Gravity doesn’t exist, it’s just density and buoyancy
“Space” isn’t what they say it is and the fact that we have our gaseous atmosphere against the vacuum of space with no hard barrier violates the second law of thermodynamics
Gravity doesn’t exist, it’s just density and buoyancy
Bouyancy cannot exist without gravity. In order for a denser fluid to take the place of a less dense object and push it elsewhere, it needs a force to move it into place. Where does this force come from any why does it act only in one direction (pushing the less dense object upwards)?
“Space” isn’t what they say it is and the fact that we have our gaseous atmosphere against the vacuum of space with no hard barrier violates the second law of thermodynamics
Or there is another force (eg: gravity) keeping it in place.
EDIT: A theory is said to be 'wrong' if it is inconsistent with observations. Thus, a single counterexample is sufficient to demonstrate a theory is wrong. Also thus, if two theories both are consistent with all known observations, then neither can be said to be 'wrong'. Whether even one of them is the 'truth' is unknowable from said observations. Science only tells us when a theory is wrong, but cannot tell us when a theory is the truth.
See edit to my previous comment. With that in mind, let me provide a counterexample to disprove the theory in the video.
Counterexample to theory in the video: See comment by u/Jellytree above.
Galileo gravity experiment. Galileo dropped two objects shaped the same [eg: hollow steel ball and solid steel ball] but weighing different amounts. Both objects landed on the ground that the same time. This experiment has been repeated countless times (including by me) and it never fails. If it's all buoyancy, why don't they fall at different rates due to their different densities?
Meanwhile, the combination of theory of gravity and thermodynamics offers an easy explanation for buoyancy:
When water replaces a less dense object, the net potential energy (determined by distance from center of the Earth and mass of object) of the system (object + water) is lower. And due to the laws of thermodynamics, a system tends to find and stay in a state of lowest potential energy (i.e. the most stable equilibrium).
Buoyancy would fail if you take a less dense object below the water level and then freeze the water because the molecules of water are not moving far enough, and the system cannot find its most stable equilibrium until they begin moving far enough (i.e. after the ice melts).
EDIT note: u/Afks I made some edits to both comments to add clarity in case you read the previous version.
This is the first i'm hearing about this, and it sounds like an interesting theory. I read up on it a little, but have two questions related to two real world experiments.
Galileo gravity experiment. Galileo dropped two objects shaped the same but weighing different amounts. Both objects landed on the ground that the same time. This experiment has been repeated countless times (including by me) and it never fails. If it's all buoyancy, why don't they fall at different rates due to their different densities?
Cavendish gravity experiment. Cavendish hung two massive lead balls from ropes and moved them close to each other to see if they were attracted to each other. They did attract, and it allowed him to experimentally work out the gravitational constant. Buoyancy here doesn't matter because the balls are hanging and the force is applied sideways. This experiment has also been repeated and improved on. If gravity doesn't exist, how were the lead balls attracted to each other?
This is the same article i read on a different site, and it doesn't answer either of the two questions i had.
However, something interesting from the article. The article mentions that NASA uses Boeing 737 airplanes to simulate zero-G, and this could disprove the existence of a space station. So they ADMIT that its possible to float for a brief amount of time. Answer me this:
How can the space station have 24/7 live streams if you only have chunks of 3 minutes of weightlessness? Did you watch the SpaceX live stream? That was 24 hours of footage that started while the rocket was on the ground and yet we see more than 3 minutes of weightlessness there in the rocket.
Why is the law of buoyancy ignored? A person is still heavier than air and the fact that the plane flies funny doesn't change that. The air and the person BOTH move in a parabola so if there is no gravity, a person should sink due to being more dense at all points in the parabola.
NASA can lie. I don't doubt that and some of their stuff can be fake. But, just because NASA lies doesn't prove the earth isn't round. However, thats not the point of this discussion which is gravity and buoyancy. Is there a real world experiment that disproves gravity? If you have one, id like to see it
Take a gander for yourself at a distant landmark 20kms or further
Bring optics for better results
The more distant the landmark the better
Pay attention and notice how you see 100% of the landmark as well as the ground leading up to it
Plug the distance into the earthcurvature.com calculator and then ask yourself why the distant object is fully in view, when it should be completely obscured due to the earths curve
I agree with you 100%. Its funny how we base most of our understanding of the cosmos on his work, also eerily similar to what happened with virology. Whole areas of science built off of lies.
Konstantinos Karatheodoris (13 Sept. 1873 – 2 Feb. 1950) was the mentor of Einstein (In 1905, Albert Einstein published an analysis in which he devised a mathematical way to predict the size of both atoms and molecules. Einstein's test was crucial in leading the way towards testing the reality of atoms. To predicting atomic size, Einstein released his specialized theory of relativity as well as several other papers that were invaluable to the expansion of physics and chemistry. Einstein also accurately calculated both the diameter of a sugar molecule and Avogadro's number).
Albert Einstein during one of his last pubic appearance said, “You ask me to answer to all sorts of questions, but no one has ever wanted to know who was my teacher, who showed me the way to the higher mathematical science, thought and research. I simply say that my teacher was the unrivalled Greek Konstantinos Karatheodoris, to who we owe everything…”
The fact he was a jew was a pretty big hint for me.
Einstein did NOT invent the theory of relativity.
James Maxwell invented the special theory of relativity years prior.
Einstein wasn't an accomplished mathematician. Others helped him with his math.
He's stole ideas from his job in the patent office to take credit for them.
It’s all just lies based on a foundation of lies
Gravity doesn’t exist, it’s just density and buoyancy
“Space” isn’t what they say it is and the fact that we have our gaseous atmosphere against the vacuum of space with no hard barrier violates the second law of thermodynamics
This shit is right in our faces all day every day
No wonder they refer to us as cattle
Einstein was a convenient plug followed by Hawking with his magic radiation covering for what black holes really are.
Pierre Robitaille is exposing the shit show that astro physics really is.
Doug Vogt as well. Some physics papers contain as many as 200 statements of "if" or "may" or "might". Such rock solid science eh
Bouyancy cannot exist without gravity. In order for a denser fluid to take the place of a less dense object and push it elsewhere, it needs a force to move it into place. Where does this force come from any why does it act only in one direction (pushing the less dense object upwards)?
Or there is another force (eg: gravity) keeping it in place.
EDIT: A theory is said to be 'wrong' if it is inconsistent with observations. Thus, a single counterexample is sufficient to demonstrate a theory is wrong. Also thus, if two theories both are consistent with all known observations, then neither can be said to be 'wrong'. Whether even one of them is the 'truth' is unknowable from said observations. Science only tells us when a theory is wrong, but cannot tell us when a theory is the truth.
http://flatearth101.com/gravity
https://www.bitchute.com/video/bPKiFfQiuAbD/
See edit to my previous comment. With that in mind, let me provide a counterexample to disprove the theory in the video.
Counterexample to theory in the video: See comment by u/Jellytree above.
Meanwhile, the combination of theory of gravity and thermodynamics offers an easy explanation for buoyancy:
When water replaces a less dense object, the net potential energy (determined by distance from center of the Earth and mass of object) of the system (object + water) is lower. And due to the laws of thermodynamics, a system tends to find and stay in a state of lowest potential energy (i.e. the most stable equilibrium).
Buoyancy would fail if you take a less dense object below the water level and then freeze the water because the molecules of water are not moving far enough, and the system cannot find its most stable equilibrium until they begin moving far enough (i.e. after the ice melts).
EDIT note: u/Afks I made some edits to both comments to add clarity in case you read the previous version.
This is the first i'm hearing about this, and it sounds like an interesting theory. I read up on it a little, but have two questions related to two real world experiments.
Galileo gravity experiment. Galileo dropped two objects shaped the same but weighing different amounts. Both objects landed on the ground that the same time. This experiment has been repeated countless times (including by me) and it never fails. If it's all buoyancy, why don't they fall at different rates due to their different densities?
Cavendish gravity experiment. Cavendish hung two massive lead balls from ropes and moved them close to each other to see if they were attracted to each other. They did attract, and it allowed him to experimentally work out the gravitational constant. Buoyancy here doesn't matter because the balls are hanging and the force is applied sideways. This experiment has also been repeated and improved on. If gravity doesn't exist, how were the lead balls attracted to each other?
http://flatearth101.com/gravity
This is the same article i read on a different site, and it doesn't answer either of the two questions i had.
However, something interesting from the article. The article mentions that NASA uses Boeing 737 airplanes to simulate zero-G, and this could disprove the existence of a space station. So they ADMIT that its possible to float for a brief amount of time. Answer me this:
I didn’t watch the livestream but if you want a compilation of nasa fails and contradictions there is plenty available on these communities
Have you considered the Coriolis effect?
The sniper that must account for the spin of the earth to hit their target?
Have you wondered why the same principle does not apply to airplanes, helicopters, hot air balloons or birds?
NASA can lie. I don't doubt that and some of their stuff can be fake. But, just because NASA lies doesn't prove the earth isn't round. However, thats not the point of this discussion which is gravity and buoyancy. Is there a real world experiment that disproves gravity? If you have one, id like to see it
Earthcurvature.com
Take a gander for yourself at a distant landmark 20kms or further
Bring optics for better results
The more distant the landmark the better
Pay attention and notice how you see 100% of the landmark as well as the ground leading up to it
Plug the distance into the earthcurvature.com calculator and then ask yourself why the distant object is fully in view, when it should be completely obscured due to the earths curve
Here is a video of a boat sailing away from the coast and "sinking" into the sea.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3_TpeNZYTmw
I think it shows pretty clearly the curvature of the earth.
I can’t reconcile the distant object problem nor the Coriolis contradiction, and I’ve gone to do the distant landmark experiment for myself
Let me know what you think
I don’t see any way to spin or argue those two points any other way than how I am interpreting them
The boat disappearing into the horizon is one of the first debunks you’ll encounter when properly researching the FE topic
You can bring that boat back into view with optical zoom
At some point you will be limited due to the atmosphere itself but we have instances where you can see well over 150kms…
https://youtu.be/GDKc6X8TXNE
Five minute video with a handful of points
The boat over the horizon thing is the Law of Perspective
Same thing how you would look down a very long hallway such as at a large hotel
The floor rises from the bottom of your view and ceiling down from the top, eventually converging
We know this is just an illusion as the floor and ceiling don’t touch at any point but this is the same thing happening with the boat
I agree with you 100%. Its funny how we base most of our understanding of the cosmos on his work, also eerily similar to what happened with virology. Whole areas of science built off of lies.
Konstantinos Karatheodoris (13 Sept. 1873 – 2 Feb. 1950) was the mentor of Einstein (In 1905, Albert Einstein published an analysis in which he devised a mathematical way to predict the size of both atoms and molecules. Einstein's test was crucial in leading the way towards testing the reality of atoms. To predicting atomic size, Einstein released his specialized theory of relativity as well as several other papers that were invaluable to the expansion of physics and chemistry. Einstein also accurately calculated both the diameter of a sugar molecule and Avogadro's number).
Albert Einstein during one of his last pubic appearance said, “You ask me to answer to all sorts of questions, but no one has ever wanted to know who was my teacher, who showed me the way to the higher mathematical science, thought and research. I simply say that my teacher was the unrivalled Greek Konstantinos Karatheodoris, to who we owe everything…”
YO YO YO...
I GET IT THAT YOURE A STEALN TURDICUS, BUT MY BOY EDISON DESERVES IT ALL.
I don't agree with Einstein and his theory that we are on a blanket type plane and that's what causes gravity. That's just childish.
Sir isaac newton was legit.