Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,784 Year: 4,041/9,624 Month: 912/974 Week: 239/286 Day: 46/109 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Was there Gravity at dawn of history?
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 22 of 37 (435085)
11-19-2007 12:06 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by simple
11-18-2007 4:36 PM


Re: Non Alternative Certainty?
simple writes:
quote:
Does this mean that it is NOT a matter of of opinion, for non alternative theories, then?
No, it means there are no alternative theories.
A theory is more than simply saying, "I think it could have been different." You have to show actual evidence that supports your claim that things were different. For example, if gravity were different then, we should see certain effects. No, that they could have built the pyramids is not such an effect.
Instead, we should see things like changes in the rocks due to the fact that gravity would not compress things as much. Why is it the granites don't appear any different?
And then there's the astronomical data: When you look into the sky, you look into the past because light takes a long time to reach us. So why is it that when we look into the past, we see that the gravitational effects are not any different from what we see here and now?
The reason why we don't discuss other theories is because there are no other theories to discuss.
quote:
What reasons do you have that gravity was the same "back in the day"when they moved the heavy blocks of the pyramids?
Because all the evidence points to that conclusion. Gravity leaves effects. They all show a constant gravitational field.
Why would you have us ignore the evidence?

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by simple, posted 11-18-2007 4:36 PM simple has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 11-19-2007 12:27 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 34 of 37 (435103)
11-19-2007 1:18 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by jar
11-19-2007 12:30 AM


Re: some evidences for long term gravity
jar writes:
quote:
Is there a relationship between the angle of debris slopes and gravity?
Yes, but not quite as directly as you might think.
That is, a debris slope has to do with the friction involved which is a function of the materials. Gravity provides a force to overcome the coefficients of friction. With less gravity, less force exists and thus, a debris pile can have a steeper conical angle since there isn't as much force pulling on the items in the pile.
So it isn't so much the gravity that controls it but the friction coefficients. Any force you care to use is sufficient and gravity is only one.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by jar, posted 11-19-2007 12:30 AM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Parasomnium, posted 11-19-2007 2:45 AM Rrhain 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