Notices
Results 1 to 42 of 42
Like Tree4Likes
  • 1 Post By KALSTER
  • 1 Post By forrest noble
  • 1 Post By SpeedFreek
  • 1 Post By AlexG

Thread: Could anything reverse the pull of Earth's gravity?

  1. #1 Could anything reverse the pull of Earth's gravity? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2
    Hello all,

    I'm wondering if any set of hypothetical conditions could result in us gravitating in a different direction. Specifically a reversal of gravity on the surface of Earth (or at least part of it), so that for people there, the ground would be above their heads, and everything unattached to it would fall into the sky.

    At first I thought along the lines of a black hole passing by our solar system, but realised that could probably not suck things off the Earth's surface. Could anything other than a biblical rapture do this without breaking obvious physical laws? I know it's far fetched but thought I'd try anyway.

    Thanks


    Last edited by Interrobang; August 28th, 2012 at 05:24 PM. Reason: Realisation
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,231
    Hi Interrobang.

    If you have any questions, you are more than welcome to ask them here (in the relevant subsections). You will get better results that way as well. There are many that would be willing to help.

    Looking forward to your participation.


    Interrobang likes this.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    I live in Los Angeles but travel a lot and spend some time in Mexico.
    Posts
    1,509
    Quote Originally Posted by Interrobang View Post
    Hello all,

    I'm wondering if any set of hypothetical conditions could result in us gravitating in a different direction. Specifically a reversal of gravity on the surface of Earth (or at least part of it), so that for people there, the ground would be above their heads, and everything unattached to it would fall into the sky.

    At first I thought along the lines of a black hole passing by our solar system, but realised that could probably not suck things off the Earth's surface. Could anything other than a biblical rapture do this without breaking obvious physical laws? I know it's far fetched but thought I'd try anyway.

    Thanks

    There are a number of ways to overcome surface gravity. Any massive body passing close to the Earth would reduce or eliminate the gravity on the surface depending upon its mass. Magnetism can overcome gravity for those magnetically susceptible elements. Centrifugal force can overcome gravity. Propulsion can overcome gravity. Velocity can overcome gravity. Airlift can overcome gravity. Light gasses such as a blimp can overcome surface gravity. High winds can overcome gravity.
    msafwan likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    But there's nothing that can reverse gravity.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    One way you could do it is to make a very powerful standing wave of sound pressure in the localized area you would like to remove gravity. This will create very power levitation effects. Please do not abuse this knowledge.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    One way you could do it is to make a very powerful standing wave of sound pressure in the localized area you would like to remove gravity. This will create very power levitation effects. Please do not abuse this knowledge.
    Excuse me? What is your source for this assertion?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    984
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    One way you could do it is to make a very powerful standing wave of sound pressure in the localized area you would like to remove gravity. This will create very power levitation effects. Please do not abuse this knowledge.
    Excuse me? What is your source for this assertion?
    Yes indeed, please do referrence your statement. Tis is an effect of sound which I was unaware of. and what exactly is "a very powerful standing wave of sound pressure"?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by Interrobang View Post
    Hello all,

    I'm wondering if any set of hypothetical conditions could result in us gravitating in a different direction. Specifically a reversal of gravity on the surface of Earth (or at least part of it), so that for people there, the ground would be above their heads, and everything unattached to it would fall into the sky.

    At first I thought along the lines of a black hole passing by our solar system, but realised that could probably not suck things off the Earth's surface. Could anything other than a biblical rapture do this without breaking obvious physical laws? I know it's far fetched but thought I'd try anyway.

    Thanks
    A rotating magnetic field can.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Interrobang View Post
    Hello all,

    I'm wondering if any set of hypothetical conditions could result in us gravitating in a different direction. Specifically a reversal of gravity on the surface of Earth (or at least part of it), so that for people there, the ground would be above their heads, and everything unattached to it would fall into the sky.

    At first I thought along the lines of a black hole passing by our solar system, but realised that could probably not suck things off the Earth's surface. Could anything other than a biblical rapture do this without breaking obvious physical laws? I know it's far fetched but thought I'd try anyway.

    Thanks
    A rotating magnetic field can.
    No, it can't.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    A rotating magnetic field can.
    Do you have any evidence for that claim?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    Of course I always do.

    Objects placed over this rotating supper conducting disk lost 0.3-0.5% with a maximum recorded reduction of 1.9% to 2.1%

    [cond-mat/9701074] Weak gravitation shielding properties of composite bulk YBa_2Cu_3O_{7-x} superconductor below 70 K under e.m. field
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Unfortunately, Podkletnov withdrew that paper, and nobody has been able to corroborate his findings. In other words, we only have his word for it, nobody else has been able to get it to work, and he has withdrawn his word for it!

    So no, we cannot say that we can reverse the pull of gravity using a rotating magnet. The withdrawn paper doesn't even claim we can reverse it, only that we can weakly shield it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Of course I always do.

    Objects placed over this rotating supper conducting disk lost 0.3-0.5% with a maximum recorded reduction of 1.9% to 2.1%

    [cond-mat/9701074] Weak gravitation shielding properties of composite bulk YBa_2Cu_3O_{7-x} superconductor below 70 K under e.m. field
    Podkletnov's reported results have never been replicated. NASA spent over a million dollars over 4 years trying to confirm the results, with no success.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    Ning Li and D. G. Torr, Phys. Rev., 43D, 457, 1991.
    Ning Li and D. G. Torr, Phys. Rev., 46B, 5489, 1992.
    Ning Li and D. G. Torr, Bull. Am. Phys. Sco., 37, 948, 1992.
    E. Podkletnov and R. Nieminen, Physica C, 203, 441, 1992.
    D. G. Torr and Ning Li, Found. Phys. Lett., 37, 948, 1993.
    http://arxiv.org/pdf/cond-mat/0010399.pdf
    http://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/9505094.pdf
    http://arxiv.org/html/cond-mat/9812070
    http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/9705043.pdf
    http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0108005.pdf
    http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/9612/9612022.pdf
    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992PhyC..203..441P

    No one has ever disproven Podkletnov's experiment.
    Last edited by ttown; October 10th, 2012 at 04:00 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexG View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Of course I always do.

    Objects placed over this rotating supper conducting disk lost 0.3-0.5% with a maximum recorded reduction of 1.9% to 2.1%

    [cond-mat/9701074] Weak gravitation shielding properties of composite bulk YBa_2Cu_3O_{7-x} superconductor below 70 K under e.m. field
    Podkletnov's reported results have never been replicated. NASA spent over a million dollars over 4 years trying to confirm the results, with no success.
    Nasa messed up the experiment, in Podkletnov's experiment the superconductor was rotating.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Ning Li and D. G. Torr, Phys. Rev., 43D, 457, 1991.
    Ning Li and D. G. Torr, Phys. Rev., 46B, 5489, 1992.
    Ning Li and D. G. Torr, Bull. Am. Phys. Sco., 37, 948, 1992.
    E. Podkletnov and R. Nieminen, Physica C, 203, 441, 1992.
    D. G. Torr and Ning Li, Found. Phys. Lett., 37, 948, 1993.
    Your references are over twenty years old, and all predate the Podkletnov paper.

    Again, never replicated, and the paper was withdrawn.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Yes, there are people pursuing this. A few. But so far we still have no concrete results. Rest assured, there are a lot of people waiting to see if anything comes of this. But, no, we cannot say that we can reverse the pull of gravity with a rotating magnet. Yet.

    You should have pointed out that this is only a tentative finding (which was withdrawn by Podkletnov in 1997). As for Torr and Li, well, their university disavowed itself from their work and ceased funding, and the funding has yet to be found elsewhere.

    This is a famous article that did the rounds the last time this came up, but nothing has really happened since, as far as I know.
    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6...ravity_pr.html
    msafwan likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    And Tajmar himself acknowledges that this is just a result of the predicted frame dragging of General Relativity, and is a distinctly different claim from the gravitation shielding claim of Podkletnov. And none of this REVERSES the pull of gravity.

    You are being disingenuous with your claims. Science is about rigour.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    [QUOTE=SpeedFreek;357870]
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Others have had also had success....

    You are being disingenuous with your claims. Science is about rigour.
    No one has been able to disprove the papers claims, not even NASA.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    [QUOTE=ttown;357874]
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Others have had also had success....

    You are being disingenuous with your claims. Science is about rigour.
    No one has been able to disprove the papers claims, not even NASA.
    What do you mean by disprove the claims? They have never been replicated, that pretty much disproves the claims.

    You can't say 'prove me wrong'. You have to show that you're right. That applies to the claims in the papers, and they haven't.
    msafwan likes this.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Science is about rigour. It is about rigorously testing claims, through repeated experiment. As I said, so far, nobody has been able to corroborate these results.

    It is never about "prove me wrong" (the call of the pseudo-scientist), it is about "see for yourself if I am right" (the call of the bona fide scientist).

    That is the scientific method.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    I have, I provided the references to the evidence. The papers are making the claim, and the cited references have shown it through both theoretical and experimental results. Both the papers and experiment were deemed to be reasonable and credible, enough for NASA to spend millions to investigate the results. There has yet been a paper or experiment that has proven it wrong. Unfortunately NASA deviated from Podkletnov's, and did not recreate his experiment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    Furthermore, this thread was a question of Could?, meaning theoretically possible?, The cited numerous reference show that it is. I encourage the scientific community to recreate the experiments.

    Abstract
    The detection of apparent anomalous forces in the vicinity of high-Tc superconductors
    under non equilibrium conditions has stimulated an experimental research in
    which the operating parameters of the experiment have been pushed to values higher
    than those employed in previous attempts. The results confirm the existence of an
    unexpected physical interaction. An apparatus has been constructed and tested in
    which the superconductor is subjected to peak currents in excess of 104 A, surface
    potentials in excess of 1 MV , trapped magnetic field up to 1 T, and temperature
    down to 40 K. In order to produce the required currents a high voltage discharge
    technique has been employed. Discharges originating from a superconducting ceramic
    electrode are accompanied by the emission of radiation which propagates in a focused
    beam without noticeable attenuation through different materials and exerts a short
    repulsive force on small movable objects along the propagation axis. Within the
    measurement error (5 to 7 %) the impulse is proportional to the mass of the objects
    and independent on their composition. It therefore resembles a gravitational impulse.
    The observed phenomenon appears to be absolutely new and unprecedented in the
    literature. It cannot be understood in the framework of general relativity. A theory
    is proposed which combines a quantum gravity approach with anomalous vacuum
    fluctuations.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    You keep missing the point. Science does not "prove it wrong", it uses it if it seems right. If nobody else can reproduce the results, nobody else will think it is right. The more corroborative results that come in, the more weight is given to the claims.

    Time will tell, as always.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    You keep missing the point. Science does not "prove it wrong", it uses it if it seems right. If nobody else can reproduce the results, nobody else will think it is right. The more corroborative results that come in, the more weight is given to the claims.

    Time will tell, as always.
    The statement, "If nobody else can reproduce the results..." this statement is not true because nobody has even recreated the experiment yet, NASA deviated from Podkletnov.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Furthermore, this thread was a question of Could?, meaning theoretically possible?, The cited numerous reference show that it is. I encourage the scientific community to recreate the experiments.

    Abstract
    The detection of apparent anomalous forces in the vicinity of high-Tc superconductors
    under non equilibrium conditions has stimulated an experimental research in
    which the operating parameters of the experiment have been pushed to values higher
    than those employed in previous attempts. The results confirm the existence of an
    unexpected physical interaction. An apparatus has been constructed and tested in
    which the superconductor is subjected to peak currents in excess of 104 A, surface
    potentials in excess of 1 MV , trapped magnetic field up to 1 T, and temperature
    down to 40 K. In order to produce the required currents a high voltage discharge
    technique has been employed. Discharges originating from a superconducting ceramic
    electrode are accompanied by the emission of radiation which propagates in a focused
    beam without noticeable attenuation through different materials and exerts a short
    repulsive force on small movable objects along the propagation axis. Within the
    measurement error (5 to 7 %) the impulse is proportional to the mass of the objects
    and independent on their composition. It therefore resembles a gravitational impulse.
    The observed phenomenon appears to be absolutely new and unprecedented in the
    literature. It cannot be understood in the framework of general relativity. A theory
    is proposed which combines a quantum gravity approach with anomalous vacuum
    fluctuations.
    That's gravity shielding again. The OP was asking about REVERSING the pull of gravity, such that objects fall upwards into the sky. Different thing.

    Rigour!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Quagma SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    You keep missing the point. Science does not "prove it wrong", it uses it if it seems right. If nobody else can reproduce the results, nobody else will think it is right. The more corroborative results that come in, the more weight is given to the claims.

    Time will tell, as always.
    The statement, "If nobody else can reproduce the results..." this statement is not true because nobody has even recreated the experiment yet, NASA deviated from Podkletnov.
    And until the experiment can be repeated with the same results, over and over again, nobody will think it is correct. You cannot claim it to be correct until we have rigorously tested the claims. We haven't. So don't.

    Remember the cold-fusion debacle?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    32
    Is this question as opposed to: can anything forward/improve the gravity of earth?


    When we 100% american superior beef religious beings, landed neil armstrong to the moon, we changed the gravity of the earth, though I doubt we reversed it. There was probably more Russian space debris falling down back to earth while he was was taking that big step. If all fat americans lose 20 stones in weight today, the gravity of earth would not alter. Thats why i am in heavy favor of shooting the mothers to Mars.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Steve, please stick to the subject of the discussion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    I live in Los Angeles but travel a lot and spend some time in Mexico.
    Posts
    1,509
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve555 View Post
    Is this question as opposed to: can anything forward/improve the gravity of earth?
    When we 100% american superior beef religious beings, landed neil armstrong to the moon, we changed the gravity of the earth, though I doubt we reversed it.
    Although I am an American I am strongly but secretly non-religious even though I love to go to church and sing the songs. I am totally a fruitarian -- zero beef, poultry, fish, not even vegetables, etc.

    There was probably more Russian space debris falling down back to earth while he was was taking that big step. If all fat americans lose 20 stones in weight today, the gravity of earth would not alter. That's why i am in heavy favor of shooting the mothers to Mars.
    No doubt about some folks losing some weight but "Mother's to Mars" seems like I society that I might want to be a part of and score some points, but how does the hostility go down? Shooting them sounds kinda drastic, how about just a little S and M A man or woman losing weight here on Earth does not change gravity because the matter lost from the body remains on Earth. But by going to the moon or Mars and leaving equipment there, decreases gravity here on Earth and increases it there, but not by a measurable amount of course.

    Don't really understand your reasoning.
    Last edited by forrest noble; October 11th, 2012 at 01:15 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Western US
    Posts
    2,845
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SpeedFreek View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by ttown View Post
    Others have had also had success....
    You are being disingenuous with your claims. Science is about rigour.
    No one has been able to disprove the papers claims, not even NASA.
    No one has been able to disprove the claim that Santa Claus exists. So what? The default is not that he does exist.

    As has been pointed out several times, Podkletnov himself withdrew the paper.

    Repeat: Podkletnov withdrew the paper.

    And no one has replicated the result that has been effectively repudiated by the original author.

    Yet, somehow, you cling to a belief that is wholly without foundation, either theoretical or empirical. That is ipso facto unscientific. At least there's apparent empirical evidence for the existence of Santa Claus.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    ***** Participant Write4U's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,245
    Gravity (on earth) is an extremely weak force, which can easily be counteracted. Place a sheet of paper on your desk and blow underneath it. The paper will easily be lifted from the surface. But it does not reverse or cancel the force of gravity. When you stop blowing the paper will gently settle down in its original position.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    32
    I was merely stating that when you transport mass from earth into outerspace, planet Earth itself will have less mass, therefore it loses gravity.
    Not claiming it to be significant, but on a microscopic level it is the truth. People somehow believe that its Earth's gravity pulling them down to her surface.
    Its actually the weight of your feet that adds up to the earths gravity that pulls the rest of your body to the earth in a logarithmic fashion.
    Thats why you better lay down and start tumbling when you are on thin ice. Best way to arm yourself to a black hole: same tactic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    ***** Participant Write4U's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,245
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve555 View Post
    I was merely stating that when you transport mass from earth into outerspace, planet Earth itself will have less mass, therefore it loses gravity.
    Not claiming it to be significant, but on a microscopic level it is the truth. People somehow believe that its Earth's gravity pulling them down to her surface.
    Its actually the weight of your feet that adds up to the earths gravity that pulls the rest of your body to the earth in a logarithmic fashion.
    Thats why you better lay down and start tumbling when you are on thin ice. Best way to arm yourself to a black hole: same tactic.
    No that is not correct.

    It is like saying that eating a pound of food makes you heavier than just holding a pound of food in your hands. Your weight IS the result of gravity, and the weight of your body or feet does not add to the mass (weight) of the earth, it is already incorporated as a result of the gravitational influence which extends well beyond the earth's surface. The water vapor in the atmosphere IS part of the earth's extended mass. Air pressure is caused by the weight of air at sea level. Air is part of the extended mass of the earth. The only thing preventing the earth from collapsing unto itself is the energetic outward pressures created at the core.
    Last edited by Write4U; October 11th, 2012 at 08:38 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36 ok 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    32
    It is like saying that eating a pound of food makes you heavier than just holding a pound of food in your hands. Your weight IS the result of gravity, and the weight of your body or feet does not add to the mass (weight) of the earth, it is already incorporated as a result of the gravitational influence which extends well beyond the earth's surface. The water vapor in the atmosphere IS part of the earth's extended mass. Air pressure is caused by the weight of air at sea level. Air is part of the extended mass of the earth. The only thing preventing the earth from collapsing unto itself is the energetic outward pressures created at the core.[/QUOTE]

    I never said anything about weight. I said that the earth's MASS is less when you subtract from it MASS that is shot into space. And people walking on earth add to the earths mass and thus add to its gravity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    32
    It is like saying that eating a pound of food makes you heavier than just holding a pound of food in your hands. Your weight IS the result of gravity, and the weight of your body or feet does not add to the mass (weight) of the earth, it is already incorporated as a result of the gravitational influence which extends well beyond the earth's surface. The water vapor in the atmosphere IS part of the earth's extended mass. Air pressure is caused by the weight of air at sea level. Air is part of the extended mass of the earth. The only thing preventing the earth from collapsing unto itself is the energetic outward pressures created at the core.[/QUOTE]<br><br>I never said anything about weight. I said that the earth's MASS is less when you subtract from it MASS that is shot into space. And people walking on earth add to the earths mass and thus add to its gravity. So when people get shot to the moon the earth loses the mass of 2 people. So its only logic to say -save incoming mass adding meteorites- that the earths gravity is diminished then.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    ***** Participant Write4U's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,245
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve555 View Post
    Write4U,
    It is like saying that eating a pound of food makes you heavier than just holding a pound of food in your hands. Your weight IS the result of gravity, and the weight of your body or feet does not add to the mass (weight) of the earth, it is already incorporated as a result of the gravitational influence which extends well beyond the earth's surface. The water vapor in the atmosphere IS part of the earth's extended mass. Air pressure is caused by the weight of air at sea level. Air is part of the extended mass of the earth. The only thing preventing the earth from collapsing unto itself is the energetic outward pressures created at the core.
    I never said anything about weight. I said that the earth's MASS is less when you subtract from it MASS that is shot into space. And people walking on earth add to the earths mass and thus add to its gravity.
    Perhaps I am nitpicking , but what I am trying to say is that people ARE part of the earth's mass. The atoms and molecules in whatever shape on earth are part of the earth's total mass. To say that people ADD to the earth's mass is misleading IMO. When we die, the earth's mass remains the same.

    But it would be correct in saying that a meteor landing on earth does add to the earth's mass.
    Of course, if you remove some matter from the earth, it loses mass.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    32
    But it would be correct in saying that a meteor landing on earth does add to the earth's mass.
    Of course, if you remove some matter from the earth, it loses mass.


    Man, that is such a relieve. I know sometimes one must nitpick, but this time you almost convinced me. Thats dangerous.
    I already crosschecked your statement with a couple of nerds who work under me, and they proved you wrong.
    I do not like shady messages in science. I do not like irony in science. For you very well know that the majority of psychopaths as well as autistic people do not like it that way. I am one of those. Perhaps both.
    Since I have lucked out and landed on the humanoid half with my illness I am still capable to somewhat interact with dissident opinions attacking my predestined superiority. I do not know why I am the way I am, but I know why you are the way you are.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    ***** Participant Write4U's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,245
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve555 View Post
    But it would be correct in saying that a meteor landing on earth does add to the earth's mass.
    Of course, if you remove some matter from the earth, it loses mass.


    Man, that is such a relieve. I know sometimes one must nitpick, but this time you almost convinced me. Thats dangerous.
    I already crosschecked your statement with a couple of nerds who work under me, and they proved you wrong.
    I do not like shady messages in science. I do not like irony in science. For you very well know that the majority of psychopaths as well as autistic people do not like it that way. I am one of those. Perhaps both.
    Since I have lucked out and landed on the humanoid half with my illness I am still capable to somewhat interact with dissident opinions attacking my predestined superiority. I do not know why I am the way I am, but I know why you are the way you are.
    The statement in question was,
    Its actually the weight of your feet that adds up to the earths gravity that pulls the rest of your body to the earth in a logarithmic fashion.....
    To me that sounded as if you were considering people as being seperated in some way from the earth's mass. Do you think a tree is seperate from the earth's mass? What about Jupiter which is largely gaseous? At what point does Jupiter acquire gravitational mass?

    I'd like to hear the opinions of those nerds who work "under" you. Perhaps I might become as superior as you obviously think you are...
    Last edited by Write4U; October 15th, 2012 at 11:54 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    319
    The only thing preventing the earth from collapsing unto itself is the energetic outward pressures created at the core.
    i would say it is the electrostatic force myself. or the inability for gravity to overcome the structural integrity of the rock. gravity gets it into a roughly spherical shape and that is about it.
    Sometimes it is better not knowing than having an answer that may be wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    ***** Participant Write4U's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,245
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrispen Evan View Post
    The only thing preventing the earth from collapsing unto itself is the energetic outward pressures created at the core.
    i would say it is the electrostatic force myself. or the inability for gravity to overcome the structural integrity of the rock. gravity gets it into a roughly spherical shape and that is about it.
    I must admit that was somewhat misleading in regards to planets, but it does hold true for larger more massive objects such as stars.

    Nevertheless the earth's core is trying to expand from heat and energy flowing outward, and it is a combination of gravity and solidity that keeps it all together. But the internal pressures are evident by volcanic action which generates deep in the molten outer core.

    from wiki,
    At the center of the planet, the temperature may be up to 7,000 K and the pressure could reach 360 GPa.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    Last Post: April 15th, 2012, 03:30 AM
  2. My Favorite Science Fiction and Non-Fiction
    By Total Science in forum Science-Fiction and Non-Fiction
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 13th, 2008, 12:21 AM
  3. Science-fiction or Non-Fiction, what is it?
    By TicoSox in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 21st, 2007, 05:35 AM
  4. Science-fiction or Non-Fiction, what is it?
    By TicoSox in forum Science-Fiction and Non-Fiction
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 21st, 2007, 12:41 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •