[jccc]

how long can you lift 1 leg in the air?

what is pulling it down? vacuum pressure?

you are full of it, why?

[gazza711 (OP)]

how long can you lift 1 leg in the air?

what is pulling it down? vacuum pressure?

you are full of it, why?

I expected some people to have a broader view of what we don't understand.I don't mean to be cheeky,but others comment with things like what happens when we throw things up-they come down.The most misguided word always used is PULL.Prove it?Vacuum pressure would be the pressure of the air bubble that we live on with a solid crust and liquid centre consisting of metal elements.Now mimic the earth on a micro scale in a vacuum in outer space.
Impossible -I know.when you throw a rubber duck with air in it hard into water.it will sink then float.buoyancy I know.But what force is dragging it back to the surface?anti-gravity.Air around us is less dense than water but behaves in the same way as water.it deflects when we move through it.both apply force on everything form 360 degrees.so why do we believe we are pulled down?we cant see the flux of gravity and we cant see buoyancy but we can see magnetic flux.the only thing convincing us is the Cavendish experiment which only used lead-research lead and how it interacts with other materials/situations.if you seek an answer you will find it I say.peace

[chiralSPO]

As a moderator, I would like to remind everyone to remain civil. This thread is getting a little heated.
~~~~~~~~~

Now on to the science!

gazza711, perhaps you would like to share some experimental evidence that your theory is correct. Or do you believe that experimental evidence is not important?

I don't understand your objection to the use of lead in the Cavendish experiment. You also seem to make some claims about the effects of oxygen and nitrogen on gravtiy that I don't understand. Could you clarify what the different elements do?

[gazza711 (OP)]

As a moderator, I would like to remind everyone to remain civil. This thread is getting a little heated.
~~~~~~~~~

Now on to the science!

gazza711, perhaps you would like to share some experimental evidence that your theory is correct. Or do you believe that experimental evidence is not important?

I don't understand your objection to the use of lead in the Cavendish experiment. You also seem to make some claims about the effects of oxygen and nitrogen on gravtiy that I don't understand. Could you clarify what the different elements do?

Sure-no one who commented answered the question.end of.they shouldnt reply if they cant answer the question with proven answers.Unfortunately nobody would understand anything other than PULL and its a waste of my time explaining where others who choose to comment should do their research first too.if I had evidence,I wouldn't be chatting openly about it here-or would I.what is your understanding of the Cavendish experiment? [] [] []

[chiralSPO]

How can you be so certain if you have no evidence?

How can you claim that the theory of gravitation is wrong because it has no evidence, when there is so much evidence for it. Even if we call into question the Cavendish experiment itself (which would be illogical, but for the sake of argument, let's say that experiment may have been flawed somehow), other similar experiments have been performed on Earth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiehallion_experiment
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1896ApJ.....3..303W
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant#History_of_measurement
http://www.livescience.com/46385-new-gravitational-constant-measurement.html

It has also been shown to hold in space for every system we have studied in depth...

[gazza711 (OP)]

How can you be so certain if you have no evidence?

How can you claim that the theory of gravitation is wrong because it has no evidence, when there is so much evidence for it. Even if we call into question the Cavendish experiment itself (which would be illogical, but for the sake of argument, let's say that experiment may have been flawed somehow), other similar experiments have been performed on Earth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiehallion_experiment
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1896ApJ.....3..303W
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant#History_of_measurement
http://www.livescience.com/46385-new-gravitational-constant-measurement.html

It has also been shown to hold in space for every system we have studied in depth...

Ok.gravity on earth is not the same in space.casimir effect not newton theory.
other experiments were out to measure masses and densities and proved gravitational attraction-they were all made with lead weights not apples-
the schiehallion experiment.hmm-did they use a spirit level.once again they must have used lead as plumb lines would've been lead at that time.hmmm.lead/metal/conductor or equivalent as well as when a man goes straight up and holding a stick and weight for example,he isn't really going straight up vertically.if two men dug a hole each 5 metres apart and dug down far enough,the holes would meet.thus proving the experiment to not prove attraction.show me a experiment where theres attraction without using a metal or conductive material.water carries current and is magnetic plus there are stronger and weaker (gravity)points all over the earth.

[gazza711 (OP)]

How can you be so certain if you have no evidence?

How can you claim that the theory of gravitation is wrong because it has no evidence, when there is so much evidence for it. Even if we call into question the Cavendish experiment itself (which would be illogical, but for the sake of argument, let's say that experiment may have been flawed somehow), other similar experiments have been performed on Earth:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiehallion_experiment
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/1896ApJ.....3..303W
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant#History_of_measurement
http://www.livescience.com/46385-new-gravitational-constant-measurement.html

It has also been shown to hold in space for every system we have studied in depth...

Ok.gravity on earth is not the same in space.casimir effect not newton theory.
other experiments were out to measure masses and densities and proved gravitational attraction-they were all made with lead weights not apples-
the schiehallion experiment.hmm-did they use a spirit level.once again they must have used lead as plumb lines would've been lead at that time.hmmm.lead/metal/conductor or equivalent as well as when a man goes straight up and holding a stick and weight for example,he isn't really going straight up vertically.if two men dug a hole each 5 metres apart and dug down far enough,the holes would meet.thus proving the experiment to not prove attraction.show me a experiment where theres attraction without using a metal or conductive material.water carries current and is magnetic plus there are stronger and weaker (gravity)points all over the earth.

How can we be taight that gravity pulls when we cant prove it-same question you asked me-except all the other planets show exactly what temp/pressure can do to a planet.buoyancy is gravity (on earth)and its not the same as space attraction