d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Flat Earth > Real Stars
Prev1323334353689Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 11,801
Joined: Nov 21 2008
Gold: 1,002.00
Warn: 10%
Oct 31 2016 08:25am
Quote (Morphmcmanerson @ 31 Oct 2016 14:36)
Gravity is a prerequisite for determining buoyancy. :bonk:
Unless you can tell me what other force it could possibly be acting against...


yeah lol. Although it could be worked around by imagining new laws..

The flat earth discussion is pointless though.. Just travel to the southern hemisphere and look at the "real stars".

This post was edited by Knaapie on Oct 31 2016 08:32am
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
Oct 31 2016 09:04am
Quote (Morphmcmanerson @ Oct 31 2016 03:36am)
Gravity is a prerequisite for determining buoyancy. :bonk:
Unless you can tell me what other force it could possibly be acting against...


vibration density, temperature, and buoyancy. Why do things lighter than air density rise while also do things lighter than water density rise?

Why doesn't your gravity work then?

There are several ways to disprove gravity.
1) Experimentally
One simple experiment shows there is no gravity. The Helium Balloon. It rises. How is this
possible? Classical Mechanics shows that Force equals the Constant of Gravity multiplied by the
Mass of Object 1 multiplied by the Mass of Object 2 divided by the Distance between the two
masses raised to the second power.
F=GM1M2/r^2
With this logic, the mass of the Earth is so great that the helium balloon would have no choice but
to be attracted to the Earth. We have mass 1 pulling on mass 2 and mass 2 pulling on mass 1.
F1 = F2. This is just wrong. The force of the balloon that pulls the Earth is not equal to the force
that the Earth pulls on the balloon. It would not rise. What we see in the experiment that the
helium is rising to meet its level of density.
2) Commutitive
The mathematics of gravity is a concept called Zero Point Mass. This is a mass without a volume.
This is not found in the universe. The main problem here is the reduction of 3 dimensional
densities to 0 dimensional masses. Once a density is reduces to a mass, the mass cannot be
returned to the original shape of the density. So we cannot cube a zero and get anything but
another zero. This breaks the commutative properties of addition.
Let’s look at some of the equations and how gravity fails at a fundamental level.
F=ma : Force equals mass times acceleration.
We have a zero dimensional mass * a 2 dimensional vector and that does not equal a 3
dimensional field. So the main axiom of gravity fails the commutative test.
This alone should disprove gravity.
F = G(M1*M2)/r^2 : Force = The constant of Gravity * (The zero dimensional mass 1 * The zero
dimensional mass 2)/ The 3 dimensional length between them squared. So every object pulls
every other object. The dimensional problem occurs again.
A constant is what is used to fill in the gaps. When things do not work the way we want them to,
we just add a constant to fix the problem. When the equation no longer works, we change the
constant’s value.
Physicists know about this problem. They created gravity waves and shell modeling to
compensate for the dimensionless mass. But gravity is still dimensionless. The dimensionless
mass cannot create a 3 dimensional shape.
We all know that gravity collapses under the scrutiny of the tiny. Quantum level objects do not
show any signs of gravity. The particle accelerators prove this. They have yet to find any force
that works as gravity is described.
3) Gravity fails the multi-body test.
Gravity can only compute the force between 2 objects. Any equation that uses a sum of objects
fails in this way. First the two objects force is computed then the third body is computed with the
resultant of the first two bodies. Then that resultant is computed with the 4 body... That is how
summation works. The problem is that the distance between object 1 and 2 is not evaluated in the
next iteration.
4) Gravity and Complex Systems.
Let’s look at a hurricane that is traveling over the ocean. The spinning winds cause rotation in the
ocean. The low pressure of the storm causes a bulge upward in the ocean. Heat and pressure
are two of the main variables in this system. As the temp increases it decreases the pressure of
the storm, causing an increase in intensity in the storm. The heated air is forced up the eye wall.
This is an example of a temperature/pressure force on density. It is not possible for gravity to
describe this system, with or without spheres.
5) Questions posed by others:
- the rain fall because of gravity.
- the rain occurs because of water vapor cooling (temperature going closer to the dew point).
- the rain formation in itself is a very complex phenomena.
- the dynamics of rain formation depends on the presence of aerosols and fine particles.
- the dynamics of rain formation also depends on complex collision and coalescence
phenomena.
- the ascending motion of air is driven by gravity on all parts of the atmosphere.
- this ascending motion is also affected by the Coriolis force.
- this motion is affected also by the drag of rain.
- this motion is also affected by the detailed geometry of the hurricane.
- the fluid dynamics itself exhibits an incredible complexity, like turbulence and instabilities.
- the term "T" in the Navier-Stokes equation above hides a lot of complexities that often still need
to be understood.
- heat exchange plays an important role, yet it is not simpler than the fluid dynamics.
- the rain fall because of gravity
Rain falls because as cold water it is more dense or less buoyant then the surrounding air.
- the rain occurs because of water vapor cooling (temperature going closer to the dew point).
Yes, that is one way of looking at density and Buoyancy
- the rain formation in itself is a very complex phenomena.
Yes
- the dynamics of rain formation depends on the presence of aerosols and fine particles
Yes, the mixture of dirty water causes it to be a more dense mixture.
- the dynamics of rain formation also depends on complex collision and coalescence
phenomena.
Yes again, as the less dense gas collides with other gases, their temperature reduces and the
gas becomes liquid. This process occurs until the liquid water is heavier than the force of the
updraft.
- the ascending motion of air is driven by gravity on all parts of the atmosphere .
No. The ascending motion of air is due to the changes in temperature. The air heats at the
ground and rises. As it rises it cools and becomes liquid again. The liquid water is more dense
then the surrounding air.
- this ascending motion is also affected by the Coriolis force .
There are only 4 forces, Gluon - nuclear, W Boson - magnetism, Z Boson - electricity, and the
Photon - heat. Those are the only forces that have been experimentally shown.

- this motion is affected also by the drag of rain
Of course, As rain falls it drags against the updraft. This is the friction that removes the heat from
the air. Heat radiates to cold.
- this motion is also affected by the detailed geometry of the hurricane
The motion is the geometry of the cyclone. Geometry is a snapshot in time of an object.
- the fluid dynamics itself exhibits an incredible complexity, like turbulence and instabilities
The whole system is buoyancy. Buoyancy is only fluid dynamics. As a matter of opinion,
everything is fluid dynamics.
- the term "T" in the Navier-Stokes equation above hides a lot of complexities that often still need
to be understood
Like G, they change T frequently. These changes of G try to mimic the evidence. Just change the
constant and you will get what you want to see.
- heat exchange plays an important role, yet it is not simpler than the fluid dynamics
Heat exchange is intrinsic to fluid dynamics. You cannot remove heat from the fluid dynamics
problem.
- yet, suppress gravity and there are no hurricanes anymore
One cannot suppress gravity. Gravity is not real. It’s an old model of how objects move. Evidence
has forced major changes in gravity. There is no supporting evidence of a graviton. It is like the
Higg’s boson. Something that was built to try to explain interactions, but it does not.
6) Silly paradoxes created by gravity.
a. Black Holes are easily disproven by Crothers at sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com
b. Worm holes/Time travel
c. Parallel Universes
d. Relativity
e. Flat universe
f. Graviton decay
g. Higg’s Boson

Kepler's 3 laws are more in line with how planets orbit the sun. This is because of the Sun’s motion
around the galaxy. This causes the elliptical shape of the orbit. Not gravity. Gravity cannot explain 3 body
interactions. If the equation has a G in it then it is a Zero Point Mass system and that does not exist in
the universe.
The rules of the universe are simple. An atoms position in a system is based upon its density in relation to
the surrounding densities and the changes in magnetism, electricity and temperature. Density is the most
important function in determining the position of an object. Density is the vibration intensity within a
volume in relation to the density of the surrounding medium.

Quote (Knaapie @ Oct 31 2016 04:25am)
yeah lol. Although it could be worked around by imagining new laws..

The flat earth discussion is pointless though.. Just travel to the southern hemisphere and look at the "real stars".


The stars of the north hemisphere are visible well into the lower hemisphere, this is not even remotely true of the southern stars.

The ball is propaganda and was designed to get Sailors in the 16 century to not be afraid of falling off the edge of the Earth and adopted into British Schools when they broke away from the Church and was seen as a boost to commercial activity and therefore quickly adapted by merchants.



This post was edited by card_sultan on Oct 31 2016 09:32am
Member
Posts: 14,099
Joined: Jul 13 2006
Gold: 83.30
Oct 31 2016 09:26am
The principle of superposition explains a lot of what you don't understand.

Relativity has literally been proven to work. You wouldn't have a working GPS without it.

I used m*g to make a EM controller work today so definitely working too.
Member
Posts: 92,921
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Oct 31 2016 09:31am
"Why doesn't your almighty gravity work on a buoyant object in a pool?"

how can someone honestly be this fucking dumb? i mean how is that possible? Gravity is a weaker force and the buoyancy of a highly buoyant object. i'm not sure why that's a hard dynamic to understand when a 4 year old with a rubber ducky can figure it out...

This post was edited by thesnipa on Oct 31 2016 09:31am
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
Oct 31 2016 09:38am
Quote (thesnipa @ Oct 31 2016 05:31am)
"Why doesn't your almighty gravity work on a buoyant object in a pool?"

how can someone honestly be this fucking dumb? i mean how is that possible? Gravity is a weaker force and the buoyancy of a highly buoyant object. i'm not sure why that's a hard dynamic to understand when a 4 year old with a rubber ducky can figure it out...


Gravity (the mass of the earth) that keeps the trillions of tons of water from spinning off the earth is not as strong as a things that float in water? How can you be this fucking dumb?

How is this possible? Classical Mechanics shows that Force equals the Constant of Gravity multiplied by the
Mass of Object 1 multiplied by the Mass of Object 2 divided by the Distance between the two
masses raised to the second power.
F=GM1M2/r^2
With this logic, the mass of the Earth is so great that the helium balloon would have no choice but
to be attracted to the Earth. We have mass 1 pulling on mass 2 and mass 2 pulling on mass 1.
F1 = F2. This is just wrong.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Oct 31 2016 09:41am
Member
Posts: 19,898
Joined: May 10 2009
Gold: 1.50
Oct 31 2016 09:39am
Quote (card_sultan @ Oct 31 2016 10:38am)
How can you be this fucking dumb?


Irony
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
Oct 31 2016 09:43am
Quote (Morphmcmanerson @ Oct 31 2016 05:39am)
Irony


Classical Mechanics shows that Force equals the Constant of Gravity multiplied by the
Mass of Object 1 multiplied by the Mass of Object 2 divided by the Distance between the two
masses raised to the second power.
F=GM1M2/r^2
With this logic, the mass of the Earth is so great that the helium balloon would have no choice but
to be attracted to the Earth. We have mass 1 pulling on mass 2 and mass 2 pulling on mass 1.
F1 = F2. This is just dumb.


your move.

Member
Posts: 53,548
Joined: Mar 6 2008
Gold: 7,908.33
Oct 31 2016 09:43am
Some people just don't understand the gravity of the situation.
Member
Posts: 63,097
Joined: Jan 11 2005
Gold: 9,765.00
Warn: 60%
Oct 31 2016 09:46am
Quote (cambovenzi @ Oct 31 2016 05:43am)
Some people just don't understand the gravity of the situation.


That gravity is real.
Member
Posts: 7,324
Joined: Dec 22 2002
Gold: 1,261.00
Oct 31 2016 09:59am
Quote (card_sultan @ Oct 31 2016 08:43am)
Classical Mechanics shows that Force equals the Constant of Gravity multiplied by the
Mass of Object 1 multiplied by the Mass of Object 2 divided by the Distance between the two
masses raised to the second power.
F=GM1M2/r^2
With this logic, the mass of the Earth is so great that the helium balloon would have no choice but
to be attracted to the Earth. We have mass 1 pulling on mass 2 and mass 2 pulling on mass 1.
F1 = F2. This is just dumb.


your move.


Card, do you know what a seesaw is? A toy that looks like a stick with a fulcrum in the middle, and a seat on each end?
I was with my older kid at the playground the other day, and they had one of these. She sat on one end and I sat on the other, and suddenly something incredible happened. She started to rise into the air. It was incredible, I had no explanation for it. Somehow, right at the moment of me sitting on my end of the seesaw, hers decide to rise against all laws of gravity I know.
Clearly gravity isn't real, because if it was the mass of the Earth (plus the mass of my kid, she's still got some baby fat on her) would be so great that she would have no choice but to be attracted to it.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1323334353689Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll