Gravity does not exist

[neutrino_cannon]

Straw man fallacy. I only said there was no gravity. Do things usually keep moving forever, in your experience?

Assuming squichydave is capable of a net force of flatulence greater than that of air resistance, he should go orbital.

Oh, wait, I forgot, no orbits, no gravity.

And since I live in a world lit by a sun that every day (and has everyday according to reliable historical records) moved relative to the earth, yes, it is my experience that Newton wasn't just a loony.

 

[richardm]

If matter is solid, then there can't be a force pulling me down to the center of the earth.

The solid matter between you and the centre of the Earth is what stops you being pulled down to the centre of the Earth.

 

[AWPrime]

Is this for real?

 

[neutrino_cannon]

Is this for real?

Originally posted by iconoclast
it's just a really impressive illusion.

Well that answers your question, quiaff?

 

[AWPrime]

Yes.

The lack of understanding of the proportions of the involved forces, is still amazing.



So Question, what is keeping your rear from floating away?

 

[Question]

Assuming squichydave is capable of a net force of flatulence greater than that of air resistance, he should go orbital.

I don't think even you can make a fart that big. Use some common sense.

Oh, wait, I forgot, no orbits, no gravity.

And since I live in a world lit by a sun that every day (and has everyday according to reliable historical records) moved relative to the earth, yes, it is my experience that Newton wasn't just a loony.

Astronomical bodies aren't subject to significant air resistance.

 

[Kumar]

The "skeptic" community prides itself on believing only what there is proof or evidence for. But I have yet to see the proof that there is a force called gravity pulling everything to the center of the earth.

May be you hold some sense. It can be somewhat 'tornado" type effect--whole universe based not just earth. About shoes, because legs are near earth, shoes tends to be attreaced toward earth.

 

[Question]

The solid matter between you and the centre of the Earth is what stops you being pulled down to the centre of the Earth.

Exactly. And if there is no force that pulls things down to the center of the earth, gravity is falsified.

 

[Question]

Yes.

The lack of understanding of the proportions of the involved forces, is still amazing.



So Question, what is keeping your rear from floating away?

Already addressed!

"LOL! Why would your computer float away, just because it was not being pulled to the center of the earth? You commit a false dilemma fallacy."

 

[AWPrime]

No it hasn't been addressed.


What force is keeping; planets from leaving orbit and objects on these planets from floating into space?

If you can't give me a good alternative to gravity, I will win this debate.

 

[neutrino_cannon]

I'm curious, if no constant downforce exists on us, why we don't drift upwards as we walk. After all, we do exert quite a bit of downforce with each step, the forward propulsion is ony the product of the coefficient of friction and our normal force.

And if there's no gravity, then there would be no normal reaction force, ergo no friction between solid objects that lie upon each other. How do you explain this in absence of gravity?

The earth's velocity is tangential to it's orbit around the Sun. there is no reason it should continue to accelerate in a circle like it does unless the Sun exerted force upon the Earth.

If objects did not always fall as a result of gravity, the air would be unbreathable. Dust particles, as the most common objects on Earth in general, would fill the air and would not settle.

A ship would not float in the absence of gravity, because bouyancy is a reaction force which only exists when there is a downforce on a body of fluid.

Finally, if there were no gravity, then there would be no seriousness. It's definitional. All the threads on this forum would be as silly as this one, which is not the case, ergo gravity exists.

 

[Soapy Sam]

Question.

Your opening post reveals two areas of ignorance.
1) Ignorance of the nature of gravity
2) Ignorance of the scientific process.

Now 1) is perfectly excusable. Nobody "understands" gravity, which is why Einstein unsuccessfully spent his latter years trying to find a unified field theory.

Item 2) is less excusable if you intend to ask questions on this board. You will be mocked. (You just have been. I wonder if you realised?)

Since the seventeenth century we have had a reliable model of how the effects of gravity can be accurately calculated. That model is predictive.In fact it is so successful that it was used to put men on the Moon and slingshot probes precisely around the outer planets. Perhaps you missed this.

Since the first decade of last century, we have had a refined version of this model, viewing gravity as a property of spacetime, rather than a disembodied force acting at long distance. The point of view differs widely, the calculations differ somewhat and the results differ , in most cases, hardly at all. (We are nowhere near having the technology to cope with those situations where the differences will be significant, but we do know what they will be).

The notion of a force holding you down is obsolete. Read any school physics text. However, here is an experiment you might care to try.

Put your chair outside. With a shovel, start digging a hole underneath the chair (and yourself of course.) After a while, it will become apparent even to you, that no matter how fast you dig, you are always at the bottom of the hole.

Now why do you think that is?

 

[Question]

No it hasn't been addressed.


What force is keeping; planets from leaving orbit and objects on these planets from floating into space?

What force would make anything float off into space?

If you can't give me a good alternative to gravity, I will win this debate.

Why should I provide an alternative to gravity? The burden of proof is on you to show that gravity exists in the first place. Surely this shouldn't be so hard, as gravity is supposedly all around us.

 

[Question]

I'm curious, if no constant downforce exists on us, why we don't drift upwards as we walk. After all, we do exert quite a bit of downforce with each step, the forward propulsion is ony the product of the coefficient of friction and our normal force.

I'm tired of debunking theoretical arguments. PROVE that we don't drift upwards as we walk, and then we'll talk.

And if there's no gravity, then there would be no normal reaction force, ergo no friction between solid objects that lie upon each other. How do you explain this in absence of gravity?

Ha, ha, how does your model explain friction between bubble gum and ceilings?

The earth's velocity is tangential to it's orbit around the Sun. there is no reason it should continue to accelerate in a circle like it does unless the Sun exerted force upon the Earth.

All this talk. Have you actually been up there to find out?

If objects did not always fall as a result of gravity, the air would be unbreathable. Dust particles, as the most common objects on Earth in general, would fill the air and would not settle.

No, dust would diffuse away from the earth.

A ship would not float in the absence of gravity, because bouyancy is a reaction force which only exists when there is a downforce on a body of fluid.

I suppose you think a ship would sink in the absense of gravity eh!

Finally, if there were no gravity, then there would be no seriousness. It's definitional. All the threads on this forum would be as silly as this one, which is not the case, ergo gravity exists.

That's just plain empirically wrong.

 

[SquishyDave]

OK Question if that is your real name. Go jump off the roof of a house, that thing that makes you go towards the ground really fast, instead of either going away from the ground, or not going anywhere, that's called gravity. What's the difficulty?

 

[Anders W. Bonde]

Experiment time:

Suspend 'Question' from a tall, robust tree by a rope looped around 'Questions' neck, but keep rope tension lax by propping 'Question' up on the back of a live, but stationary horse located immediately below the suspension point. Now kick the horse's hindquarters and observe the effect. I predict that gravity will in this case assist us in never again having to respond to such trolling OP's from 'Question' again.

Edited to add: [Disclaimer: Satirical post. Not to be taken seriously.]

 

[Question]

Question.

Your opening post reveals two areas of ignorance.
1) Ignorance of the nature of gravity
2) Ignorance of the scientific process.

Now 1) is perfectly excusable. Nobody "understands" gravity, which is why Einstein unsuccessfully spent his latter years trying to find a unified field theory.

LOL, scientists must admit they can't explain gravity, but it's in every textbook. Typically stupid scientists.

Item 2) is less excusable if you intend to ask questions on this board. You will be mocked. (You just have been. I wonder if you realised?)

Since the seventeenth century we have had a reliable model of how the effects of gravity can be accurately calculated.

Having a model of the effects of gravity is stupid unless you can prove that these effects exist. You can't do it. I dare you.

That model is predictive.In fact it is so successful that it was used to put men on the Moon

Prove it.

and slingshot probes precisely around the outer planets. Perhaps you missed this.

Since the first decade of last century, we have had a refined version of this model, viewing gravity as a property of spacetime, rather than a disembodied force acting at long distance. The point of view differs widely, the calculations differ somewhat and the results differ , in most cases, hardly at all. (We are nowhere near having the technology to cope with those situations where the differences will be significant, but we do know what they will be).

The notion of a force holding you down is obsolete. Read any school physics text. However, here is an experiment you might care to try.

Like JREF, why should I do any experiments for you? You do the experiment, with your own resources, and submit proof of your results.

Put your chair outside. With a shovel, start digging a hole underneath the chair (and yourself of course.) After a while, it will become apparent even to you, that no matter how fast you dig, you are always at the bottom of the hole.

Now why do you think that is?

Because you can imagine whatever outcome you want for an imaginary experiment.

 

[Question]

OK Question if that is your real name. Go jump off the roof of a house, that thing that makes you go towards the ground really fast, instead of either going away from the ground, or not going anywhere, that's called gravity. What's the difficulty?

What makes you think I would go toward the ground really fast? You are assuming that gravity exists in order to prove that it exists.

 

[Question]

Experiment time:

Suspend 'Question' from a tall, robust tree by a rope looped around 'Questions' neck, but keep rope tension lax by propping 'Question' up on the back of a live, but stationary horse located immediately below the suspension point. Now kick the horse's hindquarters and observe the effect. I predict that gravity will in this case assist us in never again having to respond to such trolling OP's from 'Question' again.

Edited to add: [Disclaimer: Satirical post. Not to be taken seriously.]

The burden of proof is on you. You do the experiment, and get back to us with proof of the results.

 

[RamblingOnwards]

I'm tired of debunking theoretical arguments. PROVE that we don't drift upwards as we walk, and then we'll talk.

Noone this stupid has the mental capacity to use a computer.

The only thing anyone will learn from this thread is that sceptics are insanely willing to answer questions and provide proof.