# Is it possible that the gravity that keeps our feet planted on the Earth is..

Motion of the Earth relative to what? If what you came up with were true (it isn't), the attraction force would depend on the frame of reference the Earth is moving with respect to. It isn't, so your fringe "stuff"y is false.

You can focus on other things now.

Relative to the center of the galaxy.

Inertia and momentum is enough to explain gravity. If you just pay close enough attention to the movement of the Earth and all of the planets, it makes sense.

Relative to the center of the galaxy.

Inertia and momentum is enough to explain gravity. If you just pay close enough attention to the movement of the Earth and all of the planets, it makes sense.

No it isn't, and it certainly doesn't explain the inverse square rule or the shell theorem.

http://youtu.be/-QCQ0R07SIw

Please watch this video of me trying my best to explain why gravity doesn't really need a fancy explanation and is really just Inertia and momentum. I'm not very good at talking physics, so just try to figure out what I'm trying to say using context clues.

I see, you made a video and you posted it on youtube. Must be that you made a big "discovery".

No it isn't, and it certainly doesn't explain the inverse square rule or the shell theorem.
It does. Calculate the resultant of the forces exerted on a series of points on the Earth and you'll see it. I'm not familiar with the shell theorem. Regardless, unless you can see how inertia and momentum could cause the gravity we experience, you can't see how it might work with the other theories. Can you see it?

It does. Calculate the resultant of the forces exerted on a series of points on the Earth and you'll see it. I'm not familiar with the shell theorem. Regardless, unless you can see how inertia and momentum could cause the gravity we experience, you can't see how it might work with the other theories. Can you see it?

No one else can see it but you. How do you derive the Lagrange point using your theory? How do you calculate the escape velocity? Do some calculations, let's see them.

Yes, I did. It's something that has apparently been overlooked. However, I'm no physicist and I can barely explain what I've observed, so why don't you take a look at my video and look into what I've noticed on your own. It's just very simple Newtonian mechanics.

Yes, I did. It's something that has apparently been overlooked. However, I'm no physicist and I can barely explain what I've observed, so why don't you take a look at my video and look into what I've noticed on your own. It's just very simple Newtonian mechanics.

It doesn't work this way, every day there are hundreds of crackpots that say : "Have a look at my video...".

I don't know how to do the math yet. All I know is you can take 0 to the resultant speed of 212/s over 1/4 of an Earth day and get very damned close to 9.81m/s^2. Frankly, I'm surprised that, if this theory has been debunked before, there are no websites or Wikipedia articles about it at all. Everyone seems to think gravity is some kind of mysterious force.

That's fine with me. It's an hour long and I can barely explain myself properly. You will probably just call me an idiot and go about your day. I've yet to find any evidence to convince me that I'm wrong about it though.

I don't know how to do the math yet.

How old are you? Are you in high school yet?

Frankly, I'm surprised that, if this theory has been debunked before, there are no websites or Wikipedia articles about it at all. .

There is no math, according to you, there is nothing to debunk, this is a classical case of crackpot "stuff", can't be called a "theory" since it is incapable of making falsifiable predictions.

How old are you? Are you in high school yet?

There is no math, according to you, there is nothing to debunk, this is a classical case of crackpot "stuff", can't be called a "theory" since it is incapable of making falsifiable predictions.

I'm 31 and I'm not stupid. I have mild dyscalculia. If you would use what you know about physics, but looked at the Earth with no gravity actually "pulling" on anything, you would see what I'm talking about. Like I said, if you don't want to watch the video, then don't. I don't give a shit. If you're looking for math, I don't have it. My experience with the physics community has been absolutely horrible. You are mostly stuck-up elitist jerks with closed minds.

My experience with the physics community has been absolutely horrible. You are mostly stuck-up elitist jerks with closed minds.

Yeah, I know. We actually like to see evidence, and math, and science, and all those other things crackpots just can't be bothered with.

Yeah, I know. We actually like to see evidence, and math, and science, and all those other things crackpots just can't be bothered with.

You see, that's the kind of asshole response I'm talking about. I'm not a crackpot. I'm not saying gravity is some mystical force from some 9th dimension.

Why don't you tell me why you don't think it's inertia and momentum?

Why don't you tell me why you don't think it's inertia and momentum?

Because that doesn't explain Kepler's laws. That doesn't explain orbital motion. That doesn't explain Lagrange points. That doesn't explain the inverse square function. That doesn't explain the shell theorem. That doesn't explain the variation in the CMBR. That doesn't explain time dilation in a gravity well. That doesn't explain the potential energy of a gravity well. That doesn't explain blue-shift.

It doesn't explain anything.

I'm 31 and I'm not stupid. I have mild dyscalculia.

So, you never graduated from high school. Without math, you cannot do physics. Tough.

So, you never graduated from high school. Without math, you cannot do physics. Tough.

No, I graduated high school. In fact, I'm a lead programmer over a team of 15 programmers, some of which have masters degrees in computer science. Why? Not because I have the most years of experience (Not even close), but because I'm the one they all come to when they can't figure something out and I always find a solution for them. I didn't go to college because I'm smart enough to have learned my trade on my own. I also earn 6 figures in a state where that is not very common. Knowing math does not prove how smart you are. I've been tested several times and I've scored in the 99th percentile, even with horrid math scores. So, before you discount everything I say because I don't have strong math skills, give me the benefit of the doubt.

Because that doesn't explain Kepler's laws. That doesn't explain orbital motion. That doesn't explain Lagrange points. That doesn't explain the inverse square function. That doesn't explain the shell theorem. That doesn't explain the variation in the CMBR. That doesn't explain time dilation in a gravity well. That doesn't explain the potential energy of a gravity well. That doesn't explain blue-shift.

It doesn't explain anything.

How do you know it doesn't? I assume since you've discounted all of these things that you've actually done the math and really tried to prove it and failed. If so, where are YOUR results? If you didn't do this, I assume that you've discounted it because someone else has. Where are their results?

All I know is that inertia and momentum CAN explain surface gravity, orbits, the way projectiles move, the apparent attraction between masses, and gravitational time dilation. Why would gravity be something totally different? Why don't we experience "double gravity"?

What is your theory of the cause of gravity?

How do you know it doesn't?
Because I've studied physics, and I'm familiar with the math and theory.

All I know is that inertia and momentum CAN explain surface gravity, orbits, the way projectiles move, the apparent attraction between masses, and gravitational time dilation.
You say that, but it doesn't, and you can't demonstrate it does. Aside from your idea and some flimsy reasoning, you have no support.

I don't have to disprove your idea. You have to provide evidence. You're making the claim, so the onus to support it is on you. And you haven't, and can't. Prove me wrong is the mantra of the crank position.

What is your theory of the cause of gravity?
The warping of space/time by mass and energy. That's General Relativity, which is very well tested and verified by experiment, observation, and practical application..

Because I've studied physics, and I'm familiar with the math and theory.

You say that, but it doesn't, and you can't demonstrate it does. Aside from your idea and some flimsy reasoning, you have no support.

I don't have to disprove your idea. You have to provide evidence. You're making the claim, so the onus to support it is on you. And you haven't, and can't. Prove me wrong is the mantra of the crank position.

The warping of space/time by mass and energy. That's General Relativity, which is very well tested and verified by experiment, observation, and practical application..

You said you've done the math that disproves that inertia and momentum can't possibly cause what we observe as gravity. Let's see it then.

I did provide evidence in my video. I'm sorry that it isn't math.

You know, it's sad that this whole thing that you guys do to people with theories might be exactly why we don't really know what causes gravity. My idea might not be right, but if you treat every idea from someone who just doesn't know the math like this, you might just miss something very important that they have to offer. That's like me saying, "you can't prove anything you say until you write a program that simulates visually". We can't all devote our time to learning advanced math.

You said you've done the math that disproves that inertia and momentum can't possibly cause what we observe as gravity. Let's see it then.

Fine. Here's the equation for gravitational force, in it's simple form.

F = Gm1m2/r[sup]2[/sup]
Where G is the gravitational constant 6.67384x10[sup]-11[/sup] m[sup]3[/sup]/ kg/ s[sup]2[/sup]
m1 is the mass in kg, m2 is mass in kg, and r is the distance between m1 and m2 in meters.

This is verified and proven. How do you obtain the same result using inertia and momentum?

Here's the equation for gravitational time dilation.

This equation has been proven by experiment (Pound-Rebka experiment)

How do you obtain the same result using inertia and momentum?

You can't.

I did provide evidence in my video. I'm sorry that it isn't math.

You threw a ball out of your car. That isn't evidence of anything.