the same rate from air cannot be due to a force, is that there actually is a force acting on them in air, which is wind resistance

Which just results in the objects falling at a rate based upon the combination of the downwards gravitational force and wind resistance.
That doesn't confirm your BS at all.


And notice how you also flee from other simple questions, like the pressure gradient and why this doesn't push things up.

If Earth was a ball in space, wouldn’t we see comets fly over us and across from us?

Why do all falling stars and comets travel across the sky left to right and right to left?

They never go over or across from us. Do you know the reason?

Left and right is entirely arbitrary.
How was this one going:


Notice how the same event, filmed from different angles, have it going in different directions?

But as most are just part of the solar system, and the solar system from a disc of spinning stuff, most will be aligned roughly in a plane.


And notice how this has absolutely nothing to do with the topic and is just yet another example of you fleeing from your complete inability to defend your BS?

Because everything is based on relative density.

Earth is designed for us to live on its surface, a flat plain is ideal for living on.

Why would you want to build homes to live in on a curved surface?

Why make things float around in any direction?

Why create life for Earth to float off it in any direction?

Why make a spinning and speeding around ball to put life upon? What’s the point in that?

You’d want your Earth to hold life on it, on its flat surface.

Why make a spinning ball for living on?

There’s no purpose to create a world where things can’t live on it, because you made it a spinning ball!

Earth is designed

Again, every time you say this, you are just appealing to pure magic and saying you have no evidence or explanation.

You may as well just admit you have no idea.

Why create life for Earth to float off it in any direction?

Why create life just to have it get sick and die?
Again, this world was clearly not made by a loving creator.

You are basically saying you don't like reality, so you are going to cling to a delusional fantasy.
It just shows how pathetic you and your position are.

Edit: fixed broken quote

Why would you want to build homes to live in on a curved surface?

Are you saying that people shouldn't build homes on hills?

=
Why make things float around in any direction?

Are you saying that helicopters are not useful?

=
Why create life for Earth to float off it in any direction?

Huh?

=
Why make a spinning and speeding around ball to put life upon? What’s the point in that?

What's the point of life in the first place if you're just going to die anyway?

=
You’d want your Earth to hold life on it, on its flat surface.

Why make a spinning ball for living on?

If the ball is big enough and spins slowly enough, then the surface would seem pretty flat and stationary.

=
There’s no purpose to create a world where things can’t live on it, because you made it a spinning ball!

You'd be surprised at some of the places where life flourishes where you'd think that it really shouldn't.
https://www.thoughtco.com/extremophiles-extreme-organisms-373905

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 26, 2025, 03:31:43 AM

Earth is designed

Again, every time you say this, you are just appealing to pure magic and saying you have no evidence or explanation.

You may as well just admit you have no idea.

Quote from: turbonium2 on February 26, 2025, 03:31:43 AM

Why create life for Earth to float off it in any direction?

Why create life just to have it get sick and die?
Again, this world was clearly not made by a loving creator.

You are basically saying you don't like reality, so you are going to cling to a delusional fantasy.
It just shows how pathetic you and your position are.

Edit: fixed broken quote

That we don’t know how life was created, even when we know life is made of carbon and water and cells, does not mean it was by magic, then?

Those who believe that life must be created somehow that we just don’t know yet, don’t understand that life on Earth is not a physical creation from the physical world of Earth and air.

Life was created by God as a spiritual form, which is sent to Earth in a physical form, and to return into the spiritual form once again.

You can call this magic, but it’s the reality.

We don’t know how life was created, and never will create life from nothing either. It’s stupid to claim life was created from piles of chemicals over millions of years, because THAT would be nothing but magic and stupid to claim such a thing.

Life exists, it doesn’t matter that we don’t know how it was created, we cannot explain how it was.

There’s no need for someone to claim Earth is a ball flying through endless space, because Earth doesn’t move, and there’s no endless space either. And no made up force is needed to hold all things down to a flying ball Earth in endless space.