Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Universal Acceleration debunked
« on: November 08, 2017, 12:14:52 AM »
Claim: The effects of gravity are actually caused by the Earth accelerating upward. There is no actual gravity.
Experiment setup: Had daughter stand on chair and jump off. A cloth was held beside her as a control.
Results: When she jumped, her hair and dress flew up as she jumped off.

If the was no gravity, my daughter would have simply hovered in air until the ground rushed up to meet here. Instead, she clearly accelerated downward as proven by the fact that her hair and skirt did not stay in the same position. Her downward acceleration along with air resistance caused her hair and skirt to rise. The control cloth did not move, proving there was no sudden upward rush of air.

Thanks go to Tom for giving me this idea when he claimed something along the lines of jumping off a chair proved UA. Ironically, it proved that UA fails to describe reality.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10174
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #1 on: November 08, 2017, 12:59:16 AM »
Excellent, you have proved Einstein wrong. I'm sure your Nobel Prize is waiting for you as we speak.

Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #2 on: November 08, 2017, 01:32:56 AM »
Yeah, I don't get it. Wouldn't the act of jumping, and going from 1g+ of acceleration to zero cause the hair and fabric to rebound? Wouldn't the air accelerating upward past her continue this?

I can't tell if you're serious or not.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #3 on: November 08, 2017, 02:51:29 AM »
Yes, StinkyOne, what makes you think that you are smarter than Einstein?

Offline Mark_1984

  • *
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2017, 05:04:28 AM »
More to the point, you Wiki quotes Einstein's theory of relativity as the explanation for why UA doesn't exceed the speed of light.  However, Einstein's theories explain gravity as a distortion space/time.  This only work with a spherical earth, and explains why the earth is spherical, why the atmosphere doesn't get sucked into space, why the water doesn't fall off the south pole, etc.  Why are you 'cherry picking' the parts of his theories that suit you, but are ignoring the parts you don't like.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2017, 05:20:41 AM »
More to the point, you Wiki quotes Einstein's theory of relativity as the explanation for why UA doesn't exceed the speed of light.  However, Einstein's theories explain gravity as a distortion space/time.  This only work with a spherical earth, and explains why the earth is spherical, why the atmosphere doesn't get sucked into space, why the water doesn't fall off the south pole, etc.  Why are you 'cherry picking' the parts of his theories that suit you, but are ignoring the parts you don't like.

Junker and I are referencing Einstein's Equivelence Principle.

*

Offline xenotolerance

  • *
  • Posts: 307
  • byeeeeeee
    • View Profile
    • flat Earth visualization
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #6 on: November 08, 2017, 06:22:59 AM »
I debunked universal acceleration with this experiment:

  • Lift a book into the air
  • Let go
  • It falls to the floor, unless you're in space, or underwater

This is clear and empirical proof of Aristotle's natural place theory.

smarter than Einstein confirmed

//

anyway Mark raises an excellent point.

Einstein's special relativity is what the wiki cites in reference to the speed of the Earth, and how it will never reach the speed of light. (incidentally, y'all should really cite wikipedia. plagiarism bad)

so you like the equivalence principal and special relativity, but because gravity is incompatible with your flat Earth belief, general relativity is right out.

you must think you're smarter than Einstein

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #7 on: November 08, 2017, 06:51:21 AM »
I debunked universal acceleration with this experiment:

  • Lift a book into the air
  • Let go
  • It falls to the floor, unless you're in space, or underwater

This is clear and empirical proof of Aristotle's natural place theory.

smarter than Einstein confirmed

//

anyway Mark raises an excellent point.

Einstein's special relativity is what the wiki cites in reference to the speed of the Earth, and how it will never reach the speed of light. (incidentally, y'all should really cite wikipedia. plagiarism bad)

so you like the equivalence principal and special relativity, but because gravity is incompatible with your flat Earth belief, general relativity is right out.

you must think you're smarter than Einstein

Einstein openly admitted that an upward accelerating earth would provide the same effect as his other gravity theory. Look into the Equivalence Principle.

*

Offline xenotolerance

  • *
  • Posts: 307
  • byeeeeeee
    • View Profile
    • flat Earth visualization
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #8 on: November 08, 2017, 07:08:06 AM »
No, he did not 'openly admit' to anything of the sort. In your quest to confirm your beliefs, you have willfully misconstrued the equivalence principle - but not even really that, you've misinterpreted the layperson-level explanations of it. Here is the sort of math you're glossing over.

Also, it is a mistake to think that special relativity can somehow be true without gravity existing. Gravity is well defined in terms of special relativity. You're basically asserting that nothing has mass (no gravity), but special relativity still works. The point of it being 'special' instead of 'general' is that the reference frame is not changing its acceleration - not that it doesn't have acceleration in the first place. Read: acceleration without force = gravity, the whole point of equivalence.

Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #9 on: November 08, 2017, 08:10:09 AM »
actually, special relativity exists entirely outside the realm of gravitation. general relativity deals with gravitation.

*

Offline juner

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 10174
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #10 on: November 08, 2017, 09:47:57 AM »
I debunked universal acceleration with this experiment:

  • Lift a book into the air
  • Let go
  • It falls to the floor, unless you're in space, or underwater

If all you are going to do is troll in the upper fora, then don't bother posting. Seeing as you are already on three warnings, have a few days of to review the rules.

Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #11 on: November 08, 2017, 10:06:47 AM »
Excellent, you have proved Einstein wrong. I'm sure your Nobel Prize is waiting for you as we speak.
Why are you taking this stance in the debate? Every UA believer claims to be smarter than Cavendish, Copernicus and Newton like it's nothing, but Einstein is the limit of who you cannot be smarter than?
We generally accept evidence from all  sources.

The only evidence for Round Earth celestial accuracy (assuming that timeanddate is even based on RET) is the evidence you collected with your friends last month?

Offline StinkyOne

  • *
  • Posts: 805
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #12 on: November 08, 2017, 02:01:20 PM »
No, he did not 'openly admit' to anything of the sort. In your quest to confirm your beliefs, you have willfully misconstrued the equivalence principle - but not even really that, you've misinterpreted the layperson-level explanations of it. Here is the sort of math you're glossing over.

Also, it is a mistake to think that special relativity can somehow be true without gravity existing. Gravity is well defined in terms of special relativity. You're basically asserting that nothing has mass (no gravity), but special relativity still works. The point of it being 'special' instead of 'general' is that the reference frame is not changing its acceleration - not that it doesn't have acceleration in the first place. Read: acceleration without force = gravity, the whole point of equivalence.

This guy gets it.

The other point I was going to point out when they jumped all over this is that they willingly accept at face value any theory that fits their world view. You accept some things Einstein proposed with zero proof, and yet deny other parts of his theory that are actually in real world use. (frame dragging)

If you hold the view that equivalence precludes this silly experiment, then you also must admit that there is no experiment that can prove UA. There are, on the other hand, experiments that confirm gravity. (Cavendish's experiment, LIGO detecting gravitational waves) If you're going to be intellectually honest, you have to admit that your theory of UA is in serious question.
I saw a video where a pilot was flying above the sun.
-Terry50

Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #13 on: November 08, 2017, 11:42:49 PM »
If you are going 1g then accelerate upwards, then why don't you keep going up? Is air resistance that strong?

Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #14 on: November 08, 2017, 11:48:03 PM »
I debunked universal acceleration with this experiment:

  • Lift a book into the air
  • Let go
  • It falls to the floor, unless you're in space, or underwater

If all you are going to do is troll in the upper fora, then don't bother posting. Seeing as you are already on three warnings, have a few days of to review the rules.

If the book is going the same speed as eath it won't go anywhere (relatively)

Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #15 on: November 09, 2017, 01:16:15 AM »

If the book is going the same speed as eath it won't go anywhere (relatively)
Definitely not true. The air below the book cannot exert enough force on the book to keep it in it's current position. It instead moves out of the way and around the book as "the earth accelerates towards it."
Same as with gravity.

Offline Mark_1984

  • *
  • Posts: 132
    • View Profile
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #16 on: November 09, 2017, 04:52:42 AM »
You've missed my point.  Your Wiki quotes Einstein's theories of relativity and special relativity as the reason why the earth does not exceed the speed of light under the UA theory.  However, these theories are intertwined with Einstein's theories about gravity.  You can't have one without the other.  Therefore, either Einstein is correct, and gravity exists, or Einstein is wrong and there is no gravity, but then the speed of light is no longer a constant.  And we know from observations that the speed of light is a constant.

I'd be interested to hear a clear explanation.

More to the point, you Wiki quotes Einstein's theory of relativity as the explanation for why UA doesn't exceed the speed of light.  However, Einstein's theories explain gravity as a distortion space/time.  This only work with a spherical earth, and explains why the earth is spherical, why the atmosphere doesn't get sucked into space, why the water doesn't fall off the south pole, etc.  Why are you 'cherry picking' the parts of his theories that suit you, but are ignoring the parts you don't like.

Junker and I are referencing Einstein's Equivelence Principle.

Offline 3DGeek

  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Path of photon from sun location to eye at sunset?
    • View Profile
    • What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset
Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #17 on: November 09, 2017, 05:16:21 PM »
Bah - Einstein didn't know beans.

Quote
Dr. Henry Eyring was teaching chemistry at the university of Utah. He and Einstein were colleagues. As they walked together they noted an unusual plant growing along a garden walk. Eyring asked Einstein if he knew what the plant was. Einstein did not, and together they consulted a gardener. The gardener indicated the plant was green beans and forever afterwards Eyring said Einstein didn't know beans.

Point being - Einstein was very smart at what he was very smart at - but he wasn't a universal expert on everything.   It is therefore easily possible to be smarter than Einstein in some matters - while also be less smart in others.

You really can't tell whether people are smarter than Einstein.  His IQ was never formally tested - but it's estimated to be around 160.  The most you can get on a standard test is 165.   Worse still, the VERY smartest people get worse scores on the test than less smart people because they can see possible answers that even the people who set up the test didn't envisage.   Then they have multiple possible answers and they are forced to imagine which answer the person setting the test would have considered to be the most obvious.  Hence, you require the most intelligent people to be able to put themselves into the minds of less intelligent people.

This renders scores over about 150 somewhat "iffy".

So there comes a point when "sufficiently smart" to question Einstein is entirely plausible.

What ISN'T so easy is to claim that his physics is incorrect - because most of it (but not all) has been tested more rigorously than most other scientific facts.
Hey Tom:  What path do the photons take from the physical location of the sun to my eye at sunset?

Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2017, 08:24:31 PM »
Yes, StinkyOne, what makes you think that you are smarter than Einstein?

Shh, Einstein is the smartest being ever to walk the planet.  Unbelievable insight without ever performing any experiment to come up with his conclusions.  A man way stronger than those walking the earth today.  Hopefully nobody will disrespect my Einstein again.

Re: Universal Acceleration debunked
« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2017, 02:23:17 AM »

If the book is going the same speed as eath it won't go anywhere (relatively)
Definitely not true. The air below the book cannot exert enough force on the book to keep it in it's current position. It instead moves out of the way and around the book as "the earth accelerates towards it."
Same as with gravity.

The air is going the same speed. How come people don suffocate if the air is pushed up?