Gravity and other things

Okay, so we all grew up learning that things fall due to the theory of gravity.

This seems to be in fact false. Gravity has not of yet been proven, because there is no way to prove it. Things fall through air, but things also fall through water, and mud, and concrete (situation depending)

so last night at Dairy Queen, something hit me, not literally, but I was thinking that when you drop an item the air molecules underneath it are not strong enough to support it, so they end up being pushed away or get stuck under the object as it falls through the space.

this is why a parachute is effective, because the shape of it collects air molecules and hangs on them, (a lot of them) thus slowing the person or thing parachuting down.

This also explains why things can fall through water, or mud or anything else (including dirt) excluding some shapes, fit to pass over or through them (i.e. boat, plane,) without sinking.

because the water or mud molecules are not strong enough to support an object, say a person, he/she will fall through it, until it hits somethign that can support it, (i.e.) dirt.


Now Planets as we grew up learning have their own gravitational pull. I do not believe this is the case, I believe that Planets have electromagnetic pulls. Think of magnet, since the center of the earth, and most other planets, and metal, or molten metal, it would have a electromagnetic charge; positive or negative.

We know that not all planets are on a line, like placing objects on a table, because they are in the vacuum of space. Therefor gravity cannot be, also gravity could not exist without a "up" and a "down" point, and in space, there is no "up" or "down" point.

the electromagnetic charge would explain with Saturn has those rings, and why planets have their place in the solar system, and why we have tracks and stuff like that. But since science does not explain away God, only it explains how God does things; I know with full confidence that it was teh Word of God that said for the planets to line up and for this type of thing to happen. Which is why we have an atmosphere, it is a barrier protecting us from a vacuum, because the 'breath of God is in my nostrils" (Job 27:3). Life as we know it, depends on Air. Everything has a soul, which is basically life, i.e. breath, everythign breaths, even fish (it is what the gills are for). God said he formed us "from the dust of the ground and breathed into [our] nostrils the breath of life, and [we] became a living being." (Genesis 2:7)



We all breath ari through our nostrils, so air has a connection with teh breath of life/breath of god.

Which is why our atmosphere keeps our air in adn the vacuum out. We ahve heard over the past couple years that global warming is ruinging our atmosphere, the truth is that the time of our planets destruction and the coming of jesus is closer, that even our planet itself is readying itself for it's consumption.

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. (revelations 21:1)

the book of revelations points to jesus coming a second time, most of revelations has already been fulfilled, and the last vials, and judgments are what is left. Our atmosphere is thinning becasue the time for Jesus is closing in.

I am amazed that you managed to link gravity to the bible

is that all?




actually, it wasn't all that hard.

raelly you can connect everything to the bible

I know. I'm sure you've done it.

hm...
maybe I should make it my mission to find something you can't relate the bible to....hm....

anyways, yeah. it made some sense up to the...breath of God part.

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:I know. I'm sure you've done it.

hm...
maybe I should make it my mission to find something you can't relate the bible to....hm....

anyways, yeah. it made some sense up to the...breath of God part.

but nothing still about Gravity?

nope.

if you're looking for someone to counter your arguements, you'll need someone better informed than I am at the moment

sabaku no ketsueki wrote:nope.

if you're looking for someone to counter your arguements, you'll need someone better informed than I am at the moment

I am not looking for anyone to counter the argument

.....then what are you expecting?

well nothign that you posted

That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens. So Ama is both scientifically correct and scientifically wrong. However, his theory does make a lot of sense.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

I usually use gravity for another argument.


I don't believe in anything I can't see!

So you don't believe in gravity? Ownd!

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

quater wrote:I usually use gravity for another argument.


I don't believe in anything I can't see!

So you don't believe in gravity? Ownd!

well Gravity has never really made it off paper to begin with


it has always been a theory

amaterasu wrote:

quater wrote:I usually use gravity for another argument.


I don't believe in anything I can't see!

So you don't believe in gravity? Ownd!

well Gravity has never really made it off paper to begin with


it has always been a theory

I can't tell if you are agreeing with me or arguing with me.

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

weight is a force really.

It is the force of gravity acting on the mass
I am thinking that objects will fall at different speeds because their mass is different, i.e. the mass of a piece of paper is not as heavy as a glass cup, thus the acceleration of gravity will make the glass cup fall faster than the piece of paper

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

weight is a force really.

It is the force of gravity acting on the mass
I am thinking that objects will fall at different speeds because their mass is different, i.e. the mass of a piece of paper is not as heavy as a glass cup, thus the acceleration of gravity will make the glass cup fall faster than the piece of paper

So it has everything to do with both mass and weight?

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

weight is a force really.

It is the force of gravity acting on the mass
I am thinking that objects will fall at different speeds because their mass is different, i.e. the mass of a piece of paper is not as heavy as a glass cup, thus the acceleration of gravity will make the glass cup fall faster than the piece of paper

So it has everything to do with both mass and weight?

just really mass


weight is just really the force that is being applied

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

weight is a force really.

It is the force of gravity acting on the mass
I am thinking that objects will fall at different speeds because their mass is different, i.e. the mass of a piece of paper is not as heavy as a glass cup, thus the acceleration of gravity will make the glass cup fall faster than the piece of paper

So it has everything to do with both mass and weight?

just really mass


weight is just really the force that is being applied

Ah I see. Weight is the force in this theory, therefore mass is what it's being acted upon. Correct?

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

weight is a force really.

It is the force of gravity acting on the mass
I am thinking that objects will fall at different speeds because their mass is different, i.e. the mass of a piece of paper is not as heavy as a glass cup, thus the acceleration of gravity will make the glass cup fall faster than the piece of paper

So it has everything to do with both mass and weight?

just really mass


weight is just really the force that is being applied

Ah I see. Weight is the force in this theory, therefore mass is what it's being acted upon. Correct?

yes

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

weight is a force really.

It is the force of gravity acting on the mass
I am thinking that objects will fall at different speeds because their mass is different, i.e. the mass of a piece of paper is not as heavy as a glass cup, thus the acceleration of gravity will make the glass cup fall faster than the piece of paper

So it has everything to do with both mass and weight?

just really mass


weight is just really the force that is being applied

Ah I see. Weight is the force in this theory, therefore mass is what it's being acted upon. Correct?

yes

Ah I get it now.

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

weight is a force really.

It is the force of gravity acting on the mass
I am thinking that objects will fall at different speeds because their mass is different, i.e. the mass of a piece of paper is not as heavy as a glass cup, thus the acceleration of gravity will make the glass cup fall faster than the piece of paper

So it has everything to do with both mass and weight?

just really mass


weight is just really the force that is being applied

Ah I see. Weight is the force in this theory, therefore mass is what it's being acted upon. Correct?

yes

Ah I get it now.

okay

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:

amaterasu wrote:

PeinQAkatsuki wrote:That actually makes sense. Scientifically though, they have things that measure gravity. However, I believe they're only measuring the weight.

But, gravity is the force acted upon an object, pulling it to the earth's core. Therefore, the weight of the object is probably equal to the force of gravity acting upon it. So, that also means that gravity is also acting as a magnet, pulling objects to the earth's core. So you are partially correct, Ama.

In a vaccuum, everything pretty much weighs the same. In theory, a hammer and a feather weigh the exact same on the moon because there is no gravity up there. But they still fall down, obviously, so this data also supports Ama's theory of molecules not able to support the falling object.

At least, I believe that's how that happens.

...I don't think that made any sense. Maybe I should study physics more.

gravity is measured in g and it is 9.8 m/s^2

but that can also be the rate of an object falling through air, because it is not the same as an object sinking

You see, what I am saying is the the earth isn't pulling objects towards it, otherwise the force of that would prevent us from jumping, or flying and such, unless you have a faster acceleration than 9.8m/s^2

it may seem that way because everything falls to the ground, but that happens because air isn't not strong enough to support the object.

actually a vacuum does not affect the mass of an object. A Hammer will be heavier than a feather but it's weight is greatly affected. So a hammer may feel like a feather, but really it's mass has not changed.


because Weight is Fg and it is equal to mg (mass times gravity)

since the gravity would equal zero or something different on the moon and other planets, the weight will change but not the mass

Then mass would have to equal zero if the gravity is zero. Therefore the feather and the hammer will both have equal masses, and equal weights. If g=gravity and if g also equals zero, that would mean that the mass and weight would be the same. Zero.

And because air can't support an object is because of the weight. And the weight is the amount of force gravity acts upon an object. Though you are correct in saying that the objects are merely falling in theory because air cannot support them due to the weight or whatnot. This could be entirely correct.

no, Fg means weight, the g in Fg isn't gravity it is like f(x) which equals y

mass x gravity = Weight

mass is 100Kg
Gravity is 0 m/s^2

thus

100 * 0 = 0N

mass is still 100, but weight is 0





this air molecules act as shown in the picture, they are not together, so they take up more area with less actual molecules, this cannot support an object, so it falls.

Although now I am questioning whether the 9.8m/s^2 is a constant or not, because obviously I need to test this out

Ah I see. That's a good question, you should test that out. So, am I right in thinking that you are saying that the falling of an object has nothing to do with its weight? It's more to do with its mass and volume?

weight is a force really.

It is the force of gravity acting on the mass
I am thinking that objects will fall at different speeds because their mass is different, i.e. the mass of a piece of paper is not as heavy as a glass cup, thus the acceleration of gravity will make the glass cup fall faster than the piece of paper

So it has everything to do with both mass and weight?

just really mass


weight is just really the force that is being applied

Ah I see. Weight is the force in this theory, therefore mass is what it's being acted upon. Correct?

yes

Ah I get it now.

okay

So I do agree with you.