This is the third post in /new of conspiracy tonight asking the dumbest fucking questions about basic physics and whatnot. What's the angle here? I dont spend a lot of time in new but does this happen often? An attempt to make the sub as a whole look stupid or something? I don't understand.
As I understand it, mass is the function of gravity. You can increase the density of an object but so long as the mass stays the same it is not supposed to affect its gravitational pull.
You are incorrect. If mass Is another form of measurement in density then why is density=mass/volume? Density is just a measure of how much mass is in a given volume.
What is suspect? I've been on GLP for years and it has had terrible load times the past few days so instead of just using this site to look at memes I was checking out the conspiracy sub. Big mistake though because it seems to be populated by a different crowd.
Mathematically your statement is Mass = density/volume.
Just wanted to help clear a little confusion. Density is a measurement of mass. Not the other way around. This is an important distinction because two objects can have the same exact mass, but a much different volume. Thus the need to measure a specific amount of mass to volume ratio to help in understand why a pound of feathers is so much larger than a pound of bricks.
Thermodynamics cause gravity, something about the PLUS(+) and the MINUS(-) that makes batteries work in a circuit, also works on a bigger scale, with the Sun dictating the direction.
On a smaller scale, matter seems to obey the same pattern, they heat up, lose tension, rise, repeat.
The fluid energy mechanics seems to circulate in a pattern of a Torus (energy field, NOT physical), the same shape of a copper coil in an electric motor.
Density as a property of all matter, points where everything should go, it doesn't move it, itself.
Its the ordering, not the glue.
Also, complex thermodynamic processes are irreversible, which kind of nullifies the concept of traveling back in time.
Gravity is the weakest of the four forces. Just because an egg floats when there is salt water compared to just water shows that gravity is the weakest force.
Everywhere in nature the less dense item floats. Even in the sea the ocean is more dense on the bottom, less dense on top, then the air is less dense above it and continues to get less dense with altitude. There is not a single example you will find that shows a more dense item sinking.
You even find this in the way a ship works. It has a huge mass, but it floats because it takes up such a large volume that it's density is less relative to the water. It is only when it takes on water, increasing its density, that the ship sinks.
Everywhere in nature the less dense item floats. Even in the sea the ocean is more dense on the bottom, less dense on top, then the air is less dense above it and continues to get less dense with altitude. There is not a single example you will find that shows a more dense item sinking.
Soooo less dense items float..... yes.....
? The example was in the video when he dropped the egg in the salt water.
Everywhere in nature the less dense item floats. Even in the sea the ocean is more dense on the bottom, less dense on top, then the air is less dense above it and continues to get less dense with altitude. There is not a single example you will find that shows a more dense item sinking.
I don't see how buoyancy of eggs in water and salt water proves the earth is flat.
All it proves is that salt water has more density thus holds up the egg better compared to just water.
Things do not float because they are full of air. They float because their density is less than water. Yes it is air taking up the space in a ship, but it floats due to it being less dense. That is why submarines fill their ballists with water to sink. They are making the submarine more dense and then it sinks.
I think that my initial post made it very clear that I was only asking the question does gravity or density cause objects to fall to earth. You came to the conclusion I was using it to prove flat earth. That wasn't my intention at all. Just trying to figure in my head they answer to why if an object such as the moon is attracted to earth by gravity it does not continue to move towards the earth instead of simply orbiting it. Why does our sun have the gravitational pull to bring our planet into this system but not draw it closer?
Anybody who questions of the earth is flat needs to buy a sextant and learn to use it. Sailors for the past few centuries have used this tool to travel across the world. The only way it would work right is with latitude and longitude and a spherical earth.
Maybe flat earthers should look up at the night sky and start watching the planets orbit instead of looking down at shitty you tube videos of people explaining the earth is flat with eggs in water
Do you have one, and when was the last time you studied the stars? Also, explain the civilizations who believe the Earth to be flat, yet also traverse the Seas. How did they do it? You know, by actually stargazing and not GPS devices...
Falling, on earth, is gravity. You aren't falling down you are being dragged towards the earth by gravity. Density doesn't cause motion at all because it is not a force.
You are correct density is not a force, buoyancy is. Correct? And air is a a fluid correct? So is it crazy to say that objects in air would descend because their density is greater? Isn't this how a hot air balloon works? It is filled with a less dense material and then rises? If you could somehow fill a cadaver with helium would it not float?
Bouyancy is not a force exactly. Bouyancy is a result of a difference in pressure. The pressure is caused by everything being pulled to the earth by gravity. And it affects objects differently depending on their density.
It's more like you standing on the ground. The ground only pushes you up because gravity pushes you down.
So floating on water just means the water is pushing harder than the object. Water is easier because it is more visible. A boat pushes Down into the water until the amount of water it displaces equals the weight of the boat. If you add cargo it sinks lower. Remove cargo, less water needed to displace and the boat rises.
The sinking and floating all happens be in the direction of earth. Sink towards earth and float away from earth. That is because all of the forces involved are gravity or opposing gravity.
On the moon there is less gravity so the forces are less. And no atmosphere for buoyancy so no hot air balloons.
Weird I was just thinking about this. Geocentrists and heliocentrists agree as to why things like clouds and helium balloons rise--they're lighter than air, less dense, so they float. So what makes objects fall down? Let's put a pin in that. We should also agree on what makes objects float/sink in water: buoyancy, essentially density again. Ice cubes are less dense than water so they float, rocks are more dense so they sink. Water and air have a lot in common, no? Why would objects falling not be attributed to density before Isaac Newton blew everybody's tits off by inventing the word "gravity"? 'Gravity' is all you gotta repeat over and over if you want to keep acting like Rick and Morty is accurate, but it won't change how water doesn't actually curve over long distances.
Not while I was in school. I did it the old fashion way, taking college courses my junior year. I don't think the 30 I got on my ACT was a result of them bending the rules for me either. Attacking my education does not dispute anything that I have said. In college you would have learned that this type of fallacy in argument is called ad hominem. If you want to dispute me, dispute me. Try to use observable facts rather than theories that no one can prove in an observable way.
Fact, the USA is now #23 in world education when it had been #1 for over 100 years.
Fact, if you have to be told the difference between gravity and density then your understanding of the relationship between those topics is less than you think it is.
Density is not changed by gravity. It is changed by differences in pressure. Anything you relate to gravity can also be explained by buoyancy within a closed system. Until someone from a conspiracy forum on Reddit visits space themself, I'd suggest using arguments you can verify yourself, instead of relying on the people who told you we went to the moon.
This is your argument? I'm sorry but if you are sooo old, why is it that in all your time on this earth you haven't managed to learn how an opinion is argued properly? Why do you lend yourself to fallacies instead? Did they not teach proper communication techniques wayyy back then? Lol
What I am saying is that you personally cannot prove that gravity is at play in any fashion. You can repeat things that others have said, you can point to theories about outer space, which only a select few have supposedly ever visited, but you cannot prove gravity. Yet you can prove quite easily that bouyancy is at play both in the water and in the air on this earth.
Can you explain why there are no tides in the Great Lakes? Instead these bodies of water have something called a seiche. A seiche is when a change in atmospheric pressure and wind causes movement. It is already said that the movement of the winds causes change of currents in the ocean. Why would these ocean tides not be a seiche on a larger scale because it is acting on a larger body of water? If the moons gravity was causing tides wouldn't you expect them to be pretty uniform in movement? How does the moon reach across the point of neutral gravity and pull on the oceans? Why does it not pull on the land mass? If it does pull on he land mass why do we not feel it like we observe tide? If the moon pulls the ocean towards it would there also be a measurable pull on the iss every time it is between the moon and the earth? I mean there would have to be right? How could the moon pull on the earth which is thousands of miles further away than the iss but not pull on the iss?
True tides—changes in water level caused by the gravitational forces of the sun and moon—do occur in a semi-diurnal (twice daily) pattern on the Great Lakes. Studies indicate that the Great Lakes spring tide, the largest tides caused by the combined forces of the sun and moon, is less than five centimeters in height. These minor variations are masked by the greater fluctuations in lake levels produced by wind and barometric pressure changes.
The planetary bodies do pull on land mass. You don't feel it because of how minuscule the movement is, and you are on the earth so you wouldn't feel it move.
Without gravity everything floats. It doesn't matter how dense something is. The density of water only plays a role because a more dense material has more mass for gravity to act upon.
The air filled balloon has less mass and feels less gravitational pull. Because the water is a fluid, it can flow around the balloon and build up under it, forcing the balloon upwards.
Put simply, in the real world more dense objects can be "floated" on less dense objects easily. Take an gold bar and a wooden table. Gravity holds the gold bar on the surface of the wooden table, but the less dense wooden table holds up the gold bar because the gold bar is not fluid and can't flow around the obstruction.
A more dense material does not have more mass. A more dense material only has more mass per volume. If the earth was less dense but contained the same mass, it would only affect gravity from a very close distance. Outside of that it would have the same gravitational force. If a ball weighs 1kg it will still weigh 1kg with an increase or decrease in volume.
Independent of one another, the gold bar and wooden table would both sink until they reached mass equilibrium somewhere, correct? Because they are both solids they can rest on one another, but they are still within a fluid, air, which they are more dense than. Therefore the gold bar isn't "floated" on the table, it is at rest because it has met with a solid.
It is also a solid which is why water cannot fall through it moron. What is with trying to use solids to disprove what I am saying? Obviously solids do not float on each other nor do they let liquids pass through them whether they are less dense or more dense. These are just idiotic come backs. Every example that has been thrown at me has had just no logic behind it. Why can gold rest on wood, duh because they are both solids. Why can styrofoam hold water, duh because it is a solid. And you guys think I am stupid... bahahahaha
You literally CANNOT prove gravity at your home, but you CAN prove buoyancy. This is a conspiracy forum? So crazy theories should be allowed. And IF (and that's a big if) there was a firmament keeping our atmosphere in, would air not act exactly as it does with less dense air stacked on top of more dense air until it reaches the firmament and can go no further? Assuming that air is a fluid would not all objects between the ground and the firmament act exactly like they do and sink in less dense air until they meet more dense ground?
You can easily test that a change in density would cause a solid to keep sinking with a brick, some dirt and some water. Place the brick on the compact soil. It will not sink because the soil is dense enough to prevent this. Now take the water and mix it with the soil to create mud. The mud is less dense than the compact dry dirt and the brick will sink.
This is your argument? I'm sorry but if you are sooo old, why is it that in all your time on this earth you haven't managed to learn how an opinion is argued properly? Why do you lend yourself to fallacies instead? Did they not teach proper communication techniques wayyy back then? Lol
88 comments
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Doesn't density cause gravity?
n/a ShillyMadison 2017-07-02
It's a direct, 1:1 relationship... Ill have to check out whatever this video says when I get home but i can't imagine what it would say to convince me
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Don't bother with the video. He says that because an egg floats in denser water (salt water) compared to normal water, gravity has no effect on it?
The stupidest shit I've ever seen.
n/a ShillyMadison 2017-07-02
This is the third post in /new of conspiracy tonight asking the dumbest fucking questions about basic physics and whatnot. What's the angle here? I dont spend a lot of time in new but does this happen often? An attempt to make the sub as a whole look stupid or something? I don't understand.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Some of it is bull shit spread by people wanting to discredit conspiracies in general. The othesr are useful idiots who actually believe it
n/a ShillyMadison 2017-07-02
A la flat earth
n/a ShillyMadison 2017-07-02
There we go, effort to bury the "hillary shut down pedo investigation posts" maybe
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Hahaha 🤣 we knew that a year ago when they got caught
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
As I understand it, mass is the function of gravity. You can increase the density of an object but so long as the mass stays the same it is not supposed to affect its gravitational pull.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Density creates gravity. Mass is another form of measurement in density.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
You are incorrect. If mass Is another form of measurement in density then why is density=mass/volume? Density is just a measure of how much mass is in a given volume.
n/a shayne1987 2017-07-02
You just agreed with him.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
No we are saying the reverse of one another.
n/a shayne1987 2017-07-02
You're both saying its a 1:1 relationship.
You're making the same argument.
n/a GodlyUnderdog 2017-07-02
They're not. It's the all poodles are dogs, but not all dogs are poodles thing.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Density=mass/volume
n/a frighillary007 2017-07-02
you are clearly ill equipped to have a conversation on this topic.
your comments in this entire thread have been fucking cringy.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
What is suspect? I've been on GLP for years and it has had terrible load times the past few days so instead of just using this site to look at memes I was checking out the conspiracy sub. Big mistake though because it seems to be populated by a different crowd.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Density=mass/volume
Yes.
n/a GodlyUnderdog 2017-07-02
Mathematically your statement is Mass = density/volume.
Just wanted to help clear a little confusion. Density is a measurement of mass. Not the other way around. This is an important distinction because two objects can have the same exact mass, but a much different volume. Thus the need to measure a specific amount of mass to volume ratio to help in understand why a pound of feathers is so much larger than a pound of bricks.
n/a Classifiedspankyhoes 2017-07-02
Thermodynamics cause gravity, something about the PLUS(+) and the MINUS(-) that makes batteries work in a circuit, also works on a bigger scale, with the Sun dictating the direction. On a smaller scale, matter seems to obey the same pattern, they heat up, lose tension, rise, repeat. The fluid energy mechanics seems to circulate in a pattern of a Torus (energy field, NOT physical), the same shape of a copper coil in an electric motor.
Density as a property of all matter, points where everything should go, it doesn't move it, itself. Its the ordering, not the glue.
Also, complex thermodynamic processes are irreversible, which kind of nullifies the concept of traveling back in time.
n/a GodlyUnderdog 2017-07-02
Perhaps, Nasa says it's Mass.
n/a outtanutmeds 2017-07-02
We have no clue about anything. Let us begin with no pre-concievced notions.
n/a Carlos_Dangers_wang 2017-07-02
Glue.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
This video was a waste of life.
Gravity is the weakest of the four forces. Just because an egg floats when there is salt water compared to just water shows that gravity is the weakest force.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Everywhere in nature the less dense item floats. Even in the sea the ocean is more dense on the bottom, less dense on top, then the air is less dense above it and continues to get less dense with altitude. There is not a single example you will find that shows a more dense item sinking.
You even find this in the way a ship works. It has a huge mass, but it floats because it takes up such a large volume that it's density is less relative to the water. It is only when it takes on water, increasing its density, that the ship sinks.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Ok so you are contradicting yourself now.
Soooo less dense items float..... yes..... ? The example was in the video when he dropped the egg in the salt water.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Umm yes and the egg was less dense then the salt water, thus it floated. But it was more dense than normal water. How is that a contradiction?
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Ok, so more dense items sink?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Which is exactly what I said?
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
It was a freaking typo! You know exactly what i mean but are picking it apart to be adversarial.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
So what are you trying to say? That eggs floating in salt water proves gravity isn't at work? I'm really lost with this post now
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Yes, and the ever search for truth.
I don't see how buoyancy of eggs in water and salt water proves the earth is flat. All it proves is that salt water has more density thus holds up the egg better compared to just water.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
I'm not saying the earth is flat. I'm just putting an idea out there that perhaps what we call gravity is really just bouyancy at work.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
All of you flat earthers do this. And it's really fucking annoying.
Every flat earth post here is from posters saying "I don't believe the earth is flat, just suggesting this price of evidence"
They say this because they are afraid for when proven wrong.
Yes you will not find a less dense item sinking?
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Wait what?
How is gravity buoyancy?
How do you explain the tides rising if not from the gravitational pull of the moon? How would buoyancy allow the tides?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Things do not float because they are full of air. They float because their density is less than water. Yes it is air taking up the space in a ship, but it floats due to it being less dense. That is why submarines fill their ballists with water to sink. They are making the submarine more dense and then it sinks.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
How does this prove flat earth?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
I think that my initial post made it very clear that I was only asking the question does gravity or density cause objects to fall to earth. You came to the conclusion I was using it to prove flat earth. That wasn't my intention at all. Just trying to figure in my head they answer to why if an object such as the moon is attracted to earth by gravity it does not continue to move towards the earth instead of simply orbiting it. Why does our sun have the gravitational pull to bring our planet into this system but not draw it closer?
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
You must study the theory of relativity and space time to understand the orbital paths of planetary bodies pulling on each other.
The moon is actually getting further away from the earth
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Anybody who questions of the earth is flat needs to buy a sextant and learn to use it. Sailors for the past few centuries have used this tool to travel across the world. The only way it would work right is with latitude and longitude and a spherical earth.
Maybe flat earthers should look up at the night sky and start watching the planets orbit instead of looking down at shitty you tube videos of people explaining the earth is flat with eggs in water
n/a Putin_loves_cats 2017-07-02
Do you have one, and when was the last time you studied the stars? Also, explain the civilizations who believe the Earth to be flat, yet also traverse the Seas. How did they do it? You know, by actually stargazing and not GPS devices...
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
I don't think Vikings or Nordic sea explorers thought the earth was flat.
The monarch rulers wanted to convince the people the earth was flat to scare them.
Ancient civilizations used the stars to travel, which is how the sextant was developed.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
No I don't have a sextant. I study the stars today. I don't know of civilizations that thought the earth was flat and sailed.
n/a Putin_loves_cats 2017-07-02
So shut the fuck up?
Do you? Tell me about all your research?
Research history?
I did, I commented on it? You daft?
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
I've used a sextant. And know how to.
What do you want to know about the stars?
n/a JamesColesPardon 2017-07-02
Removed. Rule 4.
n/a overtaxedoverworked 2017-07-02
Which civilizations traversed the seas and believed the Earth was flat?
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
I've used a sextant. And know how to.
Nordic and Vikings didn't think the earth was flat
What do you want to know about the stars?
n/a luke_starkiller1 2017-07-02
It's gravity.
Density is literally m/v where m = mass.
Gravitational force = g * M1 * m2/r2.
So as mass increases, gforce increases. That's it.
n/a CeeBus 2017-07-02
Falling, on earth, is gravity. You aren't falling down you are being dragged towards the earth by gravity. Density doesn't cause motion at all because it is not a force.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
You are correct density is not a force, buoyancy is. Correct? And air is a a fluid correct? So is it crazy to say that objects in air would descend because their density is greater? Isn't this how a hot air balloon works? It is filled with a less dense material and then rises? If you could somehow fill a cadaver with helium would it not float?
n/a CeeBus 2017-07-02
Bouyancy is not a force exactly. Bouyancy is a result of a difference in pressure. The pressure is caused by everything being pulled to the earth by gravity. And it affects objects differently depending on their density.
It's more like you standing on the ground. The ground only pushes you up because gravity pushes you down.
So floating on water just means the water is pushing harder than the object. Water is easier because it is more visible. A boat pushes Down into the water until the amount of water it displaces equals the weight of the boat. If you add cargo it sinks lower. Remove cargo, less water needed to displace and the boat rises.
The sinking and floating all happens be in the direction of earth. Sink towards earth and float away from earth. That is because all of the forces involved are gravity or opposing gravity.
On the moon there is less gravity so the forces are less. And no atmosphere for buoyancy so no hot air balloons.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Buoyancy is not one of the four forces .
n/a FreeDennisReynolds 2017-07-02
Weird I was just thinking about this. Geocentrists and heliocentrists agree as to why things like clouds and helium balloons rise--they're lighter than air, less dense, so they float. So what makes objects fall down? Let's put a pin in that. We should also agree on what makes objects float/sink in water: buoyancy, essentially density again. Ice cubes are less dense than water so they float, rocks are more dense so they sink. Water and air have a lot in common, no? Why would objects falling not be attributed to density before Isaac Newton blew everybody's tits off by inventing the word "gravity"? 'Gravity' is all you gotta repeat over and over if you want to keep acting like Rick and Morty is accurate, but it won't change how water doesn't actually curve over long distances.
n/a HowManyWerePureTho 2017-07-02
Lmao kys
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
So the earth is flat because you are attributing density instead of gravity to keeping us on the ground?
n/a klmd 2017-07-02
How bad did you flunk junior high science classes?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
I graduated high school early, actually.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Surprising. Public high school from one of the dumbest states?
n/a klmd 2017-07-02
That's easy to do since the schools stopped teaching how to reason and replaced education with emotional response development.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Not while I was in school. I did it the old fashion way, taking college courses my junior year. I don't think the 30 I got on my ACT was a result of them bending the rules for me either. Attacking my education does not dispute anything that I have said. In college you would have learned that this type of fallacy in argument is called ad hominem. If you want to dispute me, dispute me. Try to use observable facts rather than theories that no one can prove in an observable way.
n/a klmd 2017-07-02
Fact, the USA is now #23 in world education when it had been #1 for over 100 years.
Fact, if you have to be told the difference between gravity and density then your understanding of the relationship between those topics is less than you think it is.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Density is not changed by gravity. It is changed by differences in pressure. Anything you relate to gravity can also be explained by buoyancy within a closed system. Until someone from a conspiracy forum on Reddit visits space themself, I'd suggest using arguments you can verify yourself, instead of relying on the people who told you we went to the moon.
n/a klmd 2017-07-02
No wonder the younger generations are so pliable.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
This is your argument? I'm sorry but if you are sooo old, why is it that in all your time on this earth you haven't managed to learn how an opinion is argued properly? Why do you lend yourself to fallacies instead? Did they not teach proper communication techniques wayyy back then? Lol
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
What even is your argument? That the earth is flat? I don't get what you are talking about with buoyancy ? How does buoyancy prove gravity isn't real?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
What I am saying is that you personally cannot prove that gravity is at play in any fashion. You can repeat things that others have said, you can point to theories about outer space, which only a select few have supposedly ever visited, but you cannot prove gravity. Yet you can prove quite easily that bouyancy is at play both in the water and in the air on this earth.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
I think 9/11 proves gravity exists and can be calculated to have a rate that free fall reaches.
Also I have a telescope and look up at the night sky a lot. I study the planets and their satellites orbits.
Plus the tides rising and falling is directly correlated to the gravitational pull from the moon....
What are you talking about space doesn't exist?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Not wanting to listen? How should I listen to people that aren't providing any kind of factual argument but instead just name calling?
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
Can you please explain how the tides go high and low?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Can you explain why there are no tides in the Great Lakes? Instead these bodies of water have something called a seiche. A seiche is when a change in atmospheric pressure and wind causes movement. It is already said that the movement of the winds causes change of currents in the ocean. Why would these ocean tides not be a seiche on a larger scale because it is acting on a larger body of water? If the moons gravity was causing tides wouldn't you expect them to be pretty uniform in movement? How does the moon reach across the point of neutral gravity and pull on the oceans? Why does it not pull on the land mass? If it does pull on he land mass why do we not feel it like we observe tide? If the moon pulls the ocean towards it would there also be a measurable pull on the iss every time it is between the moon and the earth? I mean there would have to be right? How could the moon pull on the earth which is thousands of miles further away than the iss but not pull on the iss?
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
you're wrong, the Great Lakes do experience the tides
The planetary bodies do pull on land mass. You don't feel it because of how minuscule the movement is, and you are on the earth so you wouldn't feel it move.
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
How did i name call?
I'm telling you the hide Tide is proof of gravity
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-07-02
Without gravity everything floats. It doesn't matter how dense something is. The density of water only plays a role because a more dense material has more mass for gravity to act upon.
The air filled balloon has less mass and feels less gravitational pull. Because the water is a fluid, it can flow around the balloon and build up under it, forcing the balloon upwards.
Put simply, in the real world more dense objects can be "floated" on less dense objects easily. Take an gold bar and a wooden table. Gravity holds the gold bar on the surface of the wooden table, but the less dense wooden table holds up the gold bar because the gold bar is not fluid and can't flow around the obstruction.
Gravity is the force that make buoyancy possible.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
A more dense material does not have more mass. A more dense material only has more mass per volume. If the earth was less dense but contained the same mass, it would only affect gravity from a very close distance. Outside of that it would have the same gravitational force. If a ball weighs 1kg it will still weigh 1kg with an increase or decrease in volume.
Independent of one another, the gold bar and wooden table would both sink until they reached mass equilibrium somewhere, correct? Because they are both solids they can rest on one another, but they are still within a fluid, air, which they are more dense than. Therefore the gold bar isn't "floated" on the table, it is at rest because it has met with a solid.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-07-02
So you contradicted yourself. Water has more mass per volume than an air filled balloon.
No shit.
But in that given volume, a more dense fluid will be able to flow around the less dense object and force it upwards.
Why doesn't the less dense wooden table "float" on top of the gold bar then?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
That is in no way a contradiction.
I'm glad you agree that you were wrong.
Because they are both solids!
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
I'm sorry but styrofoam is actually LESS dense than water, and that is why it floats! It is a polystyrene foam made up mostly of air. Look it up!
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-07-02
No shit Sherlock... that's why I said it was less dense.
Jesus.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
It is also a solid which is why water cannot fall through it moron. What is with trying to use solids to disprove what I am saying? Obviously solids do not float on each other nor do they let liquids pass through them whether they are less dense or more dense. These are just idiotic come backs. Every example that has been thrown at me has had just no logic behind it. Why can gold rest on wood, duh because they are both solids. Why can styrofoam hold water, duh because it is a solid. And you guys think I am stupid... bahahahaha
n/a robaloie 2017-07-02
How do tides happen?
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
And before you say it, yes wood is also LESS dense than water.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-07-02
Yes, I know... that's why I used it as an example. It is also less dense than gold, but gold can happily sit on a wooden table.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
They are solids you moron!
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
You literally CANNOT prove gravity at your home, but you CAN prove buoyancy. This is a conspiracy forum? So crazy theories should be allowed. And IF (and that's a big if) there was a firmament keeping our atmosphere in, would air not act exactly as it does with less dense air stacked on top of more dense air until it reaches the firmament and can go no further? Assuming that air is a fluid would not all objects between the ground and the firmament act exactly like they do and sink in less dense air until they meet more dense ground?
You can easily test that a change in density would cause a solid to keep sinking with a brick, some dirt and some water. Place the brick on the compact soil. It will not sink because the soil is dense enough to prevent this. Now take the water and mix it with the soil to create mud. The mud is less dense than the compact dry dirt and the brick will sink.
n/a KiwiBattlerNZ 2017-07-02
Buoyancy proves gravity... whether you want to accept it or not.
Where did I say that anything you said should not be allowed. I'm happy to prove these stupid theories are bullshit.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
Scientists would disagree that indeed buoyancy does occur in absence of gravity, because even in a ball of liquid in zero G there is pressure.
n/a jakeolsen2219 2017-07-02
This is your argument? I'm sorry but if you are sooo old, why is it that in all your time on this earth you haven't managed to learn how an opinion is argued properly? Why do you lend yourself to fallacies instead? Did they not teach proper communication techniques wayyy back then? Lol