0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I would be interested to know what objects, that are visible around us, today rely on the fact that we are being pulled towards the ground. 
I would be interested to know what objects, that are visible around us, today rely on the fact that we are being pulled towards the ground. And not only that but how would these things still function if we were not being pulled to the ground.... [:I]Some possible examples for consideration: cars, shoes, hydroelectric dams, rain, rockets, golf and even the Moon.
How do you know everything is being pulled down.You know that trick when you spin a wheel fast enough,you can tell which way its turning.surely if all things attracted,especially LEAD,then the universe and solar system would just stick to itself and it would just be one lump of ###
I would add a third reason why everything doesn't collapse together:3) Orbiting in a gravitational field does not dissipate energy. So even objects which are close enough to attract each other strongly, like the Sun and the Earth, the Earth and the Moon, or the Sun and the galactic black hole, they do not collapse into one another. As they get a little bit closer, they speed up; they then move further away and slow down again - this produces an elliptical orbit which is stable for astronomical periods of time.(There is a small amount of gravitational radiation which does affect closely-orbiting neutron stars; this can be ignored for objects the size of the Solar System.)
either the motion of water being swished and something being dragged in the path replacing it.that would be displacement like smoking out a moving car window and a car drives past and sucks that away
Until we can simulate conditions of space and mimic all that we believe,then its still a theory isn't it?
Until we can simulate conditions of space and mimic all that we believe,then its still a theory isn't it?if gravity was indeed proved-it wouldn't be a theory still after 4 billion years.
In modern science, the term "theory" refers to scientific theories, a well-confirmed type of explanation of nature, made in a way consistent with scientific method, and fulfilling the criteria required by modern science. Such theories are described in such a way that any scientist in the field is in a position to understand and either provide empirical support ("verify") or empirically contradict ("falsify") it. Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge, in contrast to more common uses of the word "theory" that imply that something is unproven or speculative (which is better characterized by the word 'hypothesis'). Scientific theories are distinguished from hypotheses, which are individual empirically testable conjectures, and scientific laws, which are descriptive accounts of how nature will behave under certain conditions.
simply-what evidence do we have.anal I know,but ive seen many things since theorizing this that is defeating this theory.dont forget that science theorises a lot about things about space.there is no proof that I know of that shows 2 objects of different sizes attracting one another due to GRAVITY.This experiment doesn't work in space either does it?