[Yaniv (OP)]

I asked for evidence. You have yet to supply any. Until then, we have no reason to believe that the gravitational constant is wrong.

Experimentalists are pretty slow at concluding the experiment.

[The Spoon]

I asked for evidence. You have yet to supply any. Until then, we have no reason to believe that the gravitational constant is wrong.

Experimentalists are pretty slow at concluding the experiment.

They are also pretty slow at carrying out experiments to show that volcanic activity is caused by dragons or that the moon is made of cheese.

[The Spoon]

I asked for evidence. You have yet to supply any. Until then, we have no reason to believe that the gravitational constant is wrong.

Experimentalists are pretty slow at concluding the experiment.

The onus is on you to provide evidence not others to provide it for you.

[Kryptid]

I asked for evidence. You have yet to supply any. Until then, we have no reason to believe that the gravitational constant is wrong.

Experimentalists are pretty slow at concluding the experiment.

So is this an admission that you have no evidence?

[Yaniv (OP)]

I asked for evidence. You have yet to supply any. Until then, we have no reason to believe that the gravitational constant is wrong.

Experimentalists are pretty slow at concluding the experiment.

So is this an admission that you have no evidence?

I never received the results of the experiment.

[Bored chemist]

I asked for evidence. You have yet to supply any. Until then, we have no reason to believe that the gravitational constant is wrong.

Experimentalists are pretty slow at concluding the experiment.

So is this an admission that you have no evidence?

I never received the results of the experiment.

And, because you have not done the experiment and have not received information from anyone who has done the experiment, you do not know what the outcome of teh experiment would be.
So you have no evidence..

But, even though you have no evidence, you still claim you are right.

Do you do that sort of thing in your normal life, or only when posting here?

[Bored chemist]

I think it is sensible to wait for the results of the experiment.

Then shut up until they do.

[Bored chemist]

You can if W≠mg.

But it is- by definition.

[Yaniv (OP)]

You can if W≠mg.

But it is- by definition.

The definition of a mathematical equation is value of two expressions are equal (indicated by the sign =). Do you have the results of the experiment showing W=mg ?

[Kryptid]

I asked for evidence. You have yet to supply any. Until then, we have no reason to believe that the gravitational constant is wrong.

Experimentalists are pretty slow at concluding the experiment.

So is this an admission that you have no evidence?

I never received the results of the experiment.

So then no, you don't have evidence.

[Yaniv (OP)]

I asked for evidence. You have yet to supply any. Until then, we have no reason to believe that the gravitational constant is wrong.

Experimentalists are pretty slow at concluding the experiment.

So is this an admission that you have no evidence?

I never received the results of the experiment.

So then no, you don't have evidence.

You seem reluctant to conclude the experiment. Why?

[Kryptid]

You seem reluctant to conclude the experiment. Why?

I can't conclude something I never started. There are also two other problems:

(1) I don't have the equipment needed to do such an experiment.
(2) Even if I did have such equipment, you haven't told me the needed precision that I would need to measure to. We already know what a positive result would look like (any decrease in weight with temperature would be a positive result). But what about a negative result? If someone measured the weight and found that it didn't change with temperature, would you accept that result or would you say, "your experiment wasn't precise enough"? That's why you have to define the measurement limits. Otherwise, you can keep saying, "your experiment wasn't precise enough" after an endless number of increasingly precise tests that found no weight change.

[Yaniv (OP)]

You seem reluctant to conclude the experiment. Why?

I can't conclude something I never started. There are also two other problems:

(1) I don't have the equipment needed to do such an experiment.
(2) Even if I did have such equipment, you haven't told me the needed precision that I would need to measure to. We already know what a positive result would look like (any decrease in weight with temperature would be a positive result). But what about a negative result? If someone measured the weight and found that it didn't change with temperature, would you accept that result or would you say, "your experiment wasn't precise enough"? That's why you have to define the measurement limits. Otherwise, you can keep saying, "your experiment wasn't precise enough" after an endless number of increasingly precise tests that found no weight change.

20 grams metals heated by 5 degrees C in air lost 100 micrograms (Glaser,1990). Let's start there.

[Kryptid]

20 grams metals heated by 5 degrees C in air lost 100 micrograms (Glaser,1990). Let's start there.

In order to best measure the effect, you'd want to maximize the difference in temperature between your measurements. That being said, what kind of relationship are you expecting? Does doubling the temperature double the weight loss?

[Yaniv (OP)]

20 grams metals heated by 5 degrees C in air lost 100 micrograms (Glaser,1990). Let's start there.

In order to best measure the effect, you'd want to maximize the difference in temperature between your measurements. That being said, what kind of relationship are you expecting? Does doubling the temperature double the weight loss?

I expect a linear relationship between heat absorbed and weight loss. Doubling the calories absorbed should double the weight loss.

[The Spoon]

20 grams metals heated by 5 degrees C in air lost 100 micrograms (Glaser,1990). Let's start there.

In order to best measure the effect, you'd want to maximize the difference in temperature between your measurements. That being said, what kind of relationship are you expecting? Does doubling the temperature double the weight loss?

I expect a linear relationship between heat absorbed and weight loss. Doubling the calories absorbed should double the weight loss.

And what is the mechanism for that? Also your reference to Glaser - could you complete so we can find and assess the validity?

[Yaniv (OP)]

20 grams metals heated by 5 degrees C in air lost 100 micrograms (Glaser,1990). Let's start there.

In order to best measure the effect, you'd want to maximize the difference in temperature between your measurements. That being said, what kind of relationship are you expecting? Does doubling the temperature double the weight loss?

I expect a linear relationship between heat absorbed and weight loss. Doubling the calories absorbed should double the weight loss.

And what is the mechanism for that? Also your reference to Glaser - could you complete so we can find and assess the validity?

The mechanism for W reduction at increasing T in vacuum is described in my theory on my website here yaniv-stern.webnode.page.

Glaser paper is below.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Response-of-apparent-mass-to-thermal-gradients-Gl%C3%A4ser/dd77e00123f2e0efe31f02f9b0b717a98620172c

[The Spoon]

20 grams metals heated by 5 degrees C in air lost 100 micrograms (Glaser,1990). Let's start there.

In order to best measure the effect, you'd want to maximize the difference in temperature between your measurements. That being said, what kind of relationship are you expecting? Does doubling the temperature double the weight loss?

I expect a linear relationship between heat absorbed and weight loss. Doubling the calories absorbed should double the weight loss.

And what is the mechanism for that? Also your reference to Glaser - could you complete so we can find and assess the validity?

The mechanism for W reduction at increasing T in vacuum is described in my theory on my website here yaniv-stern.webnode.page.

Glaser paper is below.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Response-of-apparent-mass-to-thermal-gradients-Gl%C3%A4ser/dd77e00123f2e0efe31f02f9b0b717a98620172c

Summarise it here - don't link to a website. If you have a credible theory you should be able to do this. Myself and others do not want to wade through a website.

[The Spoon]

20 grams metals heated by 5 degrees C in air lost 100 micrograms (Glaser,1990). Let's start there.

In order to best measure the effect, you'd want to maximize the difference in temperature between your measurements. That being said, what kind of relationship are you expecting? Does doubling the temperature double the weight loss?

I expect a linear relationship between heat absorbed and weight loss. Doubling the calories absorbed should double the weight loss.

And what is the mechanism for that? Also your reference to Glaser - could you complete so we can find and assess the validity?

The mechanism for W reduction at increasing T in vacuum is described in my theory on my website here yaniv-stern.webnode.page.

Glaser paper is below.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Response-of-apparent-mass-to-thermal-gradients-Gl%C3%A4ser/dd77e00123f2e0efe31f02f9b0b717a98620172c

I looked at your reference. The author states: 'it is predominantly free convection forces which change the apparent mass.'

[Yaniv (OP)]

Glaser paper is below.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Response-of-apparent-mass-to-thermal-gradients-Gl%C3%A4ser/dd77e00123f2e0efe31f02f9b0b717a98620172c

I looked at your reference. The author states: 'it is predominantly free convection forces which change the apparent mass.'

The author forgot to include the 'control' experiment in his paper, weighing the metals in vacuum, to conclude air convection is responsible for changes in weight.