[CableDawg]

Given that the pseudo force known as gravity does not exist, it doesn't seem to be a problem.

This is an extremely sensationalist comment.  Can you provide proof that it doesn't exist?

[rabinoz]

Given that the pseudo force known as gravity does not exist, it doesn't seem to be a problem.

Interesting. What force do you folks believe is responsible for weight?
edit: nvmd, found the wiki article

I was also just a little curious too! Just what can we call the force that Henry Cavendish and numerous others have measured since.
Though there are, so far unexplained variations, they certainly measured a force that

leads to an accepted value of G = 6.673 x 10^-11 m³ kg^-1 s^-2

[RAB Edit format]

[confused]

Given that the pseudo force known as gravity does not exist, it doesn't seem to be a problem.

Interesting. What force do you folks believe is responsible for weight?
edit: nvmd, found the wiki article

I was also just a little curious too! Just what can we call the force that Henry Cavendish and numerous others have measured since.
Though there are, so far unexplained variations, they certainly measured a force that leads to an accepted value of G = 6.673 x 10^-11 m³ kg^-1 s^-2

Apparently, those experiments are all flawed because of... walls? I still don't fully understand where these people are coming from on this. To my ear, the fact that this "UA" hypothesis has to invoke dark energy is also kind of a red flag.

Additionally, if I'm understanding it correctly, the math they included on the Wiki page actually proves UA wrong. It is stated that it is impossible for dark energy to accelerate the Earth past the speed of light. However, it follows from this statement that as the velocity of the earth approaches the speed of the light, the acceleration of the earth MUST approach zero. Therefore, the acceleration of the earth CANNOT be constant.

[rabinoz]

Given that the pseudo force known as gravity does not exist, it doesn't seem to be a problem.

Interesting. What force do you folks believe is responsible for weight?
edit: nvmd, found the wiki article

I was also just a little curious too! Just what can we call the force that Henry Cavendish and numerous others have measured since.
Though there are, so far unexplained variations, they certainly measured a force that leads to an accepted value of G = 6.673 x 10^-11 m³ kg^-1 s^-2

Apparently, those experiments are all flawed because of... walls? I still don't fully understand where these people are coming from on this. To my ear, the fact that this "UA" hypothesis has to invoke dark energy is also kind of a red flag.

Additionally, if I'm understanding it correctly, the math they included on the Wiki page actually proves UA wrong. It is stated that it is impossible for dark energy to accelerate the Earth past the speed of light. However, it follows from this statement that as the velocity of the earth approaches the speed of the light, the acceleration of the earth MUST approach zero. Therefore, the acceleration of the earth CANNOT be constant.

On the "dark energy" matter some Cosmologists (mind you I'm not one, so watch out) propose it and "dark matter" as a hypothesis to explain galaxies not expanding as fast as simply gravitational calculations might indicate.
There is no need (as far as I know) to invoke these hypotheses for any local observations.

But the "dark energy" that FE invokes is completely unproven yet core "theory" on which their UA is based - a big difference!

But, I do have to pull you up when you say "the acceleration of the earth MUST approach zero. Therefore, the acceleration of the earth CANNOT be constant."
Yes, to an outside observer it is true that "the acceleration of the earth MUST approach zero", but an observer on the earth the acceleration would appear the same. In the earth's frame of reference nothing has changed, even the rate of energy input (power if you like) stays the same.

But, I have often argued that UA cannot be applied the the earth because of the variations in "g" observed over the surface of the earth. These are obvious enough for Robert Hooke and Isaac Newton to have observed them (largely by the variation in the rate of pendulum clocks) and these observations assisted them in arriving at the gravitation law. The two of them did disagree on the relative effects of actual gravity variations and centripetal acceleration (which reduces the apparent "g" from the pole towards the equator).