objects thata re more dense usually means it has more mass

the more mass the faster something will fall

im only 15

and ik alot

to debat a old flat earther

density affects falling speed.

mass

affects the falling speed

a feather weighs less

and a rock more

a feather is also less DENSE

and has less mass

density is what affects falling speed along with air resistance

remove air resistance then the more dense object will go faster

yes

that allpies to mass

also

aplies*

You got a lot to learn kid.

why

what im saying is true

The whole density/buoyancy replacement for gravity is disproven by dropping objects in a vacuum chamber.

Mass applies to weight. Density applies to mediums

That test was proven falsified.

Anyways I'm out

lol

avoiding

bye

"That test?"

there's a nice video from TSG physics which demonstrates the ball and coin effect

two objects of different masses fall at different rates inside of a tube filled with air

once a vacuum is created, the objects are dropping again inside the tube

they fall at the same rate

besides the popular cox video, there are a multitude of videos proving the same experiment

there is no need to avoid the test as it can be ignored for the sake of the argument

the argument here is that it was falsified

with replicated experiments littered on the web, it is safe to say that this experiment is thoroughly tested to be true

^ exactly

High school science classes debunk this all the time.

as for buoyancy being the cause of gravity, that cannot be correct as buoyancy depends on the gravitational constant to work

buoyancy has no vector

gravity exists

prove it

The tides.

the majority thinks it exists

u are making the claim it doesnt

so

u prove it

I'm appealing to mainstream science's explanation for tides, which is a gravitational "tug" from the moon as it orbits the earth. If you have a better explanation for the tides, I'm all ears.

are u talking to me?

No, just following up to my other post, sorry steveman.

It was directed at umwhat

oh kk

me to

i'd like to discuss the origin of the firmament theory

aside from the bible, where did this idea originate from

i think someone thought that the earth was flying through a medium, and that was called the firmament

the earth does not move

the firmament was there since day 2 of Creation

'aside from the bible,'

Aside from the bible, are there other interpretations of the origin of the firmament

I'd like to set religion aside for this and want to see what other scientific observations led to this conclusion

it's one thing to say what we understand is created from our religion, it's another to say exactly why

from what i understand here was a man that though the earth was flying through a medium, he did some testing to see if this was correct, and found there to be no medium, or firmament

what tests did he do

That goes hard against the religious belief as well, don't know how they would respond to that

I don't really like answers saying that the bible is 100% true, because that implies a lot of bad things that the bible says

you cant really argue against god because its not falsifiable

Hostile defense religious arguments kind of defeat the purpose of the debate

they just fall behind a failsafe and you can't really prod it without exploding

they can just explain anything with "because god"

why is the sky blue? because god made it blue

and it works

even when there is a clear non-religious explanation they just fall behind the safe word

he theorised that if there was a firmament, then light would travel faster in one direction then the other, as one way the light would be going against the firmament, the test he did did not fined these results, this test was conducted using the globe model, and i am trying to fined out who actually did it, this is just from memory

@Nico2020 sounds like michelson and morley

idk

prob

they found that earth was still in the aether

by testing light speed

then einstein came up with a theory that said the earth was still moving

but that the aether didn't exist

The Michelson Morely experiment concluded that aether doesn't exist.

Wrong

how so?

It wasnt conclusive

Actual results say the earth is at rest

Other experiments confirm an ether

Michaelson morely experiment wasn't conclusive cuz it tried to prove ether and failed

also, the two lasers deviating a little was the expected result and the actual resukt

gravitational waves are real

stop lying

No it confirmed the earth isnt moving

Lying?

F off

>>mute @MASTER CHEF

<:vSuccess:390202497827864597> Successfully muted **MASTER CHEF**#9909