What keeps us on the ground

Quote from: Username on May 02, 2025, 09:06:46 PM

Quote from: markjo on May 02, 2025, 08:48:23 PM

Quote from: Username on May 02, 2025, 06:24:41 PM

Let's say I'm in an elevator in the middle of space far away from any gravity. No windows. The elevator is accelerating upwards. What is holding me to the floor? My inertia countering the elevator rising.

No.  The normal force of elevator's floor counters the force of your weight due to the elevator's acceleration.  Come now, you're supposed to be better than this.

The force of my weight? What do you mean by that, because that sounds like inertia with extra steps.

Force = mass * acceleration.  Weight = mass * gravitational acceleration.  Weight is a force.

Weight is a force? It seems like its just the tendency of things to follow their natural trajectory.

Quote from: markjo on May 03, 2025, 06:48:14 AM

Quote from: Username on May 02, 2025, 09:06:46 PM

Quote from: markjo on May 02, 2025, 08:48:23 PM

Quote from: Username on May 02, 2025, 06:24:41 PM

Let's say I'm in an elevator in the middle of space far away from any gravity. No windows. The elevator is accelerating upwards. What is holding me to the floor? My inertia countering the elevator rising.

No.  The normal force of elevator's floor counters the force of your weight due to the elevator's acceleration.  Come now, you're supposed to be better than this.

The force of my weight? What do you mean by that, because that sounds like inertia with extra steps.

Force = mass * acceleration.  Weight = mass * gravitational acceleration.  Weight is a force.

Weight is a force? It seems like its just the tendency of things to follow their natural trajectory.

Yes, weight is a force.  You’re thinking of gravitation, which is not a force.

As opposed to us floating around in ‘space’?

You mean that everything on Earth was first created to float around in ‘space’ without a great force within a ball Earth that pulled everything from space that was floating around in it, until close enough to the ball Earth, and a force pulled them all down to Earths surface?

That’s what you assume existed first? As opposed to all the evidence that shows it’s not true?

You mean that everything on Earth was first created

No, we don't.

As opposed to all the evidence that shows it’s not true?

Your wilful ignorance is not evidence.
And again, we know it has nothing to do with them magically being created to be at a location.

Not one location or one point, the entire surface of Earth itself is where all things originated from, created to exist upon. Not one point over the whole surface, that’s just nonsense.

Not one location or one point, the entire surface

Things originate at a location, not a surface.

I get it, your position is such utter garbage you need to dishonestly appeal to a surface to pretend it has any chance of working.
But that is just nonsense.
When you are born you are not born over the entire surface. You are born at a particular location.
Likewise, when an object is made, it is not made over the entire surface, it is made at a particular location.
If you want to imagine your god creating things, it is not creating a single thing over the entire surface. Instead it creates it at a particular location.
For example, in the fairy tale world of the Bible, Adam and Eve were created in the Garden of Eden. They weren't created over the entire surface. So by your logic they should fall back there, not to any random point on the surface.


And again, we see things DO NOT fall "towards the surface". Instead they fall DOWN!

e.g. on a cliff face, if you break a rock away from it, instead of falling back to the surface of Earth, i.e. that cliff face, they fall DOWN!
If you are on the bottom of an overhang, and you break something off from the bottom of the overhang, then they fall directly away from the surface, they fall DOWN!
When you are on a sloped portion of the surface, yet again, it doesn't fall towards the surface, it falls DOWN!
When you dig a giant hole, and drop something into that hole, it doesn't fall towards the surface of Earth, it falls DOWN into that hole.

If it was falling towards the surface, then the orientation of that surface would matter, as would the direction to it.

Now you could try say it is somehow falling towards an average of the surface, but that would make things fall to the north pole in your delusional fantasy and you would need to make Earth a sphere to have it work.

But what makes it even more pathetic, we can take water, and turn it into steam, or electrolyse it to get hydrogen, and suddenly it doesn't fall down, it goes up.

Again, your nonsense doesn't work. It is just a steaming pile of garbage you use to pretend to have an explanation.

Quote from: LittlePineapple on April 16, 2025, 11:17:24 AM

if not gravity, what keeps us on the ground

There are three answers to this. Maybe more, but:

1. Some flat-earthers say that the Earth is constantly accelerating upwards and the acceleration is what we perceive as gravity. Never mind that if this were the case, we'd see the stars rushing past us at breathtaking speed.

2. Another answer to this is that all objects move toward the center of the universe, because it is in their nature. This doesn't actually answer the question, but it's something they can say.

3. And of course if we leave flat-earth aside, another explanation for what keeps us on the ground is that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is constantly pressing down on us with his noodly appendages. This is the explanation I like best. Unless, of course, we follow Newton or Einstein.

mmmm... spaghetti...

Weight?

Things originate at a location, not a surface.

I get it, your position is such utter garbage you need to dishonestly appeal to a surface to pretend it has any chance of working.
But that is just nonsense.
When you are born you are not born over the entire surface. You are born at a particular location.
Likewise, when an object is made, it is not made over the entire surface, it is made at a particular location.
If you want to imagine your god creating things, it is not creating a single thing over the entire surface. Instead it creates it at a particular location.
For example, in the fairy tale world of the Bible, Adam and Eve were created in the Garden of Eden. They weren't created over the entire surface. So by your logic they should fall back there, not to any random point on the surface.

One point on our PLACE of origin, the entire surface is where we originate from, at any one point on the place of our origin.

It’s not difficult to understand this.

One point on our PLACE of origin

I get it, you are desperate and willing to use whatever pathetic tactics you can.
But again, it is a POINT of origin, not a SURFACE of origin.
Sane people understand this, but not you.

And again, even if you do want to appeal to a SURFACE of origin, it still doesn't work, as things fall DOWN not towards the surface.
Again, this is shown by hills, holes, cliffs and overhangs.

And again, we can easily get a counterexample, by taking water, which according to you originated on the surface and must have because it goes back to the surface, and boiling it, and then all of a sudden it goes away form the surface, yet again showing you are spouting pure BS.

Again, this isn't difficult to understand. Stop playing dumb.

Things must originate from somewhere, as things do exist and must originate from somewhere, to exist.

Things must originate from somewhere, as things do exist and must originate from somewhere, to exist.

Yes, somewhere, a place, a point.
Not an entire surface.

Again, appealing to origin doesn't help you in any way.
You have been provided several examples which show it doesn't work, and you have just ignored them.

The entire surface is where all things originate from, first came to exist on, created to be on.

An entire surface is our place of origin, our region or environment or habitat of origin. And there are countless points on our place of origin, where we first came to exist on our place of origin. And we move from that point to other points on our place of origin.


It’s not difficult to understand this.

Earth is our planet of origin, too. We come to exist on the Earth, and on its surface, and they are both where we originate from.

It’s not difficult to understand this.

it isn't difficult to understand, nor is it difficult to understand that your claim is pure BS.

Once more I know that you are desperate to pretend things originate on the surface so you can pretend things fall down to go back to their origin. But they don't.
Things originate at a point. And they clearly do not fall back to that point.
And again, if you are on a hill or against a cliff or under an overhang, you can break things off and they fall DOWN, not back to the surface.
You can take a fish out of a lake, and it still falls down.
You can go into a tunnel under a lake, and it still falls down.
You can dig a massive hole, quite deep, and drop something from the surface inside, and it falls down.
You can turn water into steam and watch it rise.

So no, things originate a point, not a surface, and things do not return to their origin, even if you want to pretend that is a surface.

Again, your BS simply doesn't work.

Earth is our planet of origin, too. We come to exist on the Earth, and on its surface, and they are both where we originate from.

And notice how that doesn't require a flat Earth at all?
In fact, it actually works a lot better with a round one. Because you can then average that planet, to get a point at the centre, which things fall towards.

You’re clueless. The surface of Earth, the waters on Earth, and the air above Earth, are three distinctly different environments, right?

They are three distinctly different areas where things can originate from, can first come to exist within or on. Even your made up ‘space’ would be a different and unique area where things can originate from, come to exist within, right?

All of them are places or areas or environments where things can originate from.

So Saturn originated in ‘space’, a point within ‘space’, and we originate on Earths surface, and a point on that surface.

A point WITHIN our place of origin.

Where do you think stars originate from? Space? A point of nowhere?

You’re clueless.

There you go projecting again.

The surface of Earth, the waters on Earth, and the air above Earth, are three distinctly different environments, right?

No. If you are just providing a vague "surface of Earth" I see no reason why the water, which can also make up the surface, and the air immediately above it isn't all part of the same environment.
If you want to appeal to different environments, then the peak of a mountain is quite a different environment to a desert.

But I already gave you an example where you consider those areas and show it is pure BS.
Again, take a fish out of a lake and drop it beside it and see how it falls down, not to the lake.
You can then take the fish into a tunnel that goes under the lake, and drop it again, and see how it goes down, rather than up towards the lake.

Again, your claims are pathetic BS which are trivial to refute.
Origin doesn't help at all.
Things do not go to the origin, nor to any magical surface of origin.
Stop acting like a complete moron that comprehend such simple things.

Where do you think stars originate from? Space? A point of nowhere?

Where do you think the earth originated?

If all things that we’ve always seen to be on the Earths surfaces of ground and waters, have always been seen on Earth, have always been on Earth, and always will be on Earth in the future, it’s a good indication that all things have always been on Earth since they first came to exist, were first created, even more likely that is when there has never been something from elsewhere land on Earth.

We’ll never know for sure, we can’t prove where all things on Earth originated from. But everything doesn’t always need that level of proof, to make a valid conclusion without an actual witness seeing it in person.

The weight of evidence is often enough to make a conclusion, a ruling, and we have more than enough evidence for that conclusion, as I see it.

When there’s no evidence it is otherwise, it’s certainly not the other way around more likely at all.

If all things on Earth originated on Earth, not elsewhere than on Earth, which all evidence indicates is the case, what that would mean, is not needing a force in the ball Earth to hold all things down to the surface, because all things were always on the surface from day one.

That’s what we start from, not all things floating around in ‘space’, nothing has ever been seen floating around in space, let alone crashing down on Earth, that’s complete nonsense

The question is ‘what keeps us on the ground’?

We don’t need anything to keep us on the ground but our own mass and density. And it works that way perfectly.

All things are on Earth, because they always have been on Earth. If not, why do things exist on the ground? Why do things only go into air if an external force acts on them to put them into air? Nothing floats up into air by itself. Only things we make with less density than air will rise above the surface by themselves and without an external force acting on them.

Helium filled balloons rise up into air without any force acting on them externally. They rise because of their lesser relative density than air, same way things fall down from air with their greater density than air.

This is an absolute fact, we have measured for that.

What we’ve measured for, is each objects density, and mass as well.
 

An object will rise up in air or water if it’s less dense than air or water, there is no external force acting on them to rise up in air or water. Their lesser density than air or water makes them rise upward in air or water. When their density is measured to be less than air or water, they rise up in air or water. They don’t rise when they are measured as more dense than air or water. They fall or sink down in air or water when more dense than they are. 

This proves it is caused by an objects relative density to air and water, measured to be their relative density.

Their bs is toast, it’s time to bury this crap for good. The end.

We don’t need anything to keep us on the ground but our own mass and density.

Mass and density are not a force.  Why do I need to generate an upward force called lift to fly.

Why can’t I simply jump up and keep going up and up.  My legs pushed me off and away from the ground. 

When I jump, what causes me to slow down faster than what is accounted for by air resistance.  Stop for a split second.  Change travel of direction 180 degrees.  Then what force causes me to accelerate down.  Not drift down, but accelerate down.  How do you accelerate a mass without an unbalanced force. 

it’s a good indication that all things have always been on Earth

No, it isn't.
It is a useless and worthless indication of nothing.

Even more so when it requires to literally reject countless observations of things not from Earth ending up on Earth.

What you are really saying is that your wilful ignorance of reality should be taken as evidence of your delusional BS.

That isn't how any sane person operates.

And even more so, when you keep repeating this same pathetic BS to pretend things magically return to their origin when that clearly isn't the case.

The weight of evidence is often enough to make a conclusion

And we have more than enough evidence to conclude your delusional BS is wrong while gravity works just fine.

When there’s no evidence it is otherwise

But there is.
It is just that lying POS like you ignore it and pretend it is "fake".
Because that is what lying POS like you do. When evidence shows you are wrong, rather than admit it, you just double down on your lies.

what that would mean, is not needing a force

No, it wouldn't.
Even if you want to lie to everyone to pretend everything magically originated on Earth, that still doesn't magically mean you don't need a force.

Again, all the available evidence shows that if you want to accelerate an object then YOU NEED A FORCE;
that if you want to compress a spring then YOU NEED A FORCE;
that if you want to turn a generator to generate electrical power then YOU NEED A FORCE.

So if you want to have objects accelerate towards the ground, if you want objects to compress a spring such as in a scale to measure its weight, if you want to turn a water wheel to generate electrical power, then you need a force making these things go down.

The question is ‘what keeps us on the ground’?

And the only way for this to be a coherent question, is if you recognise the things trying to make us not on the ground.
For example, what keeps us returning to the ground, when we jump?
What keeps us on the ground, even when that results in compressing a spring?
What keeps us on the ground, even with a pressure gradient trying to push us up.

And all of this quite clearly shows WE NEED A FORCE!

We don’t need anything to keep us on the ground but our own mass and density.

And notice how again you just assert the same pathetic crap.
Why should mass and density keep us on the ground?
There is no reasoning at all there, just a pathetic, baseless assertion.

So no, not only does that not work perfectly, it doesn't work at all.

You may as well say the existence of bananas keep us on the ground, and if all the bananas in the world get eaten we will start floating off into space. It makes just as much sense, i.e. none at all.

If not, why do things exist on the ground?

Because of the same force which returns them to the ground when you throw them.

Only things we make with less density than air will rise above the surface by themselves and without an external force acting on them.

Wrong again.

Once more, another aspect of reality you, and other lying POS like you, need to continually flee from is the pressure gradient.

Air has a pressure gradient. All fluids do in a gravitational field when they aren't in free fall.
And do you know what that means?
If you put an object, like a helium filled balloon, into this fluid, there is a greater force acting on it from below than the force acting on it from above.
That an external force.

So no, you are entirely wrong.
Objects lighter than the air do not magically rise on their own accord.
They rise due to the force of the pressure gradient pushing them up.

Lying about this fact and claiming your dishonest delusional BS is an "absolute fact" will not help you. It just how truly pathetic you are.
So all you have managed to prove is how dishonest, desperate and pathetic you are.

Why would there be a force acting to push things up from the surface, if there’s a force acting to pull things down to the surface?

Air pressure doesn’t push anything upward in water or on the ground.  Why claim it does such a thing?

How would you have a force holding all things down to Earth, holding all waters and all air down to the surface, but leaves air above the surface, and water above the surface?

What proves anything is pushed upward against the first idiotic failed made up force you can’t save for your life?

Why would ‘buoyancy’ happen to be the exact same objects with less density than air and water in both cases? It must be an amazing coincidence that their relative density is the deciding factor all the time for both mediums!

Or how about admitting it’s convoluted worthless bs for once? Because a shirt pile of stupid excuses aren’t going to help this fairy tale anymore

Right, things with less mass than air are pulled to the surface by your first made up force, which cannot pull down all the air which has almost no density , while it pulls down gazillion tons of water in the oceans no problem.

Then after the first force which stops pulling down air that birds fly within leaves air above Earth, another force pushes the air upward from Earth, in ‘gradients’!!

Now a helium ballon is pushed upward against the first amazing force, subs rise up in water against the first great force, and all is solved with two made up bs forces just like that!

I’ve got to see your ‘gradients’ push things up from Earth and seev’buoyancy’ defeat your other dip is downward from the previous state , this is not a downward slope or curve or anything.

Do you see the surface past your ‘dip’?

Yes, it’s there after your ‘dip’.

Which means it is NOT A DIP, because it is actually STILL RISING UP AFTER YOUR DIP

Your idiots have lied well to you and it’s hard to think with your own brain again. Coming up with a bs word like ‘dip’ isn’t a lot better for you.

Do you even know what ‘dip’ means, what people think ❤️dip means?

I’m done arguing with morons who have no brain or clue about anything anymore. Dip means a lower level or grade than before, in geographical terms. It is never an upward slope or lesser slope.

But why do I even bother with this crap force in a battle of made up bs forces!!

Why would there be a force acting to push things up from the surface, if there’s a force acting to pull things down to the surface?

As already explained in 2 different ways.
Firstly, the simple way:

They are in a fluid.
This fluid is trying to go down.
The only way for this fluid to go down is to push the other object up.
This is like 2 kids on a see saw.
The heavier one goes down, while the lighter one goes up.
In addition, the weight of the heavier one is reduced by the weight of the lighter one (if you try to measure them while on the see-saw by measuring the force between the seesaw and the ground, assuming it gets that low).

The same happens in a fluid.
The object immersed in a fluid, has its weight reduced by the weight of the fluid displaced.
If that fluid is heavier, the object is pushed up.
You can't have both the fluid and the object go down. One has to go down, while the other goes up.

Again, so simple a child could understand.
But apparently, it is beyond your comprehension.
Is that because you are a complete imbecile so heavily brain damaged you can't understand such simple things?
Or do you fully understand and just refuse to accept it and instead choose to lie to everyone like the lying POS you are?

Or the more complex version:
The fluid is being pulled down by gravity.
This compresses the layer of fluid below, pressurising it which in turn pushes the upper layer back up to support it.
Then the layer below must apply a force to the next layer down for both its weight, and the weight of the fluid above.
This creates a pressure gradient, where the pressure is greater the lower down you are.
If you place an object in this fluid, the pressure gradient means the force of the fluid pushing up from below is greater than the force from the fluid pushing down from above. This results in an upwards force on the object from the fluid.


To reject this, you need to reject one or both of 2 things:
1 - the existence of the pressure gradient.
This is not simply objecting to the above explanation of why a pressure gradient exists, but actually objecting to its existence. This is quite problematic, because this is an empirically verifiable fact. A fact that planes rely upon to do things like measure their altitude. So rejecting this just shows wilful rejection of reality and a desperate attempt by you to cling to a fantasy.
2 - That a pressure gradient would push objects from the region of high pressure to the region of low pressure. Again, this is quite easy to demonstrate fact. It is the basic principle of how firearms work, and pneumatic systems.

Why would ‘buoyancy’ happen to be the exact same objects with less density than air and water in both cases? It must be an amazing coincidence that their relative density is the deciding factor all the time for both mediums!

Because gravity is a force proportional to mass.
i.e. the very thing you hate.
Because of this, the pressure gradient, assuming g and rho remain constant is given by dP=g*rho_fluid*h.
This is because it depends on the weight of the fluid.
If you then take an object (assumed to be a prism for simplicity) with cross sectional area A and height h, and place it in this fluid, this pressure gradient pushes upwards with a force of dP*A.
i.f. F_b = g*rho_fluid*h*A = g*rho_fluid*V.

and the downwards force of gravity is simply F_g=g*m = g*rho_obj*V

So the net force is:
F_n=g*rho_obj*V - g*rho_fluid*V
F_n = g*V*(rho_obj - rho_fluid).

Not an amazing cooincidence.
A simple fact directly expected from the fact that gravity is a force proportional to mass.

Or how about admitting it’s convoluted worthless bs for once? Because a shirt pile of stupid excuses aren’t going to help this fairy tale anymore

You mean your posts? Your pathetic excuses and fairy tale?

Again, the pressure gradient is real, demonstrable, measurable, verifiable fact.
The resulting force from it is trivial to work out.
And then measuring objects shows that as that well as that upwards force from buoyancy, you need a downwards force proportional to the mass of the object.

Right, things with less mass than air are pulled to the surface by your first made up force, which cannot pull down all the air which has almost no density , while it pulls down gazillion tons of water in the oceans no problem.

No, everything is pulled down. But it is not magic.
It can't just magically increase the force to pull things down when other forces act against it.
If it could, everything would be a black hole.
Instead, things rest upon other things.
The water rests upon the surface instead of magically pushing its way through or occupying the same volume.
Each layer supports the layer above. And the same thing happens with air.

You could even imagine a hypothetical world with almost no atmosphere.
Now the air is acting more like a collection of particles than a gas.
These particles, with lots of energy, will fall towards this planet due to gravity, and bounce of the surface.
And they will keep doing that, with virtually no air pressure.
Then if you add more in, you increase the chance for a collision.
Now an air particle can fall down and hit another one, causing it to head back down faster.
This is increasing the pressure.

And it is that pressure which keeps the air above.

Again, if you analyse it honestly (and with intelligence you apparently don't have), it all makes sense.
And you are yet to show any actual fault.

all is solved with two made up bs forces just like that!

No, unlike you we don't need to make up forces.

Instead, this rising and falling of objects is explained by 1 force, gravity. A very real and demonstrable force which you can demonstrate exists yourself but choose not to because it isn't compatible with your delusional fantasy.
A force which both acts directly on the object to try to pull it down, and on the fluid the object is in, trying to pull the fluid down, which creates a pressure gradient which pushes the object up.
This resulting force is often known as buoyancy, but this is not some magic separate extra force. This force is a direct result of gravity and the fluid being supported at the base.

And this force of buoyancy is certainly not made up.
Again, even if you want to reject gravity because your delusional fantasy can't work with it, the pressure gradient which is the buoyant force is easy to demonstrate exists and is quite well documented and relied upon for things like altimeters in planes.
There is no way out of it without rejecting so much of reality it isn't funny.

Do you see the surface past your ‘dip’?

Has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Can you try explaining the pressure gradient? Or you going to claim it doesn't exist?
Can you explain what causes it?
Can you explain why it shouldn't push things up?

Or can you only continue with this pathetic childish wilful rejection of reality?

Pressure doesn’t push things up in air or water. If a sub went to the bottom of the ocean, the pressure would crush it like a peanut, not ‘push it up in water’!

But that doesn’t work with your argument either. That’s okay, just ignore it like you always do when your arguments fail to hold up. Maybe you need to make up a third force that is in the deepest waters which crushes all objects and spits them out in pieces on the ocean floor!!! Call it ‘Jawsity’ or something, the great underwater force which crushes all things!

There are many things that nobody can ever explain. Many have claimed they are due to whatever they think up, because it cannot be proven wrong or proven in any way at all, and they claim to have explained them all by that sort of bs.

Nobody knows how the Earth or Sun or life was created, but they were created, that’s all we know for sure. It isn’t by magic, because we cannot explain them, that’s just pure ignorance and stupidity.

Saying it was created by our Creator cannot be proven nor ever could be proven true or false, but it’s the only answer I have for these things.

One thing I do know though, is that if they weren’t faking and hiding everything from us, and actually going up in craft to study the stars and all above us, to understand them better, to know how they work, and how they can move like that, and change shapes and colours, all which we SHOULD be doing now instead of faking and lying to us all the time, then even if we never really can explain all these things completely, we’d have a much better understanding of these amazing creations God gave for us to see and gaze upon.

Exactly like Von Braun said, that both science and religion should work together to understand the heavens, both have value and merit in this greatest of all ventures that they are preventing from doing for a grotesque and evil lie.

Pressure gradients were created like everything else was.

Oceans have huge volumes of deep waters within them, as do some lakes.  All that water on top is a heavy mass on the lower waters of it, creating more and more pressure on the lowest water below the rest above it.

That’s why shallow waters don’t have much pressure at their bottoms while oceans and deep lakes do.

The air and water has density like all other things do. But they have larger areas of air and water with density, and come downwards toward the surface due to their overall density, creating pressure gradients that are greater at lower levels of air and water, when deep enough for it.

They do not push anything upward in these pressure gradients, they crush or mash them inward on themselves with that oressure.