Post by: guest39538 on 14/05/2018 15:06:23
A Proton has no gravity relative to a Proton
An electron only has gravity relative to the Proton and vice versus
Therefore proving gravity is electrostatic force.
EF1 + EF2 = G
added- Get your heads around this one
-0.5 + 0.5 = 0E
ƒ:FG= 0→←0
Yes, zero is attracted to zero.
Post by: Kryptid on 14/05/2018 20:37:26
Post by: guest39538 on 14/05/2018 20:49:05
Looks like my skepticism that you were going to stop posting was well-founded.I did say maybe in a couple of days , I may or may not share how to make a star ship before I retire.
Post by: JakeTse on 17/05/2018 10:33:29
Post by: guest39538 on 17/05/2018 13:58:46
Looks like that's exactly right without any question.Well I wasn't born wearing a suit or with a silver spoon up my .........
If the face doesn't fit ''they'' would never wear the shirt. ''They'' will wait until I am dead and gone before some ''rich boy'' re-writes it all and publishes it , becoming the next Einstein.
Post by: Bored chemist on 19/05/2018 13:45:50
Well, where does it come form?
To a good approximation, the Sun is made from hydrogen which only has protons and electrons.
It also has enough gravity to keep the Earth and other planets in orbit.
No "Rich Boy" is going to bother to claim something which is plainly nonsense.
Post by: guest39538 on 19/05/2018 13:54:17
You say "Electrons and Protons do not have gravity."
Well, where does it come form?
To a good approximation, the Sun is made from hydrogen which only has protons and electrons.
It also has enough gravity to keep the Earth and other planets in orbit.
No "Rich Boy" is going to bother to claim something which is plainly nonsense.
Gravity is the relative electrostatic force between a proton and an electron. When a proton and electron are joined the electrostatic force/gravity is then relative to other atoms. Gravity was hid by 0, 0 charge does not mean 0 force as shown in the Cavendish experiment and the Casimir affect. The strong electrostatic force becomes a weakened state force once the electron and proton is combined.
A + B = G
F1 + F2 = F3 = G
Post by: Bored chemist on 19/05/2018 17:05:38
Gravity is the relative electrostatic force between a proton and an electron
What experimental evidence can you cite for that assertion?
I'm asking because, without evidence, nobody with any grasp of science is going to believe you.
People who understand science will know that gravity is different from the electromagnetic force.
This" Gravity was hid by 0, 0 charge does not mean 0 force " is nonsense.
Try writing it in English.
as shown in the Cavendish experiment and the Casimir affect.We already know what those experiments show, and it' s nothing to do with the guff you are spouting.
So, once again, what you are doing is cluttering this site with unscientific tosh.
Please stop.
Post by: guest39538 on 19/05/2018 20:40:21
You are such a troll who knows nothing. Perhaps because you keep winding me up, I will show you what world anarchy looks like and go press the anarchy button.Gravity is the relative electrostatic force between a proton and an electron
What experimental evidence can you cite for that assertion?
I'm asking because, without evidence, nobody with any grasp of science is going to believe you.
People who understand science will know that gravity is different from the electromagnetic force.
This" Gravity was hid by 0, 0 charge does not mean 0 force " is nonsense.
Try writing it in English.as shown in the Cavendish experiment and the Casimir affect.We already know what those experiments show, and it' s nothing to do with the guff you are spouting.
So, once again, what you are doing is cluttering this site with unscientific tosh.
Please stop.
Would you like me too press my button ?
Post by: Bored chemist on 19/05/2018 20:46:42
You are also deluded if you think you can show anyone much.
Post by: guest39538 on 19/05/2018 20:55:59
You are the ignorant troll.Have I ever told you I am the Vril king and can like connect to the Universe and see all the signs?
You are also deluded if you think you can show anyone much.
Perhaps the intention is I show ?
What you going do , make me disappear?
I bet you I could write an imaginative piece and make a you tube video that I could make go viral and everyone would believe it.
Want to take that bet ?
I don't care if a meteor falls on my head it is better than this rubbish Earth slavery .
Post by: guest39538 on 19/05/2018 21:16:43
P.s Now look what you done Mr C, people are going to think there is something going on....
''They'' see me Mr C, they are coming for us ,panic stations
ufo.jpg (20.07 kB . 615x406 - viewed 4039 times)Hahah, to troll a troll hey ,
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 09:37:23
You are the ignorant troll.You expect too much of me and just to be awkward , what do you mean by think you can show anyone much?
You are also deluded if you think you can show anyone much.
Why what is to show?
Are you saying there is something to show?
What you hiding Mr C?
pressure lol
Added- A proton has no relative mass relative to another proton. Showing electrostatic repulsion of proton v proton has no gravity , therefore the opposite reaction of repulsion being the force between electron v proton, attraction or formally gravity.
No other proof needed, end off.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 10:14:55
A proton has no relative mass relative to another proton.Just asserting that wouldn't make it true, even if it was meaningful.
What are you trying to say when you write "A proton has no relative mass relative to..."?
Mass isn't relative.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 10:19:15
Good morning :DA proton has no relative mass relative to another proton.Just asserting that wouldn't make it true, even if it was meaningful.
What are you trying to say when you write "A proton has no relative mass relative to..."?
Mass isn't relative.
Mass is relative, how can it not be when a proton v proton has no mass involved? If a proton had mass v proton mass , there would still be a radius apart and not a repulsion ?
added- If a proton had mass it would still attract other protons rather than repulse .
added- 'You'' are saying a Mass is attracted to mass , a proton has mass but is not attracted to a proton, surely you can see the contradiction and confusion ''you'' are causing me?
added- I am not being an idiot, but if ''you'' is going to give contradictory explanation , I want the correct answer not a contradiction answer. I demand accuracy in explanation not make believe that is falsifiable.
added- Did I ever inform you I have done quality control as a job? I know how to find errors.
added- let us name the proton (A) and add the direction of force between (A) and (A')
A←→A' electrostatic repulsion
A→←A' Mass
Explain please?
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 13:42:53
It's not "relative" to anything.
It also has nothing to do with the electrostatic attraction between charged particles.
You need to explain, as I asked you, what you think "A proton has no relative mass relative to..." means.
I am not being an idiot, but if ''you'' is going to give contradictory explanation ,
Show me where I have contradicted myself.
(I have already shown repeatedly where your ideas are self contradictory, or are contradicted by evidence).
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 13:50:55
The mass of a proton is 1.6726219 × 10-27 kilograms.Let me put this in plain and simple English , try to ''stick'' two protons together.
It's not "relative" to anything.
It also has nothing to do with the electrostatic attraction between charged particles.
You need to explain, as I asked you, what you think "A proton has no relative mass relative to..." means.I am not being an idiot, but if ''you'' is going to give contradictory explanation ,
Show me where I have contradicted myself.
(I have already shown repeatedly where your ideas are self contradictory, or are contradicted by evidence).
End of argument no gravity.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 13:56:04
try to ''stick'' two protons together.
OK, I added a couple of electrons as "glue". I now have a hydrogen molecule.
So what.
I figure you won't like that answer so here's a variation.
I get a lot of hydrogen and put it in one place- a bit like the Sun. It's now very hot and is keeping itself warm by the energy released by sticking protons together to make helium.
It has nothing to do with gravity.
The fact that you think it did shows that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Looking on the bright side, it shows that when you explain your misunderstandings in plain English, we can easily show that they are complete nonsense.
You should think about expressing your other strange ideas plainly so we can help you understand the errors in them better too.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 14:00:11
You said something right for once ,well done in not complicating the conversation.
OK, I added a couple of electrons as "glue". I now have a hydrogen molecule.
So what.
Yes the gravity is relative to the electron and proton, Can't you see that now?
Think , you are practically saying it.
Your ''glue'' is a two pack. (of two parts)
A + B = G
added - I will try algebra
(A+B) = < A and <B
F1 > F1 + F2
F1 + F2 = FG < F1 or F2
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 14:13:00
Yes the gravity is relative to the electron and proton, Can't you see that now?No, of course I can't see it for two reasons.
Firstly it's not true.
Secondly you have made no meaningful attempt to explain it.
The attraction between an electron and a proton is electrostatic and has nothing to do with gravity (which is many of orders of magnitude weaker)
Your so called "algebra" doesn't follow the rules of algebra.
Even if it did, this wouldn't help because you obstinately refuse to explain what any of the letters mean.
All you are doing is clustering the site with nonsense.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 14:15:17
No it is not nonsense, consider what you are teaching me , ''The attraction between an electron and a proton is electrostatic and has nothing to do with gravity''Yes the gravity is relative to the electron and proton, Can't you see that now?No, of course I can't see it for two reasons.
Firstly it's not true.
Secondly you have made no meaningful attempt to explain it.
The attraction between an electron and a proton is electrostatic and has nothing to do with gravity (which is many of orders of magnitude weaker)
Your so called "algebra" doesn't follow the rules of algebra.
Even if it did, this wouldn't help because you obstinately refuse to explain what any of the letters mean.
All you are doing is clustering the site with nonsense.
So where is the gravity between a proton and an electron ?
There isn't any right ? i.e no mass until combined
Added - Obviously once an electron and Proton is combined there is now a repulsive and attractive force that the weakened affect of force we call gravity.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 14:21:12
So where is the gravity between a proton and an electron ?It's between the two, pulling them together (classically) .
Why is that an issue?
The fact is that the gravitational attraction is impossible to observe directly, because it's accompanied by the electrostatic force which also pulls them together about 30 orders of magnitude more strongly.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 14:23:11
There isn't any right ? i.e no mass until combinedWrong.
The mass of an electron or a proton is perfectly well defined.
I already gave the value for a proton.
The mass of the electron is 9.10938356 × 10-31 kilograms
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 14:26:05
I disagree, the electrostatic force is the only force acting on a proton and electron, then this conditions by the combined weakened state binary force , gravity.So where is the gravity between a proton and an electron ?It's between the two, pulling them together (classically) .
Why is that an issue?
The fact is that the gravitational attraction is impossible to observe directly, because it's accompanied by the electrostatic force which also pulls them together about 30 orders of magnitude more strongly.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 14:27:20
you have weighed a proton on scales to measure that, I am impressed really?There isn't any right ? i.e no mass until combinedWrong.
The mass of an electron or a proton is perfectly well defined.
I already gave the value for a proton.
The mass of the electron is 9.10938356 × 10-31 kilograms
It is almost like someone just gives you those measurements to work with .
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 14:42:06
you have weighed a proton on scales to measure that, I am impressed really?
Measuring the mass of an electron is a high-school experiment.
The mass of a proton can be found in much the same way.
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it isn't true.
http://demoweb.physics.ucla.edu/content/experiment-6-charge-mass-ratio-electron
I disagree, the electrostatic force is the only force acting on a proton and electron,Reality doesn't mind a bit whether you agree with it or not. It will carry on.
You are plainly wrong.
It's a commonplace experience that gravity acts on, for example, a rock.
That rock is made from electrons and protons.
So, how would gravity "know" whether those electrons and protons are part of a rock (and it should act on them) or not part of a rock (so it wouldn't- according to your strange idea) act on them?
In order for your daft idea to work, gravity has to be able to choose to act on electrons or not, depending on whether they are part of a rock.
It can't.
You are obviously wrong.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 14:43:42
then this conditions by the combined weakened state binary force , gravity.That's another example of you putting down lots of words that don't mean anything.
Perhaps you should tr putting it in plain English- then we can see where your mistake is.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 14:44:50
Science should be able to explain it better than me, Individual strong electrostatic forces combine , as an independent condition of this , is the creation of a weakened binary force gravity.then this conditions by the combined weakened state binary force , gravity.That's another example of you putting down lots of words that don't mean anything.
Perhaps you should tr putting it in plain English- then we can see where your mistake is.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 14:55:11
Science should be able to explain it better than me,There is nothing to explain.
Gravity works, so does electrostatics.
It's just that you, for some reason, don't believe it.
You have no evidence to support your ideas and, as I just showed, they don't make sense.
You should stop posting your uninformed nonsense.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 15:02:20
Quite obviously you do not know the difference between space-time curvature and the linear force of gravity F=maScience should be able to explain it better than me,There is nothing to explain.
Gravity works, so does electrostatics.
It's just that you, for some reason, don't believe it.
You have no evidence to support your ideas and, as I just showed, they don't make sense.
You should stop posting your uninformed nonsense.
An object at rest relative to the rest frame is obviously not following a curved path by using speed and the linear of gravity.
You are wrong, just because you fail to understand it , that does not mean it is wrong.
Gravity is a binary force and you don't do science, you just reply with wiki instead of thinking.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 15:17:03
Gravity is a binary forceYou have invented a new term there.
Please define a "binary force".
It's not that I'm unfamiliar with space-time, it's just that it's not relevant here.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 15:25:37
Gravity is a binary forceYou have invented a new term there.
Please define a "binary force".
It's not that I'm unfamiliar with space-time, it's just that it's not relevant here.
A binary force is the outcome of two individual singular forces combining.
bf.jpg (23.59 kB . 664x503 - viewed 3317 times)Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 15:34:51
You can add them- in which case you get a force.
Or you can multiply them in which case you get the dot product or the cross product.
The dot product is a scalar quantity, so it can't be a force.
The cross product is a force.
So, by combining two forces you either get a force or something that's clearly not a force.
What rule of combination are you using to get this "Binary force" which you have made up?
As I said, you need to define this thing you invented.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 15:54:54
What rule of combination are you using to get this "Binary force" which you have made up?
A + B = G
or
F1 + F2 = F3
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 16:20:03
If you want to get some magic"Binary Force" that you have invented, then you need to show how you get it.
So, for example, If I have two forces 10 Newtons due South and 5 Newtons due East, what is the resultant "Binary force"?
What are the units for it, and how do you calculate it?
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 16:30:14
But, as I have pointed out, adding two forces just gives you a force.Faraday discovered the electromotive force and Maxwell sorted the maths. I am an amateur physicist not a mathematician.
If you want to get some magic"Binary Force" that you have invented, then you need to show how you get it.
So, for example, If I have two forces 10 Newtons due South and 5 Newtons due East, what is the resultant "Binary force"?
What are the units for it, and how do you calculate it?
You want me to quantify gravity, not easy.
I will have a think, I do know what you are asking but it is not that easy.
I do know if we add
-0.5 + 0.5 = 0
So if A = -0.5 and B = 0.5
A+B=0
So a balance of G , an equilibrium is q0. Anything other than q0 is an offset and results in acceleration/motion.
An infinitesimally small change of 0 has a result in motion and force.
So those are the parameters I think we need to look at.
Let us assume gravity is charge but the offset (amount of charge) is to small to measure at this time.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 16:34:09
You want me to quantify gravity,No
I want you to explain what yo mean by the phrase you have made up.
That's why I asked you to do it.
for example, If I have two forces 10 Newtons due South and 5 Newtons due East, what is the resultant "Binary force"?
What are the units for it, and how do you calculate it?
Stop going off at irritating irrelevant tangents full of letters you don't explain, and tell me what this "binary force" is and what it's properties are.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 16:36:00
Let us assume gravity is chargeNo.
We will not assume something which is known to be wrong.
The Earth plainly has no charge but it has gravity.
So we know that gravity and charge are not the same thing.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 16:39:30
Its going to be something to do with Coulombs laws, I am not sure yet, still considering it.You want me to quantify gravity,No
I want you to explain what yo mean by the phrase you have made up.
That's why I asked you to do it.for example, If I have two forces 10 Newtons due South and 5 Newtons due East, what is the resultant "Binary force"?
What are the units for it, and how do you calculate it?
Stop going off at irritating irrelevant tangents full of letters you don't explain, and tell me what this "binary force" is and what it's properties are.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 16:53:17
Its going to be something to do with Coulombs laws, I am not sure yet, still considering it.Since you don't know what it is, you can't use it as the basis for anything so your earlier point is wrong.
I disagree, the electrostatic force is the only force acting on a proton and electron, then this conditions by the combined weakened state binary force , gravity.
You can't disagree with reality on the basis of something which you have made up and which you don't know what it is.
That's plainly silly.
So, why not just accept that you are posting rubbish, and stop doing so?
Incidentally, if is anything to do with Coulomb's law then it's not to do with gravity- as I have already explained.
Electricity and gravity are not the same.
The Earth has gravity , but no charge.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 18:51:21
Since you don't know what it is,I have already told you what it is, you mean I do not know how to do the maths for it don't you?
Added- Who need maths , lets build one of these:
star trek.jpg (202.57 kB . 1600x900 - viewed 3541 times)Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 19:40:15
I have already told you what it is,No, you have not.
What is a binary force?
You seem to have thought that combining two forces gave something else.
what was it?
Or were you just making up words because you had been backed into a corner?
You were caught out saying the reason you don't accept reality is because of something that's not real.
Why waste the site's bandwidth with your conceited nonsense?
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 19:46:50
I have already told you what it is,No, you have not.
What is a binary force?
Yes I have, a binary force is two forces united that creates a new force . An electron joins a proton under its own force and the proton force. Once joined the strong individual forces are reduced because of the repulsive force.
So imagine a single atom , imagine a free electron, the free electron is attracted less to the atom than if there was just a single proton because of the electron of the atoms repulsive force . It nulls the force out.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 19:50:19
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 19:56:15
Yes I have, a binary force is two forces united that creates a new force .So the word "binary" doesn't mean anything because all you have is two forces that combine to give a resultant force.
Why have you put the word "binary" in there?
Were you trying to be clever or something?
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 19:58:47
binaryYes I have, a binary force is two forces united that creates a new force .So the word "binary" doesn't mean anything because all you have is two forces that combine to give a resultant force.
Why have you put the word "binary" in there?
Were you trying to be clever or something?
ˈbʌɪnəri/Submit
adjective
1.
relating to, composed of, or involving two things.
A + B = binary
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 20:05:12
So, why are you pretending that there's anything "binary" about it?
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 20:12:28
Yes, but the resultant of any number of forces is a single force.Because gravity acts like a single force but is two forces.
So, why are you pretending that there's anything "binary" about it?
A is attracted to B force 1
B is attracted to A force 2
N is attracted to N which is G. Combined force 1 + force 2
I am trying to work some maths out, I will leave this here to remind me .
(-e) - (+1e)= 0
0 = 1.6x10^-19 coulomb - (-1.6x10^-19 coulomb)
added-
9.10938356 × 10-31 kilograms - 1.6726219 × 10-27 kilograms = ??????
9.10938356 × 10-31 kilograms = 1.6x10^-19 coulomb force?
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 20:16:54
Then you can go through each one trying to explain it.
An electron has no gravity relative to an electronYou haven't explained what you think "gravity relative to..." means
A Proton has no gravity relative to a Proton
An electron only has gravity relative to the Proton and vice versus
Gravity is the relative electrostatic force between a proton and an electron.
No. Gravity and electromagnetism are different. That's why the Earth has no charge but has gravity.
When a proton and electron are joined the electrostatic force/gravity is then relative to other atoms. Gravity was hid by 0, 0 charge does not mean 0 force as shown in the Cavendish experiment and the Casimir affect. The strong electrostatic force becomes a weakened state force once the electron and proton is combined.None of that makes any sense- not least because you keep adding the phrase "relative to" things that are wrong to begin with.
I will show you what world anarchy looks like and go press the anarchy button.Just daft.
Would you like me too press my button ?
Have I ever told you I am the Vril king and can like connect to the Universe and see all the signs?The best I can say about that is I think your pills had worn off.
Perhaps the intention is I show ?
What you going do , make me disappear?
I bet you I could write an imaginative piece and make a you tube video that I could make go viral and everyone would believe it.
Want to take that bet ?
I don't care if a meteor falls on my head it is better than this rubbish Earth slavery .
Added- A proton has no relative mass relative to another proton. Showing electrostatic repulsion of proton v proton has no gravity , therefore the opposite reaction of repulsion being the force between electron v proton, attraction or formally gravity.OK, you can't spell "of" and the rest isn't any better.
No other proof needed, end off.
added - I will try algebraThat's not algebra.
(A+B) = < A and <B
Added - Obviously once an electron and Proton is combined there is now a repulsive and attractive force that the weakened affect of force we call gravity.That's not "obvious", it's nonsense.
and so on.
You just keep cluttering up the website with this anti-scientific dross.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 20:17:37
Because gravity acts like a single force but is two forces.No it is not.
Why do you persist in that delusion?
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 20:22:34
Because gravity acts like a single force but is two forces.No it is not.
Why do you persist in that delusion?
Quite clearly because in 100's of years of science you do not know the bloody answer and I am explaining the answer but you are being quite obtuse. Quite clearly I want the Nobel prize and any royalties etc I might gain so I can give my kids a better life. Why else ?
Pfffffffff.......
relative
ˈrɛlətɪv/Submit
adjective
1.
considered in relation or in proportion to something else.
added- I will escape what I deem hell, I want to travel, I want to live, I want to escape from circumstance, I am hoping Aliens come, that would be great before I die and most entertaining even if they zapped us all.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 20:32:50
The problem is you are using it in a context where it makes no sense.
"A Proton has no gravity relative to a Proton"
Is as stupid as saying "A dog has no tail relative to a dog".
Having a tail isn't relative.
A dog has one, or it doesn't.
Posting dross isn't going to win you any prize.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 20:35:51
It's not that I don't understand the word.
The problem is you are using it in a context where it makes no sense.
"A Proton has no gravity relative to a Proton"
Is as stupid as saying "A dog has no tail relative to a dog".
Dude! not the same proton , a different proton,
A proton has no gravity relative to another proton.
An electron has no gravity relative to another electron
An electron has no gravity relative to proton
A Proton has no gravity relative to an electron
A proton is attracted to an electron by the strong electrostatic force
An electron is attracted to a proton by the strong electrostatic force
Gravity is relative to an electron and proton (binary) a weaker reduced force .
Newtons third law , A+B pushes back to reduce the force.
For A attracted to B, no newtons third law, greater force.
Post by: Bored chemist on 20/05/2018 22:00:37
Dude! not the same proton , a different proton,What?
So you think one of these makes sense:
"A dog has no tail relative to another dog".
"A dog has no tail relative to the same dog".
Having a tail is not relative.
Having gravity is not relative.
So, once again, what do you mean by "A Proton has no gravity relative to a Proton"?
It doesn't make sense.
Please explain what you mean.
Don't pretend that it's a problem with my understanding.
Carefully read what you have written; look at the meanings of the words and, given that gravity isn't "relative" don't just write the same sh1t again, try writing it better.
Post by: guest39538 on 20/05/2018 22:11:43
It is your understanding sorry, I can't explain it any more simpler , your dog example is nothing like it.Dude! not the same proton , a different proton,What?
So you think one of these makes sense:
"A dog has no tail relative to another dog".
"A dog has no tail relative to the same dog".
Having a tail is not relative.
Having gravity is not relative.
So, once again, what do you mean by "A Proton has no gravity relative to a Proton"?
It doesn't make sense.
Please explain what you mean.
Don't pretend that it's a problem with my understanding.
Carefully read what you have written; look at the meanings of the words and, given that gravity isn't "relative" don't just write the same sh1t again, try writing it better.
Post by: guest39538 on 21/05/2018 10:55:27
Post by: Bored chemist on 21/05/2018 19:47:09
Why are you unable to explain what you are on about?
The dog example works just fine.
It shows that you are talking nonsense because "A dog has no tail relative to another dog". makes just as little sense as your claim that "A Proton has no gravity relative to a Proton".
It does not matter how often you repeat that same stuff- even if you write it on a video- it's not true.
It can't be true because gravity isn't relative.
Two masses attract eachother.
End of story.
That's gravitational attraction for you.
In the case of two protons they also repel eachother because they have charge (which is a different thing).
The gravitational effect is much smaller, so the repulsion wins.
But the gravity is still there.
Otherwise you need some magic mechanism to turn it off when you don't like it.
Why did you waste time producing a video to repeat what you said, after I explained that simply saying it again wasn't going to help?
Are you hard of thinking?
You also have yet to explain why the sun- made of electrons and protons has gravity if electrons and protons don't have gravity.
To put it another way, you are ignoring the real world.
Why do you do that, yet claim to be doing science?
Post by: guest39538 on 21/05/2018 19:51:34
You still make no sense.It is not my fault you can''t understand, my friends understand so why can't you understand?
Why are you unable to explain what you are on about?
The dog example works just fine.
It shows that you are talking nonsense because "A dog has no tail relative to another dog". makes just as little sense as your claim that "A Proton has no gravity relative to a Proton".
It does not matter how often you repeat that same stuff- even if you write it on a video- it's not true.
It can't be true because gravity isn't relative.
Two masses attract eachother.
End of story.
That's gravitational attraction for you.
In the case of two protons they also repel eachother because they have charge (which is a different thing).
The gravitational effect is much smaller, so the repulsion wins.
But the gravity is still there.
Otherwise you need some magic mechanism to turn it off when you don't like it.
Why did you waste time producing a video to repeat what you said, after I explained that simply saying it again wasn't going to help?
Are you hard of thinking?
You also have yet to explain why the sun- made of electrons and protons has gravity if electrons and protons don't have gravity.
To put it another way, you are ignoring the real world.
Why do you do that, yet claim to be doing science?
The video is plain and simple, a child could understand it.
If you can't understand so simple , how are you going to be when I move on to particles popping into and out of existence?
A/t and B/t
Post by: guest39538 on 21/05/2018 20:00:39
You also have yet to explain why the sun- made of electrons and protons has gravity if electrons and protons don't have gravity.
I have already explained, I am not going to keep repeating myself because you are failing to understand.
A binary gravitational field, -0.5 + 0.5 = 0
Ok ?
Added- Now I already know you will not understand this 0>0 = 0 = G
(A+B)>(A+B)
Post by: Bored chemist on 21/05/2018 20:10:03
I am not going to keep repeating myselfGreat.
I have been asking you to stop repeating yourself.
Just answer the question (without making up nonsense about "binary" stuff that's actually unary).
The bit about 0.5-0.5 =0 make sense if you are looking at the Earths charge and it seems we agree- it has zero charge because the + charges and the - charges cancel out (viewed from a distance).
But gravity doesn't.
It "sees" all the electrons and all the protons in the Sun.
So it reaches us here many millions of miles away.
We all know that.
But it doesn't help answer the question.
If a combination of protons and electrons has gravity, how can that happen unless the electrons and the protons have gravity?
Where does the gravity come from?
(BTW, please stop repeating this too- it doesn't say anything, no matter how often you repeat it. Nobody thinks it's anything but trivially true. It just hasn't got anything to do with the issue. It's like saying " protons and electrons have no gravity because the Prime Minister is female". She is- but it's not the reason for gravity.)
-0.5 + 0.5 = 0
Post by: Bored chemist on 21/05/2018 20:11:05
Now I already know you will not understand this 0>0 = 0 = GThen don't waste time posting it.
(A+B)>(A+B)
Post something which makes sense and / or answers the question instead.
Post by: guest39538 on 21/05/2018 20:40:29
Mr C , I did answer you, you just do not understand it because it is new to you. Like I don't understand stuff I have not learnt too.I am not going to keep repeating myselfGreat.
I have been asking you to stop repeating yourself.
Just answer the question (without making up nonsense about "binary" stuff that's actually unary).
The bit about 0.5-0.5 =0 make sense if you are looking at the Earths charge and it seems we agree- it has zero charge because the + charges and the - charges cancel out (viewed from a distance).
But gravity doesn't.
It "sees" all the electrons and all the protons in the Sun.
So it reaches us here many millions of miles away.
We all know that.
But it doesn't help answer the question.
If a combination of protons and electrons has gravity, how can that happen unless the electrons and the protons have gravity?
Where does the gravity come from?
(BTW, please stop repeating this too- it doesn't say anything, no matter how often you repeat it. Nobody thinks it's anything but trivially true. It just hasn't got anything to do with the issue. It's like saying " protons and electrons have no gravity because the Prime Minister is female". She is- but it's not the reason for gravity.)-0.5 + 0.5 = 0
Try it this way and you may get it.
Consider everything in the Universe is zero,
The earth is zero
The Sun is zero
The earths field and suns field between the earth and sun is zero
Now the sun is a denser 0 than the Earths 0, but the Earths 0 is denser than the fields.
0 is attracted to 0 through the coupling of the 0.
ok?
Post by: Bored chemist on 21/05/2018 20:49:54
Consider everything in the Universe is zero,That's obviously already stupid, and it didn't get better
Try again.
This time start with things that are actually true.
Post by: guest39538 on 21/05/2018 20:56:23
That is true what I said.Consider everything in the Universe is zero,That's obviously already stupid, and it didn't get better
Try again.
This time start with things that are actually true.
the earth -0.5+0.5 = 0
the earths field -0.5+0.5=0
etc etc,
0 is not nothing
program Matrix :
ero.jpg (37.17 kB . 664x503 - viewed 2503 times)Post by: Bored chemist on 21/05/2018 22:02:41
If so, why not say that?
It's more use than repeating nonsense you were asked not to bother repeating..
Post by: guest39538 on 21/05/2018 22:10:37
Do you mean the earth has no net electrostatic field?You lot told me maths was important, I provided the maths and it as took you this long to realise what I have been discussing all this time with a N-field which is a neutral field of A + B , the earths electrostatic field obviously and atoms.
If so, why not say that?
It's more use than repeating nonsense you were asked not to bother repeating..
Post by: guest39538 on 21/05/2018 22:13:53
Post by: guest39538 on 22/05/2018 06:15:44
As a consequence and condition of A + B , A + B produces a weakened binary force A + B electrical field that can also be equated -0.5 + 0. 5 = 0 , where 0 is the charge value.
The A + B of an atom having a greater density than the A + B of the permeating field.
Post by: Bored chemist on 22/05/2018 22:11:05
I provided the mathsNo
You posted nonsense.
Saying
"+0.5 + -0.5 =0 "is not the same as saying
" from a distance, the positive charges on the nuclei and the negative charges on the electrons cancel and the Earth is neutral overall."
is it?
I have been discussing all this time with a N-field which is a neutral field of A + B , the earths electrostatic fieldAnd there you go again.
The earth is neutral.
So it does not have an electrostatic field.
So, you are saying the N field is a field that doesn't exist.
However, you still need to explain why the Sun has gravity.
Where doe it come from if not the protons and electrons?
@ Mr Chemist, is your job title a professional extractor of free information ?Thankfully, no.
I'd be broke.
I have, at great expense in terms of my time, extracted very little information.
In a thread about gravity, you keep banging on about electrostatics.
So far the only information I have extracted is that you have defined your "N field" as being a field that does not exist.
I guess that's progress.
Post by: guest39538 on 22/05/2018 23:09:09
The earth is neutral.A N-field
So it does not have an electrostatic field.