Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,387 Year: 3,644/9,624 Month: 515/974 Week: 128/276 Day: 2/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Gravity does not exist
Doddy
Member (Idle past 5930 days)
Posts: 563
From: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 01-04-2007


Message 7 of 66 (393443)
04-05-2007 8:13 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by subbie
04-04-2007 4:29 PM


I have discovered a fifth force, similar in some ways to electromagnatism in that it is invisible, but acts nonetheless on objects that have mass.
Four forces are simpler than five. (Occam would be proud of me).
The more astute among you might point out that other objects in space, planets, moons, stars, etc, seem to have an attractive force, what scientists have assumed was gravity. Instead, these other bodies are nothing more than localized focal points of Subbity waves as they emanate from Earth. The more massive the object, the better job it does at focusing Subbity waves, so the more focal Subbity force it has.
What is the difference between gravity and Subbity? Can you make a prediction, based on your theory, that would could possibly falsify your theory? It isn't science unless we can prove you wrong somehow.

Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today!
Contributors needed in the following fields: Physical Anthropology, Invertebrate Biology (esp. Lepidopterology), Biochemistry, Population Genetics, Scientific Illustration, Scientific History, Philosophy of Science, Logic and others. Researchers also wanted to source creationist literature references. Register here!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by subbie, posted 04-04-2007 4:29 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by subbie, posted 04-05-2007 8:39 AM Doddy has replied

  
Doddy
Member (Idle past 5930 days)
Posts: 563
From: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 01-04-2007


Message 12 of 66 (393460)
04-05-2007 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by subbie
04-05-2007 8:39 AM


Denying the antecedent!
Denying the antecedent!
If the earth was spinning, then we should feel dizzy. We don't feel dizzy, so we aren't spinning.
But, consider that the reason we are not dizzy is not because we are not spinning?
Dizziness doesn't work like you say, unless you have a new theory on the mechanism of the vestibular system.
Newton's first law states that "An object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by another force". Therefore, when you are moving on a merry-go-round, the fluid in your semicircular canals wants to fly off and go in a straight line, and your hair cells detect this motion as you spinning. (by the way, centripetal acceleration is not only proportional to velocity, but also inversely to radius. So, even though you spin at 426m/s at the equator, you only experience 2.8cm/s/s of centripetal acceleration. This isn't enough to move your fluid much).
As one hops off the merry-go-round, the fluid keeps moving (per 1st law of Newton), so you feel like you are spinning. Because we don't hop off the Earth, we can't feel dizzy - our fluid will always be moving slightly, and our brain will compensate for this slight movement.
So, how about a prediction which actually works?
Edited by Doddy, : title

Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today!
Contributors needed in the following fields: Physical Anthropology, Invertebrate Biology (esp. Lepidopterology), Biochemistry, Population Genetics, Scientific Illustration, Scientific History, Philosophy of Science, Logic and others. Researchers also wanted to source creationist literature references. Register here!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by subbie, posted 04-05-2007 8:39 AM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by subbie, posted 04-05-2007 6:25 PM Doddy has replied

  
Doddy
Member (Idle past 5930 days)
Posts: 563
From: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 01-04-2007


Message 23 of 66 (393566)
04-05-2007 7:35 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by subbie
04-05-2007 6:25 PM


Re: Denying the antecedent!
Spinning = dizzy. Not spinning = not dizzy. Therefore, we are not spinning. It's really much too simple to be undermined by apparently reasoned analysis that must have a mistake in it somewhere.
Ah, but how dizzy? Surely you agree that if you spin really fast, you get more dizzy than if you slowly spin around? So it must be more complicated than you assume.
As for my calculations:
acceleration(centripetal)=(tangential velocity)^2/(radius)
So, for a merry-go-round of 3m diameter (1.5m radius), going with a velocity of 2m/s, we have
a(c)=(2 x 2)/(1.5)=2.7m/s
But for the earth (where on the equator, one spins around the full 40,075,020m circumference in one day = 86400 seconds) the velocity is 462m/s and the radius, at the equator, is 6,377,563m. So we have
a(c)=(426 x 426)/(6377563) = 0.028m/s
So clearly, one will be dizzy to about 1% of the degree of dizziness experienced on a merry-go-round.

Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today!
Contributors needed in the following fields: Physical Anthropology, Invertebrate Biology (esp. Lepidopterology), Biochemistry, Population Genetics, Scientific Illustration, Scientific History, Philosophy of Science, Logic and others. Researchers also wanted to source creationist literature references. Register here!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by subbie, posted 04-05-2007 6:25 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by subbie, posted 04-05-2007 8:25 PM Doddy has replied

  
Doddy
Member (Idle past 5930 days)
Posts: 563
From: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 01-04-2007


Message 30 of 66 (393604)
04-05-2007 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by subbie
04-05-2007 8:25 PM


Re: Going 'round the merry go round
Thus, it appears that your attempt to bolster your position has actually had the effect of strengthening mine.
Dizziness is not comparable to centripetal acceleration, but to change in centripetal acceleration. This is why you feel dizzy when you hop off - change from 2.7m/s/s to about 0. But, you don't hop off the Earth, so won't feel dizzy.

Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today!
Contributors needed in the following fields: Physical Anthropology, Invertebrate Biology (esp. Lepidopterology), Biochemistry, Population Genetics, Scientific Illustration, Scientific History, Philosophy of Science, Logic and others. Researchers also wanted to source creationist literature references. Register here!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by subbie, posted 04-05-2007 8:25 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by subbie, posted 04-05-2007 11:35 PM Doddy has replied

  
Doddy
Member (Idle past 5930 days)
Posts: 563
From: Brisbane, Australia
Joined: 01-04-2007


Message 32 of 66 (393632)
04-06-2007 2:41 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by subbie
04-05-2007 11:35 PM


Re: Going 'round the merry go roundau contraire
Well yes, turning your head while on one could also bring about a change in centripetal acceleration.
Let's see. If the Earth was a merry-go-round of diameter 3m, it would have be travelling at
v^2=r x a
v^2=1.5 x .028=0.042
v=.205m/s
Therefore, it would be making one full rotation every 45 seconds. Do you expect to get dizzy on that?!

Help inform the masses - contribute to the EvoWiki today!
Contributors needed in the following fields: Physical Anthropology, Invertebrate Biology (esp. Lepidopterology), Biochemistry, Population Genetics, Scientific Illustration, Scientific History, Philosophy of Science, Logic and others. Researchers also wanted to source creationist literature references. Register here!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by subbie, posted 04-05-2007 11:35 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by subbie, posted 04-06-2007 9:50 AM Doddy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024