is gravity a law?

Originally posted by Connected

Originally posted by a1ex

SATELLITES REVEAL A MYSTERY OF LARGE CHANGE IN EARTH'S GRAVITY FIELD :
www.gsfc.nasa.gov...

The moon, the sun, and other large bodies in our solar system effect Earths magnetic field. Much like two magnets close together effect their magnetic field.

www.physics.montana.edu...

Or, Earth's crust is shifting in such a way to magneticaly sheild our Earths gravity into a different shape.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Connected]

Umm It appears NASA called it a Mystery in august 2002, yet youre giving an explanation as to why its happening? or is this your theory?

I like to think of Gravity as a suggestion, Gravity however disagrees...

You seem to be misunderstanding what it is to be a scientific law..

A Scientific Law is a known behavior of a certain instance based on repeated observations. The Law of Gravity is a textbook example of Scientific Law at it's finest.

If you drop a stone it will fall. When the stone is dropped, it will fall 100% of the time. This phenominon was recorded and proposed as a law, and it has yet to be refuted.

Newton's Law does not try to explain the why of gravity, he merely presented that it exists. The FACT that gravity exists is not in question by science, the ORIGIN of the force is what is in question.

If you care to test the Law of Gravity, drop a penny 10,000 times and record how many times it simply floats in air instead of being acted on by gravity.

I await your results.

"Let's take a look at the evidence," said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden."In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, 'But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.' If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling."

Intelligent Falling Reconciles Newtonian Physics and Quantum Mechanics

Originally posted by HankMcCoy
You seem to be misunderstanding what it is to be a scientific law..

A Scientific Law is a known behavior of a certain instance based on repeated observations. The Law of Gravity is a textbook example of Scientific Law at it's finest.

If you drop a stone it will fall. When the stone is dropped, it will fall 100% of the time. This phenominon was recorded and proposed as a law, and it has yet to be refuted.

Newton's Law does not try to explain the why of gravity, he merely presented that it exists. The FACT that gravity exists is not in question by science, the ORIGIN of the force is what is in question.

If you care to test the Law of Gravity, drop a penny 10,000 times and record how many times it simply floats in air instead of being acted on by gravity.

I await your results.

Umm I like this Explanation better:

In the debate between religion and science a common argument is that the theory of evolution, or the Big Bang theory, or some other scientific theory is "just a theory". "It hasn't been proved!", they argue. "That means my theory is just as valid."

This argument shows a very common misconception about science that needs to be cleared up. Science never proves anything. Ever. Let me repeat that with different emphasis: Science never proves anything.

Consider the theory itself (in a Newtonian sense for simplicity): all mass is attracted to all other mass in a manner which fits a specific equation (F = G*m1*m2/d^2).

How would we test this? We can try dropping objects with various masses, measuring their acceleration, and then use the above equation (along with Earth's mass for the second object) to verify. If the math works out then the theory is supported. Up until Einstein (maybe even up until now, but I'm not sure) this always worked. However, the only way to prove that the equation is right would be to test every object in the Universe against every other object in the Universe. This is (essentially) an infinite number of observations, which can't be done.

ome might argue that this only applies to the equation itself, but not the fact that gravity occurs. They would say "I can prove gravity by dropping something". However, they are wrong. The only thing you can prove by dropping something is that gravity worked for that test. The only thing they're changing in their test versus the test I described above is loosening the requirements for success: instead of requiring that the equation fit the observation, they are checking that the acceleration is positive (F > 0). The reasoning being used to prove the theory hasn't changed. It's still inductive, and you would still have to make an essentially infinite number of observations in order to prove that gravity works in that way every time.

Source

Originally posted by clearwater

"Let's take a look at the evidence," said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden."In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, 'But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.' If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling."

Intelligent Falling Reconciles Newtonian Physics and Quantum Mechanics

Intelligent Falling LOL that was from the Onion

Originally posted by a1ex
Umm I like this Explanation better:

In the debate between religion and science a common argument is that the theory of evolution, or the Big Bang theory, or some other scientific theory is "just a theory". "It hasn't been proved!", they argue. "That means my theory is just as valid."

This argument shows a very common misconception about science that needs to be cleared up. Science never proves anything. Ever. Let me repeat that with different emphasis: Science never proves anything.

Consider the theory itself (in a Newtonian sense for simplicity): all mass is attracted to all other mass in a manner which fits a specific equation (F = G*m1*m2/d^2).

How would we test this? We can try dropping objects with various masses, measuring their acceleration, and then use the above equation (along with Earth's mass for the second object) to verify. If the math works out then the theory is supported. Up until Einstein (maybe even up until now, but I'm not sure) this always worked. However, the only way to prove that the equation is right would be to test every object in the Universe against every other object in the Universe. This is (essentially) an infinite number of observations, which can't be done.

ome might argue that this only applies to the equation itself, but not the fact that gravity occurs. They would say "I can prove gravity by dropping something". However, they are wrong. The only thing you can prove by dropping something is that gravity worked for that test. The only thing they're changing in their test versus the test I described above is loosening the requirements for success: instead of requiring that the equation fit the observation, they are checking that the acceleration is positive (F > 0). The reasoning being used to prove the theory hasn't changed. It's still inductive, and you would still have to make an essentially infinite number of observations in order to prove that gravity works in that way every time.

Source

What is that an explaination of exactly? I have read it several times and fail to see where ANY kind of information is being presented the refutes the Law of Gravity.

As for the chuckleworthy claim that the equation cannot be verified unless it is tested on every available combination.. To prove/disprove Gravity, or any other scientifically established Law, one doesn't have to continually prove it true, one has to only prove it false.

We are still discussing this.....and I just want to say in the words of Judge DDreads evil twin.

"Law..LLLAAAWWWW...I am the Law":bash::bnghd:

Originally posted by Royal76
We are still discussing this.....and I just want to say in the words of Judge DDreads evil twin.

"Law..LLLAAAWWWW...I am the Law"

:bash::bnghd:

Originally posted by a1ex
[

Umm It appears NASA called it a Mystery in august 2002, yet youre giving an explanation as to why its happening? or is this your theory?

NASA knows what it is, they are just not going to tell you.

Also, gravity decreases with altitude..

"Gravity also decreases with altitude (since greater altitude means greater distance from the earth's centre). All other things being equal, an increase in altitude from sea level to the top of Mount Everest (8,850 metres) causes a weight decrease of about 0.28%."

en.wikipedia.org...'s_gravity


Ever herd of continental drift?

en.wikipedia.org...

Ever herd of the the FACT that 710,000 years ago Earth's north and south poles have switched places repeatedly over the course of geologic time? The last one happened 170,000 years ago. That could be happening again.

Gravity is both a law and a theory, actually multiple theories.

The law states that there is an attractive force between masses. Thats it.

The theory tries to explain why... but they call it a theory because theres allways something more to be learnt.

So to reiterate
LAW = What we know will happen.
Theory = Why it happens that way.

The why is what got me into posting this, and later looking like a fool to more than 1/2 the people here...but no hard feelings.

OMG!!!, Intelligent Falling!?!?! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO That is now officially the dumbest thing I have ever heard on the internet.