YOU GLOBE EARTHERS think you KNOW IT ALL Huh - WAKE UP

[Jing]

it is all a matter of scale. use a tiny feather and a tiny BB if you like. Posting the small private individual experiment, in before the claim that BBC is all Masons.

You need a higher height..... yh I don't trust bbc

 

[Jing]

I'm just attempting to get you to recognize why it is that gravity has to be a "force" of some kind.

What do you mean? Has to be a force?

 

[Robert5493]

Simple Question: and for this one we will bring out this CIA Freemason PSEUDOSCIENCE Fraud Neil Degrasse Tyson

He hoes out of his way to ASSERT the Earth is not round and of course he KNOWS because he works for (((you-know-who))) and I have PROOF

Neil Degrasse Tyson claims the Earth is "Pear-shaped" because the Earth is spinning so that its constantly getting bigger at the equator and smaller at the poles

So the Earth is constantly "Flattening out" right? Because of the "rotation" thats funny isn't it? Caught on to the scam yet Globe Earthers?

now Answer me this Globe Earth Earthers - if this is true - Why aren't the continents crashing together at the equator - There is continental drift right? WHY is it not following the same direction of centrifugal force?

just watch the video Globe Earthers - hes laughing the whole time he explains this trash because they keep BUYING IT

Just a JOKE from top to bottom - the Earth is FLAT and when they finally reveal the scam they'll explain it like "oh but the equator was always getting bigger because of the spin so it flattened out over time" Yea OK

THEY RUB IT IN YOUR FACES


View: https://youtu.be/SoCKapivHGM

pretty good video. Everything he says is congruent and matches my mental model and experience.
I'm not so sure you actually watched it, because he mentions the pear shape, mountain to ocean depths etc. as being infinitesimal.
the difference between mount Everest and the ocean bottom being comparatively less than your fingerprint ridges for example.
So even though it is comparatively small it is measurable on vast distances.
It isn't continuously flattening out either, the forces came to equilibrium long ago. Similar phenomenon are seen in the rings of Saturn, Uranus, the asteroid belt. etc.

Continental drift is driven primarily by convection forces so far as we know. Orders of magnitude higher forces... but to your point, the continents ARE crashing into one another at numerous points on the globe. The Rockies get taller every year.


I'm still waiting to see a coherent flat earth model explaining things.
Like your light... if it has mass then why does it not fall towards the firmament/turtle/whatever?

 

[Robert5493]

What do you mean? Has to be a force?

to make something move from not moving, requires an outside source of energy being put in.
That could be your finger, you blowing on it, hitting it with a jet of water... something.
then it is moving faster than it was before. It 'has momentum" That momentum a product of it's mass and how fast it is moving.

so, if you pull the table out from under it and it goes faster and faster, it is gaining energy. It gets this energy from 'somewhere'. Our present model calls that gravitational energy, or potential energy being converted into kinetic energy.

so, in the flat earth model what "force" accelerates things that fall?

 

[Jing]

to make something move from not moving, requires an outside source of energy being put in.
That could be your finger, you blowing on it, hitting it with a jet of water... something.
then it is moving faster than it was before. It 'has momentum" That momentum a product of it's mass and how fast it is moving.

so, if you pull the table out from under it and it goes faster and faster, it is gaining energy. It gets this energy from 'somewhere'. Our present model calls that gravitational energy, or potential energy being converted into kinetic energy.

so, in the flat earth model what "force" accelerates things that fall?

Well it doesn't really need a force if you remove the table the object falls because it now isn't be supported by anything, it will keep falling until it hits something that can support its Weight, nothing needs to pull it downwards it's the lack of support that means an object will fall.

 

[Robert5493]

Well it doesn't really need a force if you remove the table the object falls because it now isn't be supported by anything, it will keep falling until it hits something that can support its Weight, nothing needs to pull it downwards it's the lack of support that means an object will fall.

ok. so the instant you pull the table out from under it, it is not moving yet. correct?
so 1kg moving 0m/s has no momentum...
a millisecond later, it start to move....
a second later, it is moving at 9.8m/s. so now the 1kg of mass, has got some punching power. more energy correct?
30 stories later, it is moving so fast it can crush a car roof. That is a lot of energy.

Where does this energy come from?
In a flat earth model, what is making this 1kg of mass continuously accelerate?

 

[Jing]

ok. so the instant you pull the table out from under it, it is not moving yet. correct?
so 1kg moving 0m/s has no momentum...
a millisecond later, it start to move....
a second later, it is moving at 9.8m/s. so now the 1kg of mass, has got some punching power. more energy correct?
30 stories later, it is moving so fast it can crush a car roof. That is a lot of energy.

Where does this energy come from?
In a flat earth model, what is making this 1kg of mass continuously accelerate?

It's own mass makes it continuously accelerate not having anything to stop it from moving keeps it going.if gravity is pulling all objects down how comes I can drop an apple and it falls to the ground but the same apple will float on water why does gravity stop pulling the apple ? Why doesn't it pull it to the bottom of the water?

 

[Robert5493]

It's own mass makes it continuously accelerate not having anything to stop it from moving keeps it going.if gravity is pulling all objects down how comes I can drop an apple and it falls to the ground but the same apple will float on water why does gravity stop pulling the apple ? Why doesn't it pull it to the bottom of the water?

ok, so it has it's own mass and it is accelerating towards the ground. meaning, as it falls it is gaining energy. We agree on that correct?

 

[Robert5493]

It's own mass makes it continuously accelerate not having anything to stop it from moving keeps it going.if gravity is pulling all objects down how comes I can drop an apple and it falls to the ground but the same apple will float on water why does gravity stop pulling the apple ? Why doesn't it pull it to the bottom of the water?

gravity never stops pulling on the apple when it is in water.
gravity never stops pulling on the apple when it is on the ground.
just like it never stops pulling on the 1kg weight sitting on the table.

in all cases, the forces are in balance.
why does gravity not continue to pull the apple through the water?
because gravity is pulling down on the water too, and because the mass of the water required to be displaced to sink the apple, is greater than the mass of the apple, the bigger force wins.

This is why a steel boat can float, and we can calculate how much it will hold without sinking.

 

[Jing]

and because the mass of the water required to be displaced to sink the apple, is greater than the mass of the apple, the bigger force wins.

You are just saying what I'm saying but then adding gravity, how do you know gravity is pulling the objects?

 

[Robert5493]

You are just saying what I'm saying but then adding gravity, how do you know gravity is pulling the objects?

ok, so it has it's own mass and it is accelerating towards the ground. meaning, as it falls it is gaining energy. We agree on that correct?

 

[Robert5493]

And do you also agree that the higher it is, and the further it falls, the faster it goes and has more energy in it?

 

[HeyThere]

The only thing spinning right now is my head, oy!

 

[Robert5493]

If you agree on those points, then you agree that 'something' 'somehow' accelerates mass in a particular direction you call "down".

I choose to call that force gravity (in the Newtonian sense)

what would you like to call it?

 

[Jing]

If you agree on those points, then you agree that 'something' 'somehow' accelerates mass in a particular direction you call "down".

I choose to call that force gravity (in the Newtonian sense)

what would you like to call it?

Why are you so sure it's a force? Why can't I feel this gravity pulling? How can I touch it? Or see it? I don't need to call it a force its simply just accelerates down because there is nothing to support the object.

 

[Robert5493]

Why are you so sure it's a force? Why can't I feel this gravity pulling? How can I touch it? Or see it? I don't need to call it a force its simply just accelerates down because there is nothing to support the object.

because unless you believe energy can be created from nothingness, then something has to have added energy to that 1kg weight.

Words are just tools used as shortcuts to describe a thing. A word is not the thing.


do you agree in descriptive terms that

'something' 'somehow' accelerates mass in a particular direction you call "down".

if you don't want to call the something adding energy to the mass a 'force', what would you like to call it?

 

[Jing]

because unless you believe energy can be created from nothingness, then something has to have added energy to that 1kg weight.

Words are just tools used as shortcuts to describe a thing. A word is not the thing.


do you agree in descriptive terms that

'something' 'somehow' accelerates mass in a particular direction you call "down".

if you don't want to call the something adding energy to the weight a 'force', what would you like to call it?

But there isn't a force pulling the object down, it's falling because it has mass and there is nothing to support it.

 

[Robert5493]

But there isn't a force pulling the object down, it's falling because it has mass and there is nothing to support it.

what would you like to call the process that is taking the 1kg mass from having no momentum to having some momentum as it accelerates without any applied force.

 

[Jing]

what would you like to call the process that is taking the 1kg mass from having no momentum to having some momentum as it accelerates without any applied force.

It's called falling or sinking.

 

[Robert5493]

In summary


On flat earth,

something (but not a force)
acts on all mass, (except heavy light?)
causing mass to accelerate 'down' (towards the earth),
measured at rate of 9.8m/s/s in a vacuum. (except for feathers, maybe, given enough time?)

this something that is not called a force, even though it adds energy to the mass,
and while having all the properties of gravity,
is not gravity.

It's called "falling" or "sinking"

is that about it?