Gravity does not exist

[athon]

I really have to ask; is Question a troll? Seriously...because as a science teacher, I truly am having trouble believing that anybody who has reached a grade 7 level of education can have such a poor grasp of science.

Beleth's experiment is simple and perfect. Since Question is the one proclaiming that the accepted paradigm for the observations of an unqualified force labelled 'gravity' are incorrect, he should be the one nominating variables that could be used to account for an alternative.

But either Question is intentionally stirring the ants nest, or he really does have a poor idea of how science works. If it's the former, it's in porr taste (and lost its humour a page or so ago). If the latter...well, it becomes funny again.

Athon

 

[Question]

But you know what? It doesn't matter. You want a helium balloon to be one of the three items, fine. I accept. As long as the test container is a vacuum, my theory predicts that the balloon will accelerate downwards the same way the feather or the billiard ball will.

Very well, do the experiment and get back to us eh!

 

[Anders]

I have found that small objects are not pulled to the center of the earth, and that some in fact fly up toward the sky. Gravitationalists will not admit this however, because there is money to be made in keeping the public deceived.

I would say that most physicists agree that there are objects that not defy gravity, but are just light enough to be lifted by up-moving air. Nothing can defy gravity. To bad though, it would be fun if we could.

However, as I so patiently described before, objects don’t continue to the center of earth just because there are material in the way, like concrete, dirt, stone, magma, etc. The materials are hold together by electromagnetic forces, which are much stronger than gravity. Therefore the objects can’t penetrate for instances my floor, unless it is very heavy. You see, gravity depends on the mass of the objects attracted. The planet Earth and the elephant (just an example, we could use a car as well) attract each other so much that the electromagnetic bonds between the cellulose molecules in my floor would break, and the elephant fall down into the basement, where the bond between mineral molecules probably would hold. So the elephant would not fall to the canter of earth, but it would fall a bit though, to my basement.

This is all testable and tests have been carried out.

I think you are doing this to show us “sceptics” that we are so stupid that we don’t understand that nothing is provable. So by showing us that gravity can’t be proven, how on earth could ESP, homeopathy and other woo-woo things be explained and proven.

Sorry, but it’s not the same thing. Gravity has been observed since Newton, and explained since the turn of the last century. To my knowledge, neither ESP nor homeopathy effects have never been observed in scientifically scrutinized conditions.

Or you just talking us for an exercise round on the track!

 

[Beleth]

Very well, do the experiment and get back to us eh!

Hold on, Question, we haven't finished defining the experiment yet.

 

[Beleth]

Experiment Description 2.0

Three objects will be placed individually in a cylindrical vertical vacuum chamber. They will be held near the middle of the vacuum chamber by a mechanical restraining device (tongs, vice, etc.). The chamber will be evacuated, and allowed to come to rest until both the velocity and the acceleration of the object with respect to the vacuum chamber is zero. The object will then be released from the restraining device and be allowed to move freely in the chamber.

Each object will be subjected to this procedure ten times.

The objects are:
- A helium balloon
- A billiard ball
- A 1Kg weight made of a nonmagnetic material


Prediction
The expected behavior of the object in the chamber will be to accelerate downward until it hits the bottom of the chamber.


Success Criterion
The experiment will be considered a success (i.e. the existence of gravity will be confirmed to the satisfaction of all parties involved) if each object displays the behavior described in the Prediction eight times out of ten.



How's that, Question?
Anything else you would like to add?
I'm serious about this... if you don't suggest changes to this, I will perform this experiment this weekend, and I will expect us both to abide by the results.

 

[Question]

How's that, Question?
Anything else you would like to add?
I'm serious about this... if you don't suggest changes to this, I will perform this experiment this weekend, and I will expect us both to abide by the results.

Can you videotape the procedure so we know you did it?

 

[Beleth]

Can you videotape the procedure so we know you did it?

Is that a requirement?

I mean, will you consider a videotaped demonstration as sufficient proof, given the fact that videotapes can be altered?

 

[davidhorman]

The objects are:
- A helium balloon

Won't that one be a bit problematic in a vacuum?

Can you videotape the procedure so we know you did it?

Can't you just provide us with one counterexample that defies the generally (by which I mean universally, save a few crackpots) accepted idea of gravity? You said earlier:

I have found that small objects are not pulled to the center of the earth, and that some in fact fly up toward the sky.

What are those small objects? Are you implying that you believe large objects are pulled to the center of the earth? By "flying", are these small objects exerting a force, and if so, why do they have to do this if there is no force pulling them down?

How do you explain snow and rain always falling down and not up? Or are you, as someone suggested, simply trying to back everyone into a corner over terms like "proof" and "evidence" so you can scoff at the sooper-sceptics for being so cynical?

David

 

[Beleth]

Won't that one be a bit problematic in a vacuum?

I anticipate no problems. The helium will be on the inside of the balloon, and the vacuum will be on the outside.

 

[Question]

Is that a requirement?

I mean, will you consider a videotaped demonstration as sufficient proof, given the fact that videotapes can be altered?

It would be much more difficult/expensive to make a flawless, undetectably fake video than it would be to just lie about it.

 

[Carn]

I anticipate no problems. The helium will be on the inside of the balloon, and the vacuum will be on the outside.

But the helium causes a outward pressure, that normally is counter by the outside air.

So in vacuum your balloon will at least be slightly bigger that in air and can hold less helium inside without being destroyed.

Also balloon is not totally tight and the amount of helium that flows out would be bigger in vacuum.

But this is managable

Carn

 

[Question]

So in vacuum your balloon will at least be slightly bigger that in air and can hold less helium inside without being destroyed.

Of course if the balloon has less helium in it, it won't rise. Do you all think I'm stupid? You have to use the normal amount of helium in the baloon, or you haven't proven anything!!!

 

[Carn]

Of course if the balloon has less helium in it, it won't rise. Do you all think I'm stupid? You have to use the normal amount of helium in the baloon, or you haven't proven anything!!!

Do you think it would be sufficient, to fill one balloon with an amount of helium, show that it rises in normal air and then fill the same amount of helium into an identical balloon and do the test?

Also i'm not certain whether my thoughts realy are a problem, i just gave them, as i think there might be a problem.

And do you realy think that there is nothing like gravity?

If so, why do you think, people manage to get satelittes up and keep them staying up there? All space flight calculation is done with newtons gravtitation law, maybe slightly modified for general relativity. If that law is wrong, why are satellites and space shuttle operating succesfully most of the time and do get where they should get? How was the flight to the moon manage? Or do you think some or all of this are hoaxes?

Carn

 

[athon]

Do you think it would be sufficient, to fill one balloon with an amount of helium, show that it rises in normal air and then fill the same amount of helium into an identical balloon and do the test?

Also i'm not certain whether my thoughts realy are a problem, i just gave them, as i think there might be a problem.

And do you realy think that there is nothing like gravity?

If so, why do you think, people manage to get satelittes up and keep them staying up there? All space flight calculation is done with newtons gravtitation law, maybe slightly modified for general relativity. If that law is wrong, why are satellites and space shuttle operating succesfully most of the time and do get where they should get? How was the flight to the moon manage? Or do you think some or all of this are hoaxes?

Carn

Question is a troll simply looking for attention. He's found it. I honestly feel that somebody who can coordinate his brain cells to spell correctly and form coherent sentences must also be capable of understanding basic science. Even Kumar can present something of an argument in a child-like manner. Question has not even done that.

If it was a true query, he would have postulated an inconsistency in the observation of gravity in his early posts. He didn't. Therefore he is simply stirring the nest and watching the ants run.

*yawn*

Athon

 

[BillHoyt]

He's playing skeptic-as-doubting-Thomas. Basically, a three-year-old's "why" game. One error made was in not calling Question on the "objects of my choice" bit. By proposing specific objects, the posters missed that Question would simply turn the tables and accuse them of choosing objects for which they already knew the results. They correctly saw that was what Question was up to, didn't call it, named objects instead and gave the opportunity for Question to turn the tables. The better response would have been to directly call Question on his game and propose instead that the test be done with mutually agreed upon objects, ala JREF claimant procedure.

 

[Beleth]

The better response would have been to directly call Question on his game and propose instead that the test be done with mutually agreed upon objects, ala JREF claimant procedure.

We have indeed come up with mutually agreed objects.

We agree that a helium balloon, a billiard ball, and a nonmagnetic 1 Kg mass (I keep calling it a "weight", my bad) are agreeable.

 

[Beleth]

It would be much more difficult/expensive to make a flawless, undetectably fake video than it would be to just lie about it.

That does not answer my question, so I will ask it again.

Will you consider a videotaped demonstration as sufficient proof?

 

[BillHoyt]

We have indeed come up with mutually agreed objects.

We agree that a helium balloon, a billiard ball, and a nonmagnetic 1 Kg mass (I keep calling it a "weight", my bad) are agreeable.

Perhaps you missed this angling for an out, quoted below:

Of course if the balloon has less helium in it, it won't rise. Do you all think I'm stupid? You have to use the normal amount of helium in the baloon, or you haven't proven anything!!![/b]

 

[Beleth]

Of course if the balloon has less helium in it, it won't rise.

Aren't you presupposing gravity by saying this?

Do you all think I'm stupid?

I can't speak for everyone, but as for me personally, no, I do not. You are playing the fool, but that is actually a very important step in skepticism.

I don't believe for a minute that you think gravity doesn't exist. But since your stated objection has merit beyond determining whether gravity really exists or not, I am willing to play along.

 

[Alkatran]

What if the balloon expands to the point where it comes in contact with the sides of the container, slowing it due to friction?