0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Mr. Newton was hit on the head by a falling apple and realized there must be a force pulling the apple to the ground. He called this force gravity. But something falling to the ground does not mean the force is pulling. It could be a force pushing it to the ground.
There could also just be atmospheric pressure. Once gravity had a name, everyone assumed a force was pulling us toward earth and began to try to explain this force.
When we look at the evidence however, a force pushing or pulling is out of the question.
My question for this theory is, if the core spinning in the opposite direction causes gravity,...
... then what was the force that caused the heavy elements to sink to the center in the first place. Are we to believe that the process of creating gravity requires there to already be gravity?
If there was a force pushing or pulling us to the earth then the things with the least amount of mass would fall faster than things with more mass.
Take a fan for example, a feather blows away before a rock would.
But as we know, items with the most mass are effected by (gravity) more than items with less mass.
So there is a problem with the gravity theory.
Also if there was a force pulling us to the earth, then the farther away from the earth we go the less the force should have an effect. But as we know, it is opposite of that. The farther away we get, or higher in altitude we go, the stronger the force.
And not only should the force weaken the farther away we get, but it should gradually weaken until there is no effect at all. But instead it gets stronger and stronger until you take one step past the atmosphere and all of a sudden no effect. So the only place (gravity) has an effect is within the atmosphere.
I hate to break this to you, but someone beat you to it and published 1st.You need to read posts by and replies to Gazza177.He will probably cry plagiarism, but welcome your support.Not sure where you get the idea that the earth's core rotating causes gravity, but no physicist would suggest that.Also there is no evidence that objects with greater mass fall faster, I think you misunderstand mass and air resistance.Anyway, I'm not going to engage in this one as it's been done to death in the other threads.I leave you to your misguided beliefs.
Are you a troll? Things weigh less the higher you go. only a handful of people on earth would believe us and have made this statement. Forget about that centrifugal theory in the mix. Loada tosh. My aim with our theory is Back to the Future-Hoverboard-Got any ideas?
Well first of all I get the notion that the core causes gravity from how they teach it in school. Also someone on this very site said the same thing, or you can google it. If you do that you will see many people must believe the core causes gravity. Go to physics.org, the very first sentence is, it is believed to be generated deep down in the earths core. Secondly, I am not saying it is caused by the core, I am saying it is not caused by the core. I am not even saying there is a core, there is no evidence of that is there? So no, I am certainly not suggesting the core does anything. And sir, you never read anywhere where I claimed that items with more mass fall faster..read slower...I clearly said that if there was a force (which I clearly do not believe there is) then items with less mass should fall faster, but they do not. Hence I do not believe the force exist. And I do not think the force that keeps planets in orbit is the same force holding us to the planet. You are right about one thing I ignored, drag. That was just a bad example. But it makes no difference, take away the drag. Take 2 pieces of metal the exact same size and shape but with different weights and it works out the same. You make a lot of claims about gravity as if they were fact, just like the teacher saying gravity is caused by the core. But they are not proven facts, merely theories. And for your question about "do I really think scientist could miss something so simple, and do I really think you all are that dumb", well take a good look at past history of science and you tell me. Show me a force you can create that effects two objects of substantial different mass the same. Can you do that? And gazza if this was your idea then kudos to you and no I am not a troll. Also you both should go back and read the agreement you signed to register to this site.
Scientific revolutionModern work on gravitational theory began with the work of Galileo Galilei in the late 16th and early 17th centuries. In his famous (though possibly apocryphal[1]) experiment dropping balls from the Tower of Pisa, and later with careful measurements of balls rolling down inclines, Galileo showed that gravity accelerates all objects at the same rate. This was a major departure from Aristotle's belief that heavier objects accelerate faster.[2] Galileo postulated air resistance as the reason that lighter objects may fall more slowly in an atmosphere. Galileo's work set the stage for the formulation of Newton's theory of gravity.
If you do that you will see many people must believe the core causes gravity.
Go to physics.org, the very first sentence is, it is believed to be generated deep down in the earths core.
Secondly, I am not saying it is caused by the core, I am saying it is not caused by the core. I am not even saying there is a core, there is no evidence of that is there?
So no, I am certainly not suggesting the core does anything. And sir, you never read anywhere where I claimed that items with more mass fall faster..read slower...
I clearly said that if there was a force (which I clearly do not believe there is) then items with less mass should fall faster, but they do not. Hence I do not believe the force exist.
And I do not think the force that keeps planets in orbit is the same force holding us to the planet.
You are right about one thing I ignored, drag. That was just a bad example. But it makes no difference, take away the drag. Take 2 pieces of metal the exact same size and shape but with different weights and it works out the same.
You make a lot of claims about gravity as if they were fact, ..
...just like the teacher saying gravity is caused by the core.
But they are not proven facts, merely theories.
A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory capability.
And for your question about "do I really think scientist could miss something so simple, and do I really think you all are that dumb", well take a good look at past history of science and you tell me.
Show me a force you can create that effects two objects of substantial different mass the same. Can you do that?
Here is what you need to understand gravity.Stand at a suitably close position (r) and you will find your answer.
Quote from: jeffreyH on 20/06/2015 23:15:08Here is what you need to understand gravity.Stand at a suitably close position (r) and you will find your answer.That's not going to help anybody understand gravity, Jeff. Also, people should never learn GR before they learn Newtonian mechanics first. If they can't grasp Newtonian mechanics then they'll never be able to grasp GR. The math will be beyond them.
Do you think it makes a difference in this case? I could have been talking about swiss cheese for all the good it would do. I feel like I'm in groundhog day when reading threads here.
The "theory" is obvious bunkum.
I refer gazza to almost every experimental determination of G. In the laboratory, we measure gravitation as a horizontal force in a vacuum, not a vertical force in air. And to nobody's surprise, it produces the right answer when we try to land a probe on a distant planet or even a comet.
Quote from: alancalverdThe "theory" is obvious bunkum. Quite obvious indeed my friend!Quote from: alancalverdI refer gazza to almost every experimental determination of G. In the laboratory, we measure gravitation as a horizontal force in a vacuum, not a vertical force in air. And to nobody's surprise, it produces the right answer when we try to land a probe on a distant planet or even a comet.What they refuse to address is the fact that air pressure is omnidirectional whereas the force of gravity is directed towards the center of the Earth. They also refuse to address the superposition of air pressure and the force of gravity too.
gazza711 - Each line item in that list is utter and complete nonsense. Some of it is clearly shows what a pathetic little thing you are. Anyone who chooses to use ad hominems like you just did doesn't deserve to be shown all their errors so I'm going to leave you steeped in the ignorance that I found you in.