9 Likes
Exactly and what you mentioned are characteristics that are associated with buoyancy and density.
So does a rubber ducky in a bathtub. I don’t understand your point.
Helium balloons don’t float up infinitely, either. They will get pulled down.
Relevant, as air is just as subject to fluid dynamics as water. Bouyancy, density, and gravity are interrelated.
Maybe you should pick up a science textbook and put down your Bible.
8 Likes
Theory…
6 Likes
Theories aren’t proven in sciences. They are models with a set of rules that conform to observable events. The very best of the models are those with do need the least amount of assumptions/axioms and which can be used to predict as of yet unobserved behavior.
As your Helium example: A helium balloon does float to the top of the atmosphere and would “swim” there, slowly losing buoyancy while the Helium leaks. Gravity would keep the Helium, but solar radiation pushes the individual helium atoms into outer space.
5 Likes
- So if these wanderers are all gas, why are they formed as balls? If not timespace curving amounts of mass, aka gravity, then what? Why are they orbiting the sun, if not gravity?
Also, if the moon is made of gas how can we explain what clearly looks like persistant geological features on its surface? - They are not doing a great job then.
3 Likes
I know this is going to be futile, because you’re either a trolley or an impervious idiot, but…
How, if there is no gravity, does the difference in density matter? Buoyancy makes no sense without gravity.
6 Likes
Condemnation before investigation is the true sign of ignorance.
Density and Buoyancy don’t need Gravity.
Waaaaaaay ahead of you.
5 Likes
In fact, the average velocity of a helium atom at any temperature anywhere in the atmosphere exceeds the escape velocity of the Earth’s gravity well. So, no, gravity cannot trap helium atoms: little buggers move too fast for that.
1 Like
I not an expert, but I believe this is explained by the orbital prograde motion.
But you did not offer an explaination for the shape of the planets, nor for the persistant terrain of the moon.
2 Likes
Nope.
The Earth rotates 360 degrees in 23h56m4s, not 24h. During that time, the Earth has revolved around the sun by almost one degree, so it has to rotate a little farther to reorient the sun to its original apparent position, which takes an extra 3m56s.
This is not a difficult concept.
9 Likes
David, when rational people are presented with competing explanations, they afford to those explanations a degree of belief that is proportional to the likelihood of each. The more likely explanation, the one with the most evidence supporting it, is the one a rational person will choose to believe. If an idea or model can explain more things with fewer postulates, can make more testable verified predictions, is in accord with a greater number of other accepted facts and ideas – if it just makes more sense of more stuff – then that model is superior, and has more supporting evidence, and rational people are more compelled to believe it.
You have made an extraordinary claim: gravity does not exist. But gravity is a pretty successful model, one that had makes a lot of sense out of a lot of stuff, one that’s been tested and assessed for over 400 years. And (in its non-relativistic form) it’s a very simple premise: gravity is a force, with magnitude between any two masses of F = Gmm/r2, and like all forces it has the effect F = ma. With that one simple premise, I can explain, for a start:
- objects heavier than air fall to the ground in air, while objects lighter than air float in air
- objects both heavier than air and lighter than air fall to the ground in a vacuum
- a thrown object falls to Earth with the same speed as initially thrown, describing a parabolic arc
- if I stand on a scale in an elevator, the scale reads a higher weight when the elevator begins moving upwards, a lower weight when it begins moving downwards, but the same weight when in motion as when standing still
- if I stand on a (highly accurate) scale at Machu Pichu, it reads a lower weight than the same scale at the Dead Sea.
- I can stand on a skateboard and coast down a hill, but will eventually slow, stop, and reverse direction of motion if I try to coast up a hill
- an object 400 km above the Earth’s surface travelling at a speed of about 7.5 km/s will never fall to Earth
- tides
- pendulums
If you want any rational person to believe your claim that gravity doesn’t exist, posting somebody else’s easily-debunked infographics isn’t sufficient. You need to offer another model. You need to offer a better explanation. You need compelling evidence for your extraordinary claim to convince people that their perfectly good explanation isn’t the best one. You need to offer an explanation that explains everything that gravity explains, plus things it does not explain, in a manner that makes testable and verifiable predictions that prove to be true.
So what’s your alternative explanation? If gravity does not exist, then why do all those things happen the way they do?
Explain the nine things on my list in a universe without gravity.
If you cannot do that, then no rational person has any reason to believe your claim. If you cannot do that, then you have no reason to believe it, either.
10 Likes
Polaris has an annual parallax larger than 100 arcseconds. And in 2000 years, Polaris won’t be the pole star, Errai will be, due to a motion your silly graphic doesn’t even depict.
What’s your point, exactly? You can’t just (fail to) poke holes in the model you’re trying to debunk; you have to provide an alternative, more compelling explanation. How do you explain the apparent (short term, large scale) lack of motion of Polaris, and apparent motion of all other stars in circular paths around it?
8 Likes
As I suggested earlier in this thread, the flat-earthers are mostly trollies. They cherry-pick a few items, and introduce things that have nothing to do with the topic to try to get you off on a tangent. The planets are round because ancient Greek? They are round because pool tables? Huh? The earth is flat because some people don’t like gravity? Double Huh?
The fact is, we can see celestial bodies, like the moon, Mars, Venus, etc. They are all spheres. There is no pool table-shaped object we have ever seen. They are all spheres, and none of them is a flat disk, so it’s logical that earth is also a sphere.
And then there’s the lunar eclipse question, which I’ve asked several flat-earthers, and none have ever given a logical explanation.
2 Likes
When people just 100% know something, they are often just assuming that their feeling(s) on the subject is an accurate reflection of reality. And thus cannot debate the subject rationally and instinctively resort to goal-post moving and hold “competing” theories to vastly different standards of proof.
It is like a brain damage really, but we do have the cure. Unfortunately the medicine is not mandatory
3 Likes
10 Likes
