Because a object that is denser than air will fall down, until it finds it buoyancy level, or it is physical stopped. That is why helium rises, as it is lighter than air, so it goes up until it finds it buoyancy level, or it is contained.
Buoyancy is dependent on gravity, or some other force to push/pull things, so you're defeating yourself here. You still have to account for this external force, which means that you haven't provided an alternative to gravitational theory.
The buoyancy argument is seriously disinfo. If you want to dive into the flat earth space, you need to have a complete understanding of the system you're trying to disprove, and not just parrot things you've heard.
The only viable alternative system to gravity that I've seen is the theory Tesla believed in which describes a magno-electric universe.
You make claims, with no proof to back it up, but that is how it always been with gravity. A object seeks its natural buoyancy level, I do not know what that is so hard to understand. The more dense a object is, the lower its buoyancy level is. Once a object has reached its buoyancy level, it is not going to move up or down, unless outside forces affect it (like the wind).
The heavier, more dense, a object is, the lower its buoyancy level is. The more dense a object is, the further down it will fall. No more forces are needed, only different density and buoyancy levels.
You do need a force. Things do not move without a force applied to them. Your worldview does not explain why denser objects don't fall sideways, it's basic logic that the direction things fall must be determined by something. Do you believe the earth is flat, by any chance
You don't seem to understand the point of the question. Why don't things fall upwards in your worldview
Because a object that is denser than air will fall down, until it finds it buoyancy level, or it is physical stopped. That is why helium rises, as it is lighter than air, so it goes up until it finds it buoyancy level, or it is contained.
Buoyancy is dependent on gravity, or some other force to push/pull things, so you're defeating yourself here. You still have to account for this external force, which means that you haven't provided an alternative to gravitational theory.
The buoyancy argument is seriously disinfo. If you want to dive into the flat earth space, you need to have a complete understanding of the system you're trying to disprove, and not just parrot things you've heard.
The only viable alternative system to gravity that I've seen is the theory Tesla believed in which describes a magno-electric universe.
You make claims, with no proof to back it up, but that is how it always been with gravity. A object seeks its natural buoyancy level, I do not know what that is so hard to understand. The more dense a object is, the lower its buoyancy level is. Once a object has reached its buoyancy level, it is not going to move up or down, unless outside forces affect it (like the wind).
I'm not pushing gravity, I'm explaining that buoyancy is not a replacement to gravity.
Why do more dense objects always fall towards the earth? Because boyuancy is dependent on an external force to provide directionality.
But what determines which direction this happens in? This logically necessitates another force. It makes no sense otherwise
The heavier, more dense, a object is, the lower its buoyancy level is. The more dense a object is, the further down it will fall. No more forces are needed, only different density and buoyancy levels.
You do need a force. Things do not move without a force applied to them. Your worldview does not explain why denser objects don't fall sideways, it's basic logic that the direction things fall must be determined by something. Do you believe the earth is flat, by any chance