Ghost of V

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #20 on: January 10, 2015, 08:24:17 AM »
4) You, again, fail to provide data to support your conclusions. How many times to we have to point out that failure?

Hello, pot, this is kettle. 

I've never seen any data from you, just obtuse nay-saying and handwaving references to "accepted" physics.  Just because you follow Neil Tyson on twitter and skimmed A Brief History of Time doesn't make you an expert on relativity and gravity.
You must be confused. I regularly post links to published scientific articles replete with data. I point to USGS gravity readings. Heck, Tom Bishop claimed this month the the KSU article on modeling gravity discrepancies had data but no hypothesis.

I'm happy to debate relativity and gravity with you without expecting your being an expert on the

Please note how Tintagel said "data from you", not "data from articles". That's important because we want to know what you think and what data you've collected yourself to support your own dogma.

It's easy to post links. It's difficult to think for yourself.

Rama Set

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #21 on: January 10, 2015, 01:55:48 PM »
Please note how Tintagel said "data from you", not "data from articles". That's important because we want to know what you think and what data you've collected yourself to support your own dogma.

It's easy to post links. It's difficult to think for yourself.


............ it adds up mathematically.

Would you mind showing the math?
« Last Edit: January 10, 2015, 02:32:25 PM by Rama Set »

*

Offline Tintagel

  • *
  • Posts: 531
  • Full of Tinier Tintagels
    • View Profile
Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #22 on: January 10, 2015, 09:05:50 PM »
4) You, again, fail to provide data to support your conclusions. How many times to we have to point out that failure?

Hello, pot, this is kettle. 

I've never seen any data from you, just obtuse nay-saying and handwaving references to "accepted" physics.  Just because you follow Neil Tyson on twitter and skimmed A Brief History of Time doesn't make you an expert on relativity and gravity.
You must be confused. I regularly post links to published scientific articles replete with data. I point to USGS gravity readings. Heck, Tom Bishop claimed this month the the KSU article on modeling gravity discrepancies had data but no hypothesis.

I'm happy to debate relativity and gravity with you without expecting your being an expert on the

Oblique references to scientific journals are what I'm referring to as "handwaving."  It's not hard to get published in a journal.  Think for yourself. 

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/nov/25/journal-accepts-paper-requesting-removal-from-mailing-list

Rama Set

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #23 on: January 10, 2015, 11:20:51 PM »
4) You, again, fail to provide data to support your conclusions. How many times to we have to point out that failure?

Hello, pot, this is kettle. 

I've never seen any data from you, just obtuse nay-saying and handwaving references to "accepted" physics.  Just because you follow Neil Tyson on twitter and skimmed A Brief History of Time doesn't make you an expert on relativity and gravity.
You must be confused. I regularly post links to published scientific articles replete with data. I point to USGS gravity readings. Heck, Tom Bishop claimed this month the the KSU article on modeling gravity discrepancies had data but no hypothesis.

I'm happy to debate relativity and gravity with you without expecting your being an expert on the

Oblique references to scientific journals are what I'm referring to as "handwaving."  It's not hard to get published in a journal.  Think for yourself. 

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/nov/25/journal-accepts-paper-requesting-removal-from-mailing-list

Well it is easy getting published in that journal. I hope you don't think all journals are similar?  If so, then you need to be a bit more critical in your thinking.

Ghost of V

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #24 on: January 10, 2015, 11:49:56 PM »
Well it is easy getting published in that journal.

If it's so easy then why don't you get an article published in that journal?

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #25 on: January 11, 2015, 12:00:08 AM »
Well it is easy getting published in that journal.

If it's so easy then why don't you get an article published in that journal?

Better yet, why don't FE'ers get published in that journal?
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

Rama Set

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #26 on: January 11, 2015, 12:18:38 AM »
Well it is easy getting published in that journal.

If it's so easy then why don't you get an article published in that journal?

Did you look at her link?  It seems like you didn't.

Ghost of V

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #27 on: January 11, 2015, 12:19:48 AM »
It seems like you didn't.

I didn't. I'm sorry.

Rama Set

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #28 on: January 11, 2015, 12:24:01 AM »
It seems like you didn't.

I didn't. I'm sorry.

You should.  It is pretty funny.

Offline AMann

  • *
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #29 on: January 11, 2015, 06:12:34 AM »
Einstein came to the conclusion that the effect that most people think of as gravity is exactly the same as acceleration.  I think he was a pretty smart guy, don't you?

Since gravity is a force and a force applied to an object causes acceleration, this is something that is already known.
I was asking if there was any evidence of the 'upward' acceleration of the Earth... any experiments conducted... etc.

The trouble I have with the explanation of the Earth accelerating is inertia. The act of accelerating the Earth beneath us would cause inertia which can be felt. And inertia is something that I have experienced many times.

So, now, in addition to wondering if there is any evidence of the 'upward' acceleration of the Earth, why is it that we do not feel the inertia of the acceleration of the Earth?

Ghost of V

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #30 on: January 11, 2015, 06:34:37 AM »


why is it that we do not feel the inertia of the acceleration of the Earth?

Why would we?

Offline AMann

  • *
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #31 on: January 11, 2015, 07:05:37 AM »


why is it that we do not feel the inertia of the acceleration of the Earth?

Why would we?

Because that is how inertia works.
You can test it yourself, it is a very easy experiment. Ride in a vehicle, have the driver step on the accelerator and feel yourself pushed back into the chair. As long as you are accelerating, you feel as if you are being pushed in the opposite direction of the acceleration.
It's one of the laws of inertia: For every action (force) there is an equal and opposite (force).

This also works in the up and down orientation and can be felt when traveling by plane, or if you are daring enough, skydiving or bungee jumping.

The force felt is often referred to as g-force, since it is based on the force of gravity (or on a FE site, the acceleration of the same rate that is perceived as the force of gravity).

Ghost of V

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #32 on: January 11, 2015, 08:02:29 AM »
It is impossible to discern acceleration from a relative frame of reference. This is called The Equivalence Principle. You might want to study it as it is one of the most basic principles in physics.

Offline AMann

  • *
  • Posts: 117
    • View Profile
Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #33 on: January 11, 2015, 08:38:18 AM »
It is impossible to discern acceleration from a relative frame of reference. This is called The Equivalence Principle. You might want to study it as it is one of the most basic principles in physics.

I am familiar with the equivalence principle. It states that in any small region of space-time, the effects of a gravitational field are indistinguishable from those of an appropriate acceleration of the frame of reference.

Because of this principle, if I was unable to see (if I were in a closed box) and it were in free-fall, I would not be able to tell if I was experiencing the affects of free-fall or the affects of zero-gravity.
Similarly, if I were approaching the Earth at an acceleration of 9.81m/s^2, I would not be able to tell if it was gravity working on me or in the case that Earth had no gravity that the Earth was accelerating towards me at the same rate as gravity. (The impact with the Earth would be the same).

The difference between the principle and the idea that the Earth is accelerating in an upward direction is the direction of the forces on our bodies. With gravity, I would be falling to the Earth, whereas with an accelerating Earth, a force pushing up on us. In the case of Gravity, when on the ground, there is no acceleration. In the case an an accelerating Earth, there is an acceleration 'upwards' in which case inertia would work in opposition.

But we digress...

More important than the affects of inertia if certain situations were true is the evidence that the Earth is accelerating in an 'upward' direction. Without evidence, the idea, no matter how good it sounds, is merely a guess.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2015, 08:55:11 AM by AMann »

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2015, 09:31:52 AM »
It is impossible to discern acceleration from a relative frame of reference. This is called The Equivalence Principle. You might want to study it as it is one of the most basic principles in physics.

I am familiar with the equivalence principle. It states that in any small region of space-time, the effects of a gravitational field are indistinguishable from those of an appropriate acceleration of the frame of reference.

Because of this principle, if I was unable to see (if I were in a closed box) and it were in free-fall, I would not be able to tell if I was experiencing the affects of free-fall or the affects of zero-gravity.
Similarly, if I were approaching the Earth at an acceleration of 9.81m/s^2, I would not be able to tell if it was gravity working on me or in the case that Earth had no gravity that the Earth was accelerating towards me at the same rate as gravity. (The impact with the Earth would be the same).

The difference between the principle and the idea that the Earth is accelerating in an upward direction is the direction of the forces on our bodies. With gravity, I would be falling to the Earth, whereas with an accelerating Earth, a force pushing up on us. In the case of Gravity, when on the ground, there is no acceleration. In the case an an accelerating Earth, there is an acceleration 'upwards' in which case inertia would work in opposition.

But we digress...

More important than the affects of inertia if certain situations were true is the evidence that the Earth is accelerating in an 'upward' direction. Without evidence, the idea, no matter how good it sounds, is merely a guess.
You did well to point out Vx's oversimplification of the EP. FEers tend to forget that it applies only at a point. Indeed any decent lab can determine that the UA is not the cause of the sensation of gravity. For example, simple experiments show that gravity is radially symmetric. See http://www.amazon.com/Gravitation-Spacetime-Second-Edition-Ohanian/dp/0393965015
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Ghost of V

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2015, 07:27:47 PM »
It is impossible to discern acceleration from a relative frame of reference. This is called The Equivalence Principle. You might want to study it as it is one of the most basic principles in physics.

I am familiar with the equivalence principle. It states that in any small region of space-time, the effects of a gravitational field are indistinguishable from those of an appropriate acceleration of the frame of reference.

Because of this principle, if I was unable to see (if I were in a closed box) and it were in free-fall, I would not be able to tell if I was experiencing the affects of free-fall or the affects of zero-gravity.
Similarly, if I were approaching the Earth at an acceleration of 9.81m/s^2, I would not be able to tell if it was gravity working on me or in the case that Earth had no gravity that the Earth was accelerating towards me at the same rate as gravity. (The impact with the Earth would be the same).

The difference between the principle and the idea that the Earth is accelerating in an upward direction is the direction of the forces on our bodies. With gravity, I would be falling to the Earth, whereas with an accelerating Earth, a force pushing up on us. In the case of Gravity, when on the ground, there is no acceleration. In the case an an accelerating Earth, there is an acceleration 'upwards' in which case inertia would work in opposition.

But we digress...

More important than the affects of inertia if certain situations were true is the evidence that the Earth is accelerating in an 'upward' direction. Without evidence, the idea, no matter how good it sounds, is merely a guess.

Wrong. Equivalence principle is why we don't feel Earth accelerating. If you want to argue the merit of the Equivalence Principle then you are in the wrong place. I'm sure Einstein would love to hear your theories on how he was wrong, but unfortunately he's dead so I guess we'll never know.

Either way, my money is on Einstein. Unless you're claiming to be smarter than him. Are you?
« Last Edit: January 11, 2015, 07:51:58 PM by Vauxhall »

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2015, 07:39:56 PM »
Einstein came to the conclusion that the effect that most people think of as gravity is exactly the same as acceleration.  I think he was a pretty smart guy, don't you?

Einstein also said that there is a finite maximum speed in the universe, regardless of the referential, that is the speed of light. So if the earth is accelerating upwards at 9.81 m/s2 since roughly 4 billion years, it has reached the maximum velocity a long time ago. We should thus all be floating in the air.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2015, 07:45:36 PM »
Einstein also said that there is a finite maximum speed in the universe, regardless of the referential, that is the speed of light. So if the earth is accelerating upwards at 9.81 m/s2 since roughly 4 billion years, it has reached the maximum velocity a long time ago. We should thus all be floating in the air.
Please read the FAQ. More detailed explanation available here.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline Gulliver

  • *
  • Posts: 682
    • View Profile
Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2015, 08:54:45 PM »
Wrong. Equivalence principle is why we don't feel Earth accelerating. If you want to argue the merit of the Equivalence Principle then you are in the wrong place. I'm sure Einstein would love to hear your theories on how he was wrong, but unfortunately he's dead so I guess we'll never know.

Either way, my money is on Einstein. Unless you're claiming to be smarter than him. Are you?
Wrong. We do feel gravity, with a few exceptions like a small part of a roller coaster ride. In FET that sensation is caused by the earth accelerating.

Oh and Einstein believed that the earth orbits the sun. Are you claiming to be smarter than Einstein? 
Don't rely on FEers for history or physics.
[Hampton] never did [go to prison] and was never found guilty of libel.
The ISS doesn't accelerate.

Thork

Re: No gravity on Earth
« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2015, 09:04:19 PM »
Wrong. Equivalence principle is why we don't feel Earth accelerating. If you want to argue the merit of the Equivalence Principle then you are in the wrong place. I'm sure Einstein would love to hear your theories on how he was wrong, but unfortunately he's dead so I guess we'll never know.

Either way, my money is on Einstein. Unless you're claiming to be smarter than him. Are you?
Wrong. We do feel gravity, with a few exceptions like a small part of a roller coaster ride. In FET that sensation is caused by the earth accelerating.

Oh and Einstein believed that the earth orbits the sun. Are you claiming to be smarter than Einstein? 
Einstein denied the existence of black holes, discovered the universe was expanding only to declare he must be wrong and tried to join the second law of thermodynamics (which says that heat always tends to pass from the hotter to the cooler) with laws of mechanics. He made some pretty dumb guesses.