Russia Says Proposed Mission To The Moon Will ‘Verify’ Whether The USA. Actually Landed There
- Thread starter RoomService
- Start date
Bro, didn't we talk about this already!! Get your ass out of this thread
Ayo. See why I think 10 teams in suppose to be in the playoffs in the West?
Last edited:
Ok. I see what your say when you put it that way.
And that makes sense to me. Thanks for the explanation.
See, this is why this thread ain’t going anywhere.
His golden ratio is homo?
Yeah, this why we on page 18. Lmaooo.
Imma start checking the number of insults you’ve thrown before I start these discussions again. Especially if you’ve had a day head start.
Yo GD I didn't know you were on that level b, you have a great grasp and a very good way of breaking that shit down too. Salute.
on the cool yall niggas some damn geniuses
Tex and LS too
niggas brown fractals blown smoove out lol
They make me do this shit man, all that lol'ing and gifs and unjust arrogance. Fuck that I ain't letting that shit ride <~O-dog voice
salute brother. not a genius just really into physics and mental simulation. by CAC standards I might be considered smart though based on standardized testing but I can see my blind spots. you should meet some of my homies (one of whom is a laser physicist down in the state that shall not be named) and my brother. them ninjas are brilliant for real.
Black excellence, fucking dope
I think the link between understanding of higher maths & physics and genius is a very short one.
Way to be humble though lol
No. You're making shit up about what I said. Now answer my questions about the last part. I didnt get that part.
I'll paste it here again:
Please show me an equation where the units on the left side of that equation don't cancel out with the units on the right side of that equation.
There IS a way to explain the mass of an object that gravity would act on. It's called Newton's gravitational force equation. It includes the mass of the first object and the mass of the second object. Or are you talking about something else? Can you please define the part of Newton's 2nd Law where his gravitational force equation does not apply?
Last edited:
Is gravity created by mass or is gravity a property of mass?
There's no bickering. You asked a question. I answered it. There was no arrogance in my answer. You didn't reply to it though.
lol. Explain to me my line of thinking. Doesn't have to be a long answer. Just quickly.
This should be good
Gravity is not a force?? Wow. My arrogance has nothing to do with physics. This is all about physics. And we've been discussing about the force of gravity. Also, you didn't reply to the answers I gave you directly. No arrogance there.
I said these exact words already
It is an effect on spacetime of the presence of mass
Ergo, gravity is created by mass.
Once again. Einstein proved that gravity...is NOT...a force.
That’s the thing you refuse to accept. To say that Einstein and every scientist that has tested and confirmed this is wrong and that you are right is the definition of arrogance.
Once you accept that Einstein was right, the rest of your case goes away. You keep clinging to Newton.
Well, let me tell you what Netwon said about how gravity is created...
“You sometimes speak of gravity as essential and inherent to matter. Pray do not ascribe that notion to me, for the cause of gravity is what I do not pretend to know...”
I wish makkonen was around.
Nigga would son all u smart niggas to death.
I wish I had a billion dollars to send all u niggas in space.
Nigga would son all u smart niggas to death.
I wish I had a billion dollars to send all u niggas in space.
You said gravity is a force and that gravity has a mass because mass is required for gravity to be a force. So then I ask, “are you going to roll with gravity having a mass? Then you tell me no I was making shit up.
To me that whole exchange sound like:
Kool-aid is sweet and kool-aid has sugar because sugar is require for kool-aid to be sweet. So I ask, “are you rolling with kool-aid having sugar?” Then you tell me no I’m making shit up.
So then I’m like:
And you’re right about the units supposing to cancel out on both sides. I have no issues admitting my mistake on that part. I’ll have to realign my thinking on that.
So I’ll be clear where I stand. I do not think gravity is a force. I believe that gravity is created by mass because Einstein’s Theory makes the most sense to me.
I get the Gravitational for equation. We’ve beat it down to death at this point.
Your words: “there is a way to explain the mass that gravity acts on. The gravitational force equation.”
If gravity is a force (F=ma) then why would I need the gravitational force equation in the first place? Are you’re suggesting that gravity and the gravitational force equation are the same thing?
You said gravity is a force and that gravity has a mass because mass is required for gravity to be a force. So then I ask, “are you going to roll with gravity having a mass? Then you tell me no I was making shit up.
To me that whole exchange sound like:
Kool-aid is sweet and kool-aid has sugar because sugar is require for kool-aid to be sweet. So I ask, “are you rolling with kool-aid having sugar?” Then you tell me no I’m making shit up.
So then I’m like:
And you’re right about the units supposing to cancel out on both sides. I have no issues admitting my mistake on that part. I’ll have to realign my thinking on that.
So I’ll be clear where I stand. I do not think gravity is a force. I believe that gravity is created by mass because Einstein’s Theory makes the most sense to me.
I get the Gravitational for equation. We’ve beat it down to death at this point.
Your words: “there is a way to explain the mass that gravity acts on. The gravitational force equation.”
If gravity is a force (F=ma) then why would I need the gravitational force equation in the first place? Are you’re suggesting that gravity and the gravitational force equation are the same thing?
I can roll with this. I can admit that what I said was confusing. Thank you for now admitting that particular mistake. Nothing wrong with making a mistake. But you doubled down on it at first. And it's funny to me that your boy @sammyjax cosigned that mistake as if he knew what you were talking about.
To me, gravity is a force. To you, gravity is not a force. Keep in mind that you first used the gravitational force equation to support your point. But that equation supports my point.
To answer your question, I am suggesting that gravity is a way of saying gravitational force between 2 objects. For example, here on Earth there's gravity. And there's a force or a pull between Earth and a smaller object like an apple. But the pull from Earth is so strong that whatever pull the apple is doing is negligible. Gravity can be defined as gravitational force, but it can also be determined without using that equation. A simple F=ma
So again, yes I am saying that gravity is a force.
Also, saying that gravity is created by mass is not the same as your first assertion, which said that gravity is a property of mass. They are not the same thing. If you want to go in details about why they're not the same thing we can start a new thread just dedicated to that. If you already addressed that somewhere in this thread then I missed it.
Last edited:
Hey dumbass
You said gravity is created by motion
I said it's not
You can gtfoh with any and all of the rest of this bullshit
4D twisting himself in knots to try to help your ass out
He's not even agreeing with you lol you up here like yeah see 4d, glad you can admit when you're wrong when all he did was say he made a mistake. Fundamentally you are still wrong.
Motion does not create gravity.
Period.
Last edited:
It's not his fault he cosigned that mistake on my part because I did word it in a particular way to him. That's 100% on me an no one else. He's been very consistent on where he stands and never needed me to cosign him in the first place. I was merely trying to support his stance (an others) in which I still do. But, I also have my on shortcomings from time to time.
I used the Gravitational Force equation to support my point that mass creates gravity and it was to counter that motion was need. You then said that "G" contained acceleration, but my research revealed that "G" has no physical baring on the Gravitation Force equation. It was there to simply make the equation equal and not proportional.
I don't remember me specifically saying gravity is a property of mass. My assertion was that motion was not needed. Maybe the semantics of this discussion caused implied interpretation of what I meant, but my position has remained the same since I've entered this thread, which is motion is not need to create gravity. Only mass.
Last edited:
Raymond is like: "The reason the horse is moving is because the cart is pushing it".
I know I have been all over the place trying to make sense of where I stand and where he stands. Yes, mistakes on my end have happened.
But my position has never changed.
No. Only mass.
And that's the stance I've been with since my first reply to you in this thread.
NoRaymond is like: "The reason the horse is moving is because the cart is pushing it".
This discussion started because I said this: "Gravity is NOT the property of a mass. It's is a force that is CREATED when that mass moves."
So I mistakenly thought that with your replies you were defending the "its a property of mass" argument. That probaly threw me off.
I was beginning to see your point that G has no physical bearing on the gravitational force equation, but the fact still remains that scientist were observing movement when they were determining the value of the constant G. The value comes from real measurements, just like the speed of light. For me to believe that gravity only requires mass I would have to see an example of a mass that's completely still pulling objects towards it. I doubt that example exists. But there are examples of gravity defined as a force, requiring mass and acceleration. Maybe if you push the G has no physical bearing part more I may see your point.
A different theory is Einstein's theory. To me that theory is defining gravity as a property of space.
Last edited:
Thread goes from Russia and the main on landing to arguing about Gravity.
HaHa!
HaHa!
You a muthafuckin lie. This shit started with Alex saying gravity came from the sun and you hopped on his dick with this one right here
I knew you was stupid then. But you followed it up with these fucking gems
Why lie when everybody can read that shit happening in real time?
Smh
Kind of. Like I said, the only time you could even think about motion causing gravity is acceleration of mass to near light speeds. But that's not practical for what we are discussing here. The Sun, the local cluster and the entire milky way aren't moving anywhere close to that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity
Read that, it will help especially the part about a box with paricles in motion versus one with particles at rest.
Interesting. Are you talking about the terminology part or do you want me to read the whole page? I'll have to reply back tonight. It will take me some time to read all of it.
Last edited:
No. The definition of gravity as a force did not come from me. You're calling scientists from today arrogant. It's defined as a force and that's what works for science today. Eisntein could still be right by saying its not a force. And I personally tend to accept quantum theory over statistical mechanics. But it still is defined as a force. You're trying to be right, but you're ignoring today's physics. This is not about being right.
So you're still mad because I said Alex had a better grasp of gravity than you? Than's not my fault b. I wouldn't be mad if someone knew more about a concept than me. I'm hoping to learn something from reading what @LordSinister just replied to me.
Show proof from modern scientists that say Einstein was wrong and gravity is a force.
Damn you're a dishonest lil dude lol
Lord Sin JUST said that what you have been saying is not practical, and I'll extrapolate from that the inference "and therefore is not a reasonable basis for your argument of 'motion is created by gravity' as a rule". Lord Sin, please correct me if I I have erred in this inference.
And lol @ you and Alex both being reduced to "you mad". I'm not mad at all man. If you are still agreeing with a nigga that said earth's gravity comes from the sun and still saying motion creates gravity, make no mistake, the owners of the 4 nuts you've tried to grab and point to like they're absolving you of your stupidness are NOT in agreement with you about those things. No matter how many flea flickers your bitch ass tries to run lol
Matter of fact, no one on earth agrees with you either, or else you would have provided evidence of such by now instead of trying to change the subject every time you have been asked to do so. You ain't slick enough to get away w that one b, then niggas entertaining you just like to do math lol.
Last edited:
I have proof of the "gravity is a force" part. Now please show me where I said that Einstein was wrong. You're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing.
Similar threads
