Debunking teh Space Universe

a reply to: Spacespider

9.8 + 1? No, anything above 9.8 will accelerate it from rest to movement. Not sure why you are not responding to the current question. Again, we have to conclude now that nothing is making the object resist acceleration besides teh gravitah, right?

a reply to: MkayUltra

Mis-spelling 'the' as teh and 'gravity' as gravitah once, maybe twice, are typo's and very understandable.....we all do it sometimes.
But repeatedly?
Its just annoying and very distracting.

Why don't you spell them correctly and cut to the chase and get to the #ing point of your thread?

a reply to: MkayUltra
It's because it's so obvious what you are doing here.

You're pretending like wanting an honest answer, yet you already seem to have yours. And then you ask loaded questions, move the goal posts with semantics.

Like I've seen literally a hundred times, because it's like a dumb sport that gains traction currently. IDK what it gives you other than trolling and waste other's time.

a reply to: TDDAgain

I'm sorry but we already established that you have absolutely no clue about physics yet you are judging the merit of my argument? Laughable.

a reply to: Freeborn

Rofl, so it is annoying you huh. I already moved on with the thread. Waiting for relevant replies. Go ahead.

a reply to: MkayUltra

What is your point?

Spit it out man.

Not annoyed, just bored.....

a reply to: Freeborn

My current point is that we have to conclude that the only thing that makes this object resist acceleration is teh gravitah, right?

I don't get what you try to convey, some thoughts that came along.
If you show me an object that is not moving, relatively to the universe, I bet you'll get a nobel.
then I went on a tangent thinking about inertia and gravity and that relatively it could be seen as acceleration even if there is an overall deceleration...but that didn't really add up...
So I'm thinking we can conclude to blame teh gravitah, for the threads sake and move on, to the big reveal?

a reply to: MkayUltra

Probably starting with a vertical spring scale and Hooke’s law, and how and why the spring extends when used to weigh objects.

Hooke's law

In physics, Hooke's law is an empirical law which states that the force (F) needed to extend or compress a spring by some distance (x) scales linearly with respect to that distance—that is, Fs = kx, where k is a constant factor characteristic of the spring (i.e., its stiffness), and x is small compared to the total possible deformation of the spring. The law is named after 17th-century British physicist Robert Hooke. He first stated the law in 1676 as a Latin anagram.[1][2] He published the solution of his anagram in 1678[3] as: ut tensio, sic vis ("as the extension, so the force" or "the extension is proportional to the force"). Hooke states in the 1678 work that he was aware of the law since 1660.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: MkayUltra

You only need one newton to move one kg of mass ignoring teh atmosphir. But you didn't say the gravitah was ignored so now you got 9.81 newton's to add to teh 1 gravitah. So teh answer is eleven newton's but are you talking about the equator or not cause then you need to change your gravitah.
1+9.81=ten point eighties one

a reply to: MkayUltra

that makes this object resist acceleration is teh gravitah,

Resist what if there is no force acting on it, or held in place by no other forces overcoming the force of friction.

a reply to: Terpene

Don't forget the selective canceling of other physical laws, to bring over whatever point it might be.

But all you get is trap-questions that serve the purpose so the OP can disagree. By time, you will notice that the person behind the question has an agenda, and that's mostly trolling or showing off how smart they are. Hence the instant attack on anyone calling it out as being "dumb".

Like I wrote, happens currently a lot on forums and ask-a-question-websites. It was funnier though, when it was pupils asking their homework questions.

I get it. You have super glued the 1 kg mass to the sidewalk and thus there is another force causing it not to move. But I have a bottle of acetone. Not a problem.

One must think outside the dumb.

a reply to: Terpene

Took long enough. If you were thinking that, you should have already gotten the point. Again, we have to conclude that nothing is making the object resist acceleration, besides teh gravitah, raiight? Your peers have calculated it remember. 9.8+ N to accelerate from rest to movement.

a reply to: neutronflux

Try to post something relevant.

a reply to: neutronflux

The question was what force is needed to make it accelerate from rest to movement. What part do you not understand? The answer was 9.8+ N. Unless you disagree with that, you have to conclude that gravity is the only thing that was making the object resist acceleration, right?

a reply to: oddscreenname

Interesting. So it doesn't takes 9.8+ but 10.8+ is what you are saying.

a reply to: MkayUltra

Got to move the object, 1, then move it beyond the gravitah, 9.81.

a reply to: oddscreenname

Are you factoring in the strong and weak nyuckuler forces?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

No such things. Only gravitah exists. Nuculer force only exists if you divide by zero